Talk:Darrell Issa

Military Career, Education, and Alleged Criminal Activity

In the article, this section lists several alleged criminal activities Mr. Issa may have participated in. The section does not only contain his military background and education. The heading needs to accurately reflect what is contained in the paragraph below the heading. Alternatively, we could move the alleged criminal activity into a separate paragraph and then have a new heading entitled, "Alleged Criminal Activity". — Preceding unsigned comment added by Avatar2k (talk • contribs) 21:35, 16 October 2011 (UTC)

Untitled

I changed the last paragraph to more accuratly represent the controversy and not make it seem that Jewish groups are targeting him becasue he is an arab. -Moshe Constantine Hassan Al-Silverberg

The Hezbollah quote

There's a quote attributed to Issa in a hitpiece by Debbie Schlussel. She gives her source as the Beirut Daily Star from October 2001, but I haven't been able to track that down. The Daily Star has a website, and the search page gives date options going back to 1996, but their search functionality gives only errors at the moment. Searching Google for mentions of Issa's name on the Daily Star website shows only more recent results. There are no reputable sources on the internet with this quote, all of them come from Schlussel.

Apparently Issa generally denies making statements sympathetic of Hezbollah. Given that the current source is secondhand, coming from someone with a history of attacking Issa, potentially distorting things for her own self-promotional purposes, I think the quote's going to have to come out for now. If somebody can find a reliable source for it, this can be reconsidered. In the meantime, we need to follow the lead of reputable publications like the San Diego Union-Tribune, which discusses the battles between Issa and Schlussel, but doesn't repeat quotes without knowing where they really come from. --Michael Snow 00:32, 11 February 2006 (UTC)

Issa interview at [1]. I Dont have the time to read it right now, but there may be some useful things there to include in the article. --Asbl 15:49, 14 February 2006 (UTC)

Religion

Is there a source for Darrell Issa being an Antiochian Orthodox as opposed to Non-denominational Protestant? --Kevinkor2 18:39, 8 March 2007 (UTC)

Because of no reply, I removed religion as being unsourced. --Kevinkor2 06:29, 16 March 2007 (UTC)

It's probably best - it doesn't appear to be very clear. Newsweek says "Protestant (no denomination)"[2] but NNDB says "Eastern Orthodox"[3]. The only direct evidence I could find was that he attended the 45th General Convention of the Antiochian Orthodox Christian Archdiocese [4] - but just because he attended doesn't make an Antiochian Orthodox adherent. —RP88 07:18, 16 March 2007 (UTC)

I'll resurrect this old thread since it has come up again. The best sources I've found:

• Roll Call profile - Religion: Antioch Orthodox Christian Church [5]
• Vote-CA Biographical Profile for Darrell E. Issa - Religion: (current and past religious affiliations, beliefs): no response [6]
• MSNBC profile- Religion: Protestantism, Antiochian Orthodox Church [7]
• Project Vote Smart - Religion: [blank] [8]
• Congress.org - Religion: Christian[9]
• National Journal - Religion: Antioch Orthodox Christian.[10]

What I don't see is him answering any questionnaires about his religion, or otherwise making comments on it. One source, which I've misplaced now, said that his father was Greek Orthodox and his mother was Mormon. I think we need to leave it undescribed until we get a sufficient source.   Will Beback  talk  23:00, 7 October 2011 (UTC)

Corruption

Viewing the trail of documentation [11] in the Lam case it is seemingly obvious she unfortunately were following the money trail and this was leading far too close for comfort to Issa's supporters. Once again it has proven that if you have enough money in your pocket you can hire and fire anyone, even people who are supposed to be non-political and follow crime wherever it leads and not just depending on if it is an easy target or convenient for the local politicos.
All in all I hope his district wises up and votes him out of office come around next election. I sincerely hope the Democrat organization will use all that comes out about the Lam case against him. -- Lindus 18:08, 21 March 2007 (UTC)

Issues and Legislation

It would be nice if these politician entries focused more on the actual positions that these guys have on issues, and the legislation that they have helped to introduce. Jumping right into allegations and controversies smacks of "partisan hackery." When I look up these people on Wikipedia, it is often to look for this kind of information, not so much seeing their dirty laundry. Just my two cents. Quigonpaj 12:35, 8 May 2007 (UTC)

Issues

I don't think Issa would benefit by a discussion of position. He doesn't appear to actually have any, just opposition to other representatives positions. Govtrak (which is mostly nonpartisan http://www.govtrack.us/congress/person.xpd?id=400196) puts him as a centrist but if you ever watch him on CSPAN, well, it is mainly because he will object to anything. On the Internet, we call such people trolls.

