President Obama Invokes Own Struggle With Cigarettes as He Signs Tobacco Bill

If Obama wants to do something then do it. Call for a BAN on all tobacco products because they produce a health hazard. BUT OF COURSE that would take brass AND of course you cant tax or sue a banned product. Obama and all the SUITS
can only BLEED money from a legal company.
CHICKEN..

Jake,
When are we going to see a photo of the President smoking? Or, is that a state secret too?

. . but still won’t admit to still being a smoker, despite the promise he made to Michelle, and still won’t lead the way for our young people by finally quitting. Another failure of Obama’s leadership — Republicans warned you. ———————————-
He’s trying to quit, it’s not easy. He has admitted to falling off the wagon, did you read the post?

Good Grief I am so sick of people straining at a Gnat while swallowing a Camel and I don’t mean Joe Camel or the cigarette either. He is a smoker. that is how he deals with stress. he was actively recruited as a kid like many of us were. I quit and for the first 5 years after I quit it was a 12 step level of coping. I literally had to take things one day at a time and at times I had to take things one minute at a time or one crisis at a time. This is a man under enormous stress and he is trying to stop a habit that he has used for the majority of his life as a stress reliever. I am sure that he is doing his best as a human being (he does not walk on water and is not a demi-god) to quit smoking. If anything I am pleased that he recognizes that he was recruited by the tobacco industry and that our children are still being recruited. I grew up in the household of a smoker and I became a smoker at 14. I quit at 21. It too me a full 14 years before I actually got through and entire week without wanting a cigarette. I am now 47 and have no desire to smoke but I fully understand what a person that has recently quit struggles with on a daily basis. His real time understanding makes him more capable of understanding the need to prevent young people from ever getting into the position that he is currently in and that I was in back then. Get off his back about this. He is doing the right thing so why are we attacking him because he wants to protect our kids from becoming a victim of the tobacco industry like he is and like I was.

Try the truth: “He’s trying to quit, it’s not easy. He has admitted to falling off the wagon, did you read the post?”
Trying isn’t leading, and yes I read the whole post. Beyond what Jake omitted here, is the fact that the Obama administration will not confirm or deny the President’s smoking status. In Obama-speak, that’s confirmation that he still smokes. How embarrassing. But not embarrassing enough to not sign the revenue-raising, anti-tobacoo bill. What a hypocrite!

I am glad that Obama referred to himself as an addict. I am more concerned about his addiction to cocaine. This is truly a lifelong addiction and I wonder if he has beat it! ———————————–
Were this concerned about Pres. Bush? He was addicted not only to coke but is an alcoholic? FYI – Pres. Obama was NEVER a coke addict!

Grandmother Spyder: “5 years after I quit it was a 12 step level of coping. I literally had to take things one day at a time . . . His real time understanding makes him more capable of understanding the need to prevent young people from ever getting into the position that he is currently in”
All the more reason to make tobacco illegal rather than condoning it by continuing to rake in the tax revenue.
Grandmother Spyder: “he wants to protect our kids from becoming a victim of the tobacco industry like he is and like I was.”
Again, protect kids from tobacco by making it illegal, not by taxing it. And, you aren’t convincing anyone that you or Obama is a “victim” of the tobacco industry. If you started smoking as a kid, you are a victim of poor parenting. If you continue to smoke as an adult, you are a victim of stupidity. Either way, blaming the tobacco industry is completely dishonest and really just pathetic.

“I know; I was one of these teenagers,”
Isn’t this a self-serving statement by the President? If tobacco is addictive and delterious, then why not make it illegal? Here, he converts his poor judgement into contempt against tobacco. Responsibility is no longer pursued by individuals.
Also missing from his analysis is the concept of liberty as it applies to smoking. The consequence is that the President has implicitly taken a position on the debate about legalization of marijuana. At the next press conference, he should be asked about how the federal government should be treating the legalization and enforcement of marijuana by state and local governments.

Considering Obama’s past and current cigarette use and cocaine use in the past, I think the American people were owed more than a one-page letter from his doctor attesting to his health during the campaign. McCain made available thousands of pages of medical records and it still wasn’t good enough for the Obama-crazed media and fans.

jhw539: “False choice. As alcohol prohibition showed, it is not POSSIBLE to make it illegal.”
It is you that has provided the “false choice,” and here’s why:
1. Alcohol usage was on the rise then whereas tobacco use is already on the decline now. Tobacco is viewed far more negatively now than alcohol was then (or now for that matter). Tobacco and alcohol are used for different purposes and have differing short-term and long-term affects on the body. Stop comparing apples to oranges.
2. Despite the failure of the war on drugs, Obama and Democrats continue to support keeping existing drugs, including Marijuana, illegal.
3. If the government has deemed something, like tobacco, so extremely harmful to one’s health, like anything else, it should be made illegal. Instead, they raise the taxes on it. The Democrats have made clear where their priorities are and they aren’t with our children, but instead their (and our) money. Big surprise, I know.

