Return to: Home | Life & Society | Society

The puffing president

Neil Clark

Published 22 January 2009

Observations on lighting up

Smoking could help Obama

The puffing president

Last Tuesday was a momentous day in American political history. For the first time in more than 30 years, a regular smoker was installed in the White House. But whereas Gerald Ford openly puffed on his pipe in the Oval Office, it is unlikely that the new incumbent will be quite so forthcoming.

"It's not something I'm proud of," says Barack Obama of his long-standing and much-discussed cigarette habit. The 44th president certainly takes great care never to be seen smoking in public. But is this the right move? Historical evidence suggests that if Obama really wants to go down as a great American president, being a smoker - and a smoker not afraid to be seen smoking in public - can only enhance his chances.

James Madison, the "Father of the Constitution", was a cigar smoker throughout his presidency, and smoked right up to his death at the age of 85. The Civil War hero - and supporter of civil rights for African Americans - Ulysses S Grant smoked 20 cigars a day. In the 20th century, Franklin D Roosevelt, the man whose New Deal Obama would like to emulate, was seldom seen without his jauntily clenched cigarette holder. And Ford, who smoked on average eight pipeloads a day while in office, has been labelled America's "greatest president" by the political pundit Alexander Cockburn, simply because he did the least damage. In contrast, we can reflect that Ronald Reagan and both George Bushes were non-smokers.

Twenty-first-century America is, of course, a country where some consider smoking to be one of the seven deadly sins. But if the actress Maggie Gyllenhaal has the courage to face down the antis and light up a cigar on a live television programme, as she did in 2003, surely the US president could do likewise. Most commentators agree that the success or failure of Obama's presidency will depend on whether he has the courage to stand up to powerful vested interests. Lighting up a cigarette in the Oval Office would be a symbolic gesture that, at last, America has a president not afraid to be his own man. And if Obama really wants to be another FDR, why not buy a cigarette holder?

Post this article to

  • Digg
  • del.icio.us
  • newsvine
  • Reddit

11 comments from readers

Martin Miller
23 January 2009 at 20:08

I can't understand why Neil Clark doesn't use his real name of Citylightsgirl or Greengoddess.

http://www.spectator.co.uk/stephenpollard/89011/neil-clark-h...

Neil Clark
24 January 2009 at 10:05

Wow, my cyber-stalker active even on a Friday evening!

For the background to 'Martin Miller' and why he has such an obsession with me :

http://neilclark66.blogspot.com/2008/01/green-city-girls-sui...

http://neilclark66.blogspot.com/2007/11/criminal-affair.html

http://neilclark66.blogspot.com/2007/09/case-of-criminal-har...

ps 'Martin'- I really can't understand why you don't use your real name either. Or rather, I can.

Martin Miller
25 January 2009 at 13:40

Neil Clark, your party leader David Lindsay has published loads of comments from me, are you saying he's invented them all? http://davidaslindsay.blogspot.com/2007/11/martin-miller-res...

This is funny though.

http://www.spectator.co.uk/stephenpollard/89011/neil-clark-h...

Neil Clark
25 January 2009 at 20:33

But nowhere near as funny as this: a tale of a 'slim virgin' and a mysterious wikipedia editor named 'elena zam'

http://neilclark66.blogspot.com/2007/12/stranger-than-fictio...

Martin Miller
25 January 2009 at 21:05

Why do you fake booster comments about yourself while pretending to be a girl? Do you always do this?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Citylightsgirl#Conflict_of_interest

Neil Clark
25 January 2009 at 21:16

Wow, my cyber-stalker active even on a Sunday night! Talk about obsessional!

Such devotion to the cause of trying to smear Neil Clark! And all on account of his writing an unfavourable book review of a pro-war book by a certain neocon hedge fund trader named Oliver Kamm.

For the background to 'Martin Miller' and why he has such an obsession with me :

http://neilclark66.blogspot.com/2008/01/green-city-girls-sui...

http://neilclark66.blogspot.com/2007/11/criminal-affair.html

http://neilclark66.blogspot.com/2007/09/case-of-criminal-har...

Oliver Kamm
27 January 2009 at 11:32

This is of no intrinsic interest to anyone, but if Mr Clark is going to cite my name publicly then I will correct him for the record. The objection to his review of my book was not that it was unfavourable, but that it relied on claims drawn from a discredited source (viz. a Srebrenica-denial organisation) that Mr Clark did not represent accurately in answer to a direct question from his editor. As Mr Clark does not dispute that I correctly identified his source, this can hardly constitute a smear, and is clearly relevant information in assessing his reliability as a commentator on public affairs.

explodingbadger
28 January 2009 at 02:58

Hey Oliver he didnt like your book, get over it, dont be such child.

Oliver Kamm
28 January 2009 at 11:17

You'll have to take my word for it that Mr Clark's opinion doesn't weigh highly with me. The issue I raised was rather that Mr Clark had given inaccurate information about his source - a right-wing Srebrenica-denial outfit rather than, as Mr Clark's editor had assumed, the scholarly IISS. That's not a trivial issue, and nor do serious newspapers regard it as such.

Neil Clark
09 February 2009 at 10:35

“You'll have to take my word for it that Mr Clark's opinion doesn't weigh highly with me"

Then what on earth- considering the thousands of articles there are to peruse on the internet- brought Oliver Kamm to read this article by Mr Clark- and the comments after it- in the first place?

Oliver Kamm
11 February 2009 at 13:15

I read very widely indeed. I'm surprised Mr Clark has forgotten this characteristic, given that it was what enabled me to identify - in the case I have described - his obscure source from the inaccurate information he had volunteered about it.

Post your comment

Please note: you will need to login or register before you can comment on the website

Read More

Vote!

Should we build new nuclear power plants?

Suggest a question

View comments

© New Statesman 1913 – 2009

Tracker