For example, from a couple of recent CSPAN broadcasts

Issa's first statements to a European scientist testifying at a Congressional Hearing on Global Warming about his research: ISSA: "Do you believe in God? My constituents believe in God."

Issa's last statement at an Ethics committee hearing to the Inspector General of the GSA: ISSA: "I think you had a personal agenda in reporting that Hatch act violation. If you want to keep your job, you had better find some way to fix it." The IG had reported (not prosecuted) a Hatch act violation by the head of the GSA, something he was required to do by law.

And, of course, Issa's all time classic (at another ethics committee hearing): ISSA: "I want to object to the amendment!" WAXMAN: "Could we read it first?" ISSA: "Why are you stopping me from objecting?" WAXMAN: "I'm not. It just that the amendment has to be introduced before you can object to it."

Recordings of the Waxman, Mica, and Issa confrontations at ethics committee meetings on CSPAN is a favorite at many Political Science students drinking parties, where they are viewed as a sort of political science Extreme Wrestling event and the basis of a drinking game. 71.239.175.188 05:32, 7 June 2007 (UTC)

After reading the above nonsense, I can't, for the life of me, figure out why a great many people think any attempt to label Wikipedia as encyclopedic is a complete farce, almost as farcical as the claim that watching Issa for a few minutes on C-Span and providing a few out-of-context quotes enables someone to make the ludicrous assertion that Issa doesn't stand for anything. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 74.138.145.181 (talk) 22:35, 21 August 2010 (UTC)

Lam

I have removed this section. As far as I can tell, the evidence of Issa's involvement consists of him criticizing Lam. There are no accusations of wrongdoing in that section, making the "controversy" here largely vacuous. If there is a well-documented, well-reported-on allegation that was made about Issa himself, please feel free to write a section along those lines. Phil Sandifer (talk) 14:45, 9 July 2008 (UTC)

Cute. You didn't need a citation for his mother's background, but someone felt that a citation after his father's background was warranted. Racism at it's finest. --69.246.107.50 (talk) 20:17, 20 May 2009 (UTC)

National Institutes of Health Vetoing

Someone should add a note about this (from Science 11 September 2009; Vol. 325, No. 5946):

From the Science Policy Blog The U.S. House of Representatives dug into minutiae at the National Institutes of Health last week before passing a $31 billion NIH funding bill. At the behest of Darrell Issa (R–CA), members okayed an amendment to kill three peer-reviewed grants Issa doesn’t like. They support efforts to understand the spread of HIV/AIDS by studying risky behavior among prostitutes in Thailand and China and alcoholics in Russia. Issa called them wasteful; biomedical groups protested. But rather than debate the issue, bill manager epresentative David Obey (D–WI) accepted Issa’s amendment. As with similar grant-killing measures a few years ago, many expect it to be stripped out in negotiations between the Senate and House on a final bill.

California Recall section and over all appearance of article

The article seems a bit slanted in a direction of support for a politician and what is up with the "Recall" section? Really? OK......what recall? Mmmmmmmm. Here is the section as it appears now;

Gubernatorial recall

Issa came to national prominence when he contributed over $1.6 million to help fund a signature-gathering drive for the petition to recall Gray Davis. At the time he made the contribution, it was widely believed that Is intended to place himself on the ballot to replace Davis. However, following the entrance of fellow Republican Arnold Schwarzenegger into the race, two days before the filing deadline, Issa tearfully announced that he would not run.[10] Issa later said that his mission had been accomplished since Davis was recalled and he wanted to continue representing his district in Congress and work towards Middle East peace. For the recall election, Issa endorsed Schwarzenegger. However, at one point in the campaign he actually suggested that people should vote against recalling Davis, concerned that Schwarzenegger and fellow Republican Tom McClintock would split votes and install Democratic lieutenant governor Cruz Bustamante as Davis' successor.

No matter how you look at this section something VERY important is missing. The state this took place in. Not one word mentions the state of California by name. Also for the impact this had it could be a bit lengthier and a little more information. You can expand on sections even if they have a main article. The addition of information that is accurate and referenced will not be looked down on by most established editors unless there is an edit war. As this is a biography of a living person why is there no section for current activities and controversies. Information comes out everyday, and while to a Wikipedia is not a current news source, when a person is a ranking member of the committee he sits on and is accusing the President of the United states of an Impeachable offense.......I think most editors would agree (not all, but a good portion) that the information becomes valid when it can be sourced and referenced and has a direct bearing on the subject....yeah, you can add a section.