Ryan C: “Wow 3 hours to review”
That will always be better than the 0 hours Obama allowed reporters to see his records.

Anonymous: “It is you that has provided the “false choice,” and here’s why:”
I actually didn’t provide any choice.
“3. If the government has deemed something, like tobacco, so extremely harmful to one’s health, like anything else, it should be made illegal.”
Despite the hysterical right wing rhetoric, we do not live in a nanny state and are no where near to doing so. In general, people are free to take their own risks provide the externalities of their choices are considered.
“Instead, they raise the taxes on it. The Democrats have made clear where their priorities are and they aren’t with our children, but instead their (and our) money. Big surprise, I know.”
Raising the taxes on it is a very effective method of stopping kids smoking. This is documented fact. Plus, raising the taxes does not incur the massive costs of trying to outlaw them.
And since this passed the Senate on a 79-17 vote and the House on a 307-97 vote, how exactly is this a Democrat thing? Both Republicans and Democrats care about children you know.

Face it. He still smokes. He’s been smoking since his teens. So what? The problem is the deceit. Gibbs acknowledged that Obama gets aggravated if asked and challenged a reporter if he would dare ask.
I am so tired of a press that won’t drill down on issues. The issue here is not the lack of transparency, it’s the obfuscation.

Wow 3 hours to review over 1100 pages.
Posted by: Ryan C | Jun 22, 2009 4:41:47 PM
——————————
Gee, Ryan – 3 hours and 1100 pages vs. a one-page letter. Hmmmm…. shouldn’t take too much to figure out who was being more transparent (and it wasn’t Mr. Faux Transparency, Barack Obama).

Teenager to his/her parents: “Obama smokes, then so can I!”
Oh please. Obama blew this. He could have said,
“I started smoking in my teens and to this day still have trouble trying to quit. I could have taken the money I spent for cigarettes and bought a house, a car. Take it from me…don’t do it.”

danita: “Protecting children from tobacco marketers who use sweet and candy-flavored cigarettes is a good idea. Period.”
That’s silly. Tobacco is already illegal for children. Adults should be able to enjoy varying flavors, including fruit and sweet flavors, without government intervention.
danita: “I’d rather have a President who wrestles a bit with tobacco . . .”
I’d rather we have a President that wasn’t a tobacco-smoking hypocrite.

Father’s Day – Barack plays 18 holes of golf while Michelle goes to San Francisco. (see photos of she and Maria Shriver.)
No problem, he got the ice cream photo op done on Saturday and the press pretends it’s a father’s day shot.
You know what will really be fun – he ain’t a family man.

“Obama makes it difficult for parents and adults to have the “moral authority” on the issue.”
Because you derive Your moral authority from the President?
The Bush years must have been difficult than.

Ryan C: “Because you derive Your moral authority from the President?”
No, because Obama claims to be this great anti-smoking advocate for children and then turns around a lights-up outside, raises taxes, and rakes in the revenue from it just fine. His moral authority is absolutely corrupt!

Ryan C: “Well I only provided an excerpt, you should hunt down the paper via google.”
I found the original article and read it. And, again “it finds that enforcing federal and state laws against tobacco sales to minors dramatically decreases underage smoking rates.” This article does not say that this or any other study found that raising taxes decreases youth smoking. I’m sure it has an affect, but you have not “documented” it as I challenged. Instead, you documented that enforcement works best.
Ryan C: “every 10 percent increase in the real price of cigarettes reduces overall cigarette consumption by approximately three to five percent, reduces the number of young-adult smokers by 3.5 percent”
With that logic all we need do is raise taxes roughly 290% to eliminate smoking in young-adults. As per the study you were so nice to find for us, enforcement of current law is more effective. Ultimately, parents are to blame for youth smoking.

Anonymous . . .
I’d rather have a President who wrestles with tobacco than a President who thinks God is talking to him.
And I don’t think candied and sweetened tobacco is a good idea because it is aimed at children and young adults as an additional enticement to smoking. Any adult who needs to sweeten their tobacco can do it themselves if their need is that big.

