Thursday, March 26, 2009

Republicans’ Transparency Push Interpreted by Democrats as an Attack on Michelle Obama

According to Politico, an effort is being made on the part of House Republicans to institute a change in federal law that would require first ladies to conduct their policy work in public. But many Democrats are interpreting this move as an attack on Michelle Obama and are warning their GOP colleagues that her husband, who has a big-ass nuclear arsenal at his disposal, might see it the same way.

This Republican push for transparency is being led by Rep. Darrell Issa (R-Calif.), the ranking member of the House Oversight and Government Reform Committee. Issa, a key player behind the 2003 gubernatorial recall election of former California Gov. Gray Davis and a one-time target of the Jewish Defense League, launched what is shaping up to be yet another partisan campaign at a combative committee markup session on March 10.

If his proposed amendment passes, “any government policy group that Mrs. Obama or another first spouse regularly participates in would be subject to a law requiring meetings to be announced in advance and, in most instances, public.”

Issa’s initial proposal at the markup sparked a furious debate between Democratic and Republican House members that lasted more than half an hour. Rep. William Clay (D-Mo.) said President Obama might view the legislation as a personal attack and a brutal partisan fight could be the result.

“Let me… caution my friend from California that, as you’re probably aware, this president is very guarded about his family,” Clay said. “I think that, no matter what you’re intending with this amendment, that the president may view this as an attack on his wife. And I’m just saying, you know, let’s be careful--if we want to open up that can of worms. Let’s not go in that direction.”

For his part, Issa insists that he and members of his party are only trying to get the Obama administration to live up to its image of itself as a champion of transparency.

“We are trying actually to protect the historic role of the first lady,” Issa said. “I believe this is open government at its finest.”

So who is telling the truth here? Are the Republicans sincere in their transparency effort or are the Democrats right in their suspicion that this same effort is really nothing more than a not-so-subtle knock at the woman Michelle Malkin derisively refers to as “the Other Michelle”?


  1. Is there anything the Republicans do like this that ISN'T an attack? As your previous post notes, the Democrats are portraying them as the Party of No.

    As usual, they are handing the Democrats more ammunition. Pathetic.

  2. I am going to use my google account, I think. This is a test to see how it works.

  3. Ridiculous. The first lady is a more useless position than vice president.

  4. Hmmmm....The Repugnants owned Congress for 6 years. Bush never had to cast a veto in that time. So, why didn't Issa introduce this very important amendment then? Is he suggesting that if Michelle (the REAL one) has a meeting with the local children who are going to be working in her garden, it should be televised or something? Just what is the idiot saying?

  5. Even if the Republicans' motives are sincere, this is a bad time to bring it up. It looks too much like a personal attack.



blogger templates | Make Money Online