The article has a great deal of room to grow. I feel I would be creating a conflict of interest by editing this article now, but suggest editors take a good look at this through the eyes of a disinterested person and try to explain thoroughly what is be claimed so it has context as well as, short, pointed prose.

Personal life

In the Personal Life section it states he is the grandson of Lebanese immigrants. Then goes straight to his being the wealthiest man in congress.......that is way to soon for that information if you are going to bring up anything else that took place before it. The first line about the grand parents....that's called a Glittering generality which I am afraid this article suffers from greatly. Either information about the grandparents and their move to the US is mentioned or it would be more encyclopedic to say. "Issa's family immigrated to the US in (?)....then go into at least some details as to where they settled, what they did do to provide for the family etc. Otherwise the first sentence is out of place and has a tone that makes me very uneasy, and I am not sure why it has to be written is such a sappy cliche way.

The auto theft is in two separate sections and should probably simplified in the first section and then go into detail in the controversy section....however. I am inclined to remove this as even with an inline citation from a verifiable source, it's still just an allegation and the heavy use of the weasel word seems unjustified. For an article of a biography of a living person it may be better to use the term "Accused" as that is what this amounts to in the article used to reference this particular claim and I this does appear to be disproportionate space given the lack of a details from the editor mentioned plainly in the citation. This seems like just trying to tell the story in the worst way. Also I am confused as to why the article says Dodge sedan but the reference is for a Mercedes and the second online reference is a dead link...well just not to any article. This needs to go or become accurate information written in a neutral manner.

As for the rest most of the sections look like bullets point lists from a pamphlet or promotional material and need to be re written in prose that include actual paragraphs.--Amadscientist (talk) 08:06, 31 May 2010 (UTC)

Wholesale revision for BLP concerns

I've gone through and removed a large amount of material per BLP--some was undersourced, some was direct copyvio, some was reported by the RS'es simply as allegations. Much of it was entirely non-NPOV and unencyclopedic in tone. While I've noted in the edit summaries that several parts of this could be readded appropriately, any wholesale return to the former tone is completely unacceptable and would constitute a BLP violation. Jclemens (talk) 03:07, 3 January 2011 (UTC)

Car Thief?

Somebody posted in a Washington Post forum that he's a former car thief with a conviction. I'm not researching this further, but it doesn't surprise me either way. If anymore info is found, prove it first, and don't muck up the article. (BTW, I don't support his yahoo, nor his views. But I wouldn't want true or false info on his article posted anymore than on Obama's, as an example of principle.) Apple8800 (talk) 16:02, 3 January 2011 (UTC)

Heh... I saw that same comment at the Washington Post that you did, and headed over here to see if there was any information on it. Hopefully someone can shed light on this. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Just Below 39 (talk • contribs) 16:48, 3 January 2011 (UTC)

I also stopped by to see if this was something discussed in our article. It's possible that the earliest mention of it is from this New York Times article from last July. There is very little context, and personally I would not be comfortable putting anything in the article based on that story, particularly since it's not clear if Issa was even convicted. I think the only way this would be worthy of inclusion is if we get more firm information on it from a reliable source. Even then it might be questionable, though it would probably definitely be worth talking about if there was a link between previous criminal activities and Issa eventually achieving success with an anti-theft system. Perhaps there will be more detailed reportage on this history once Issa takes on a more prominent role as investigator-in-chief of the White House—for now I'd suggest holding off on including anything. --Bigtimepeace | talk | contribs 21:27, 3 January 2011 (UTC)

Here is an article on it. [12] Truthsort (talk) 23:38, 3 January 2011 (UTC)

I imagine that if that article was fabricated then Issa would have sued. It seems detailed enough, apart from the fact that the court records were never apparently made public. I guess that is where the retired cop comes in. 124.149.125.81 (talk) 23:46, 3 January 2011 (UTC)

• In West Coast recall, shady past recalled Ex-Cleveland Hts. man leading effort to oust governor is on hot seat; Stephen Koff, Plain Dealer Bureau Chief. The Plain Dealer. Cleveland, Ohio: Jul 24, 2003. p. A.1