Ultimately, parents are to blame for youth smoking.
Posted by: Anonymous | Jun 22, 2009 8:33:53 PM
*************************
Were you a perfect teenager or is everything or anything you did wrong or may have tried your parent’s fault?

danita: “And I don’t think candied and sweetened tobacco is a good idea because it is aimed at children and young adults as an additional enticement to smoking. Any adult who needs to sweeten their tobacco can do it themselves if their need is that big.”
That’s your opinion, and it is a very narrow one at that. I am an adult who has enjoyed a sweet cigar on occasion. I know other adults who enjoy fruit flavored tobacco products. I believe fruit flavored tobacco to also be very popular among middle-eastern cultures. There are endless legitimate adult uses for sweet and fruit flavored tobacco. A complete ban is an extreme overreach, and I hope it is found unconstitutional.
You illustrate the problem of the liberal nanny-state very well — narrow-minded, short-sited, self-serving people making useless, unconstitutional, freedom-stealing laws. Disgusting!

Anonymous . …
Make your own flavored tobacco if you need it so much. Nobody is stopping you.

Ryan C: “Did you miss this part of the study then?”
No, but you keep reading it wrong. Let me try to help.
“”Our data suggest that a 25% increase in compliance of laws prohibiting cigarette sales to minors has about the same deterrent effect as increasing the price by $2.00 in 2006 dollars,” says DiFranza.”
With the premise being that enforcement of current law is the conclusion of the study, this is simply an extrapolation of the results. Again, the article specifically cites the study finding “enforcement of current law” as the best method in reducing youth smoking, not tax increases. Apparently, you are just going to see what you want to see. Dare I say liberal bias.

“. Apparently, you are just going to see what you want to see.”
Here is what the author of the studysaid
“Our data suggest that a 25% increase in compliance of laws prohibiting cigarette sales to minors has about the same deterrent effect as increasing the price by $2.00 in 2006 dollars,” says DiFranza.
Now pay close attention
“We need to continue to raise tobacco taxes and improve compliance on laws preventing cigarette sales to minors as a part of a comprehensive approach to reducing smoking rates among youth.”
“Dare I say liberal bias.”
Dare I say right wing stupidity?

Ryan C . .. ..
I see that you may be correct about flavored tobacco being available, just not in cigarette form. I’m just rereading that part of the article.
“the federal government will ban all CIGARETTES from having candy, fruit, and spice flavors”.

I’ll bet you the marketing of “candy, fruit, and spice flavor” cigarettes was targeted in part at teenage female smokers, who for some time were becoming the fastest growing group of new smokers.
Sneaky smart heh?

“enforcement of current law” as the best method in reducing youth smoking, NOT tax increases.”
quote:
“We need to continue to raise tobacco taxes AND improve compliance on laws”
Is there something I’m missing here Anonymous? not=and?

“No mention of taxes in that definitive statement. In the article, I see the author of the study advocating further tax increases, but he cites no study that supports his suggestion. He did perform a previous study that showed a tax increase could help better enforce the law. Maybe that is the source for his affinity for tax increases.”
So the author of study stated that increasing cigarette taxes (along with enforcement of bans on sales to minors) would reduce youth smoking and in fact conducted a study on it.
“Regardless, no studies are cited in the article that claims raising taxes lowers smoking rates. Period. Case closed for this article.”
ROFLMAO!
I think this must be a record for goal post moving.
So you weren’t arguing that increasing cigarette taxes DOES NOT reduce youth smoking but rather that 1 article (which is funny since we cited DIFFERENT articles mentioning the same study) did not mention that FACT.
So because the article you read failed to mention this FACT, does it not exist?

As an ex-smoker I understand all the pits and snakes out there. But ….quitting cold turkey works. Apparently the blessed one isn’t that strong.

….quitting cold turkey works
If that were true the number of people who die every year from smoking related health injuries wouldn’t have so many zeroes on it.

danita….it has never stopped any of the other side from smearing the GOP…goes both ways!
And Skip…FYI cold turkey is the only way to quit…tapering off or using crutches simply isn’t effective long term. Yes..I very well could fall victim to a disease caused by smoking but I know my risks are definitely lower now than they were 16+ yrs ago when I was smoking.
I thought a leader lead by example…and this one isn’t working!

Padma: “All this back and forth on taxation and parts of a study – go to the source too. Here’s some information from internal tobacco company memos. They sure seem to think raising taxes on a pack of smokes works… ”
I said it earlier, but I’ll say it again: Why not raise taxes to $100 per pack, then? I’ll do you (and your logic) one better, why not outlaw them altogether? That would be even more effective. Think of it as a 100% tax rate. The answer is Obama would rather have many of the young in America smoking cigarettes and generating tax revenue than simply outlawing them altogether.

