Yesterday, at an hour when many of us were either fulfilling Sunday obligations to our Lord or sleeping, Bernie Sanders was appearing on Chuck Todd's television program. I haven't watched his entire appearance because I have strong moral and aesthetic objections to the Sunday morning show format. What I did see, though, was the junior senator from Vermont questioning the legality of cigarettes.
Pressed by Todd to explain his opposition to a soda tax in Philadelphia that Hillary Clinton has endorsed, Sanders pointed out that such schemes soak the poor. This is true. It is also true of tax increases on cigarettes. That's when Bernie went off the rails:
But cigarettes are causing cancer, obviously, and a dozen other diseases. And there is almost the question as to why it remains a legal product in this country.
Mine has been a reliably pro-Sanders household this last year or so. I agree with Bernie about trade and share much of his skepticism about our financial system. But this is not simply a question of being inconsistent on the question of when it's okay to exploit the poor. America as we know it exists because English colonists had the good sense to borrow from the indigenous population the refined custom of burning this particular leaf. Being anti-tobacco is basically being anti-civilization. Moreover, it's risible that anyone who could talk about ending "the drug war," which we’ve never fought, and legalizing cannabis could even broach the subject of banning tobacco.
This is the end of my tacit if-only-he-were-pro-life kinda-sorta support for Sanders, following fast on the heels of my disillusionment with the anti-anti-Trump cause. At this point, I'm going to end up urging my friends who are registered voters to write in Rick Santorum, who is a reliable friend of the tobacco industry. Not a bad way to go election-wise.