According to this 2003 article in the The Plain Dealer, there are court records for the Cleveland arrest. After the prosecution made its case the judge dismissed the charges on the grounds of insufficient evidence. There was also a 1980 California arrest for a car theft, which Issa later admitted but which the prosecution didn't pursue. There was a conviction in a 1972 conviction on a concealed weapons charge in Ohio. It also discusses the arson charge, and cites public records of a co-worker accusing him and other incriminating information, but notes that no charges were brought. The article, which came out in conjunction with Issa's involvement in the California gubernatorial recall, says that these charges were often mentioned in the press, so there is some significance to them. If nothing else, the fact these charges are frequently mentioned is itself notable. "Issa has been dogged by press reports of possible criminal activities in his past, but he was only convicted of ...." or something like that.   Will Beback  talk  00:58, 7 January 2011 (UTC)

Arson

Seems like WP:UNDUE to me, as it does not appear any charges were brought. Guy (Help!) 17:08, 6 January 2011 (UTC)

• Agreed. The information, which appeared to be properly sourced, suffered from excessive detail--but the final verdict (there was no final verdict) suggests that this is at most a footnote in his biography, and not necessarily in this article. Drmies (talk) 19:49, 6 January 2011 (UTC)

In light of the Ryan Lizza article in the New Yorker , which is presumably a proper source, which argues that he was investigated by the insurance company and the insurance company refused to pay out for the inventory of the factory, it does seem reasonable to at least mention, possibly if not probably in a controversy section, the fire and insurance company investigation. I agree with the undue weight concerns, however, this seems to be a legitimate developing controversy (actually the previous lack of controversy is becoming a controversy in and of itself) and failure to mention it would be improper. Additional citations that the Lizza article has invigorated the controversy Michael Keith Jewitt (talk) 22:22, 17 January 2011 (UTC)

Hi. :) Why not write up something here for proposed addition to the article? We can discuss the actual text as needed, and it can be implemented easily enough after language is reached that is appropriate. --Moonriddengirl ^(talk) 22:50, 17 January 2011 (UTC)

The Lizza article is an excellent source, putting all these things on the table in detail. I was shocked they weren't here already, and in fact the Christmastime edits are explicitly discussed in the article:

He noted that after Christmas his Wikipedia page was rewritten to highlight many of the old controversies. “Fixing Wikipedia is a full-time thing when you’ve got people hacking it, or editing it, in a rather slanted way.” He added that in most areas of knowledge Wikipedia works well. “If you’re looking at the history of Picasso’s ‘Scream,’ ” he said. “What’s that famous—'Ahhhh'?"

Well, no one ever said he was an art aficionado. Daniel Case (talk) 19:14, 19 January 2011 (UTC)

Botched edit summary in full

I'm on an unfamiliar computer and this edit saved before I could finish writing the edit summary. So, I changed "all" to "some" because Issa did not explain all of the suspicious behavior Adkins alleged before the fire to Lizza. He explained the increased insurance and removal of the computer, but not the removal of the software, manuals or business records, nor placing the silkscreens in the fireproof box. Nor did he deny them, at least not anywhere Lizza quoted them. Therefore, we cannot truthfully say that he explained all the allegedly suspicious behavior, just some of it. Daniel Case (talk) 03:19, 22 January 2011 (UTC)

You must be on a very unfamiliar computer, considering that "this edit" is actually the history of The Reader. :D (Pre-caffeine, I spent a moment starting at that edit history in confusion, but I worked it out.) Seems like a sensible change. We want to be strictly accurate here.

I believe that there may be some weight issues with the article as it currently stands. I presume that the bulk of his notability lies in his political career, which (including the "political views" section and all headers) currently receives 1,042 words. The time from his dropping out of high school to deciding to enter politics has 2,021. It's also, of course, very heavily drawn from a single source, which introduces some concerns of bias. (Though I recognize that Lizza's interview is probably the most comprehensive coverage of these events.) The material is important, but I suspect that it is overly detailed at this point, unless it is going to be balanced out by additional material on the career choice that merits his inclusion. I would not feel it appropriate for me to add substantially to the article because of my involvement via WP:OTRS, but I may be able to find some additional sourcing for the earlier material or help condense content further, if need be, to maintain due weight. --Moonriddengirl ^(talk) 13:33, 22 January 2011 (UTC)

It's probably my journalistic background, but I feel that this level of detail is necessary to treat the allegations fairly, since Issa himself offered refutations of very specific aspects of those allegations. Saying something like "In 1982, Steal Stopper's factory burned down. Investigators from the insurance company and two former business associates believe Issa started the fire himself, which he denies" is not only going too far in the other direction but, IME, invites the reinsertion of more dubious treatments of the subject that may remain there for some time without being caught.