Anonymous – Doesn’t your making it illegal argument contradict many of the things you’ve posted here tonight? Why would you want to “outlaw” smoking when you say something like what I reposted for you below? Does that make you a “narrow-minded, short-sited, self-serving people making useless, unconstitutional, freedom-stealing laws?” – just curious.
**********************************
“There are endless legitimate adult uses for sweet and fruit flavored tobacco. A complete ban is an extreme overreach, and I hope it is found unconstitutional.
You illustrate the problem of the liberal nanny-state very well — narrow-minded, short-sited, self-serving people making useless, unconstitutional, freedom-stealing laws. Disgusting!” posted by: Anonymous

Padma: “WOW. You make quite the reach.”
I’m sorry if you can’t detect the hypocrisy in Obama raising tobacco tax (to fund his child health insurance SCHIP bill) and then supporting a huge anti-tobacco bill, but then he still continues to smoke. He can’t take his own advice. This is not a leader, this is a hypocrite.

Padma, I’m not advocating tobacco be made illegal. We have every right to smoke tobacco if we please.
I’m simply calling out the false intentions and hypocrisy of those on the left that on one hand decry tobacco as the leaf of the devil and on the other hand rely on the tax revenue generated rather than simply outlawing it like we do for all other harmful drugs. Hypocrisy!

“…that on one hand decry tobacco as the leaf of the devil and on the other hand rely on the tax revenue generated…”
-Because if there is anything more evil than selling minors cigarettes it’s taxing them for it!

Skip: “Because if there is anything more evil than selling minors cigarettes . . .”
Selling tobacco to minors is illegal. Adults on the other hand are free to purchase them, for now, if they can afford the excessive tax. Try to keep that straight.

Skip: “If we can agree that making them illegal is a bad idea then what’s so awful about regulating their use through price control?”
You have no right to artificially inflate the price of tobacco, a legal product. For the sake of freedom and individual liberty, I would hope that eventually these excessive taxes be ruled unconstitutional. An administrative tax for the purpose of education and enforcement is reasonable. The excessive taxes we have now funding various things, including children insurance programs, are completely overboard.
Skip: “Unless you’re really more worried about there being a dreaded good reason to raise taxes on something instead of genuine concern for peoples health.”
The two aren’t mutually exclusive, Skip. I can have a “genuine concern for people’s health,” while at the same time advocate that people have the freedom to live unhealthily if they so chose. The difference between you and I is you would rather dictate to someone than let them have the freedom to make their own decision. That’s not freedom. That’s a Skiptatorship, if you will. You obviously would.

I don’t understand the preident’s position on this. When the health care bill for children was signed earlier this year it was going to be funded by smokers, and thousands of new smokers are needed every year to fund health care for the kids. Why are they hindering something that is supposed to generate revenue for the legislation they passed? One other point on this insanity, the stimulus bill has 300 million for smoking cessation programs.
You really do need a scorecard with this administration.

if a ‘terrorist’ group killed as many americans per year as tobacco….. we would demand an immediate invasion and launch a war against them…..
just another example of how the US is still run by corporations….

Obama to teenagers: “Don’t do what I say, do what I do…smoke cigarettes.”

Once again, it’s all about him.

If your addiction to cigarettes makes you so irresponsible that you are willing to miss eating in order to afford them then or you need clinical help. Its not fair that people who want to be healthy are forced to deal with the consequences of nicotine addicts. Second-hand smoke is worse than first-hand. So if your gonna make the general public suffer, the least you can do is pay a tax for it. Dont ban it, make them pay

I’m still curious as to why we’ve never seen a picture of Obama smoking, other than those goofy college pictures. If he’s a smoker, one would assume that all through the campaign he had to stand outside and smoke — while surrounded by a hundred photographers and camera men.
And not one picture was taken?
If John McCain, Sarah Palin or Hillary Clinton had smoked a cigarette in front of cameras, you can be sure that that photo would have been shoved down our throats constantly prior to the election.

Here is the face of liberal idiocy on full display!
Obama claims that 1000 kids a day are being “recruited”. Well, after all….HE is the one who signed SCHIP! Therefore HE is the one recruiting them to pay for the SCHIP program!

Somebody should have an online Photoshop contest: Create a photo of Obama smoking cigarettes.
The winner gets to watch Obama smoke a cigarette.

I agree that the media contributes greatly to the amount of people smoking cigarettes. I mean, they make a ton of money! However, I don’t necessarily agree that banning flavored cigarettes is the solution. People should be free to do what they want, and I even think that increasing the tax on tobacco would be a better idea.

what is weed tobacco????????
“…he would quit the vile weed tobacco”

I had no idea that our President battled with cigarretes.
Hopefully for his heath he will be able to kick the habit.