I would say as much of his notability comes from his business career, and there is more that could be added (like the detail about him owning 16 patents; I should put that in). I think your comment also points to a need to develop the political career section; it deserved more detail in any event. Daniel Case (talk) 19:44, 22 January 2011 (UTC)

Oh, I wouldn't propose truncating it that far. :) I agree that it needs to have an appropriate level of coverage. But there's an awful lot of detail--one example that jumps out of me, we even have the model and year of the car with which he was involved in an accident. Speaking of which, that's a perfect discussion point. How encyclopedic, I wonder, is that accident? There's no allegation of wrongdoing (except liability in a car accident) in the article, unless it was a crime in California to leave the scene of an accident. It is not, where I live and it does not seem to be in California at this time. ([13]) There's no allegation that he failed to properly identify himself, and it seems to have been resolved routinely. I would recommend we omit that altogether.

I concur. The accident actually occurred in Ohio, so I went and checked what the Ohio Revised Code has to say and found that, contrary to what I thought (and what may be the case in some states), it is not, at least under current law, necessary to wait for the police before you leave as long as you give the info to the other person (But if they're incapable of receiving it, you do have to wait). So it's just a routine traffic accident and lawsuit that could be on anyone's resumé. It goes. Daniel Case (talk) 03:32, 23 January 2011 (UTC)

Additional detail on his career would be a welcome balance to controversy. And information on his political career would be a welcome balance to the focus on his business career. Again, though, I don't feel like I should be substantially adding content (good or bad) to this article under the current circumstances. Do you have it in you to expand more? :) --Moonriddengirl ^(talk) 22:36, 22 January 2011 (UTC)

Welll ... technically I should be on OTRS because that's how OS is handled now, but I have not yet set myself up for that. So, I could do this but it may take some time. At the very least the Union-Tribune and other Southern California newspapers probably have covered Issa in more depth since he's local, and whatever they might have in their archives, we could cull something from to give a more rounded account of his career (at the very least we should have something about more of his election campaigns than 2008, even if he represents a very solidly Republican district and probably didn't get any better challenger than that year). Daniel Case (talk) 03:32, 23 January 2011 (UTC)

Just being on OTRS wouldn't in itself create issue. So even if you do transfer over, I don't there'd be a problem. :) I've removed the accident material, and I'll take a look through to see if I see any other areas that might be good for tightening at this point. --Moonriddengirl ^(talk) 12:51, 23 January 2011 (UTC)

Richest Member of Congress

I suspect that it would be more accurate to list him as the richest member of the House of Representatives. I believe that Senator John Forbes Kerry (D-MA), whose net worth is roughly $800 million, is the richest member of "Congress."

According to The Washington Post Kerry was only worth $231 million in 2010, making him only the 4th richest member.

--Qwerty0 (talk) 18:39, 31 December 2011 (UTC)

Car theft

• Issa decided to return to civilian life instead. A week before he was discharged, he and his brother were arrested again on theft charges. Near the end of 1979, William Issa, who by then had served federal and state prison time for theft, had sold his brother's 1976 Mercedes-Benz sedan to a San Jose dealership for $16,000, giving the dealer an Ohio license with Issa's name on it. Issa had soon reported the car stolen and told the police he had left the title certificate in the trunk. Issa made conflicting statements to police about whether or not he had obtained a second license and also about his brother, whom he had recently seen at Christmas in Cleveland Heights. With the investigator suspicious that the brothers might have conspired to commit insurance fraud, they were indicted. Issa said he had no knowledge of his brother's intentions; William said Issa had given him power of attorney a few weeks beforehand and had authorized him to sell the car. Issa bought the Mercedes back from the dealership for $17,000 in February; in August, the case was dropped..

This material, which has been discussed before on this page, was deleted with this edit summary: "Rm cruft per WP:BLP."[14] "Cruft" is defined by Wikipedia as "jargon for computer software or hardware that is of poor quality." That is certainly not the case here. The issue is well-sourced, and neutrally presented. It is not a violation of BLP to report significant criminal issues from a subject's youth. the fact that Issa went on to make his fortune selling car alarms makes the issue particularly relevant to his biography. Thoughts?   Will Beback  talk  08:59, 20 December 2011 (UTC)

Hi, Will. I see we're skipping from B to D in WP:BRD ...

I deleted that stuff because 150+ words ending in the "the case was dropped" struck my as a classic example of WP:UNDUE in violation of BLP. Also, the unsourced claim about conflicting statements set off alarm bells. But the thing that really smells is the single source, a source who/which (shall we say) is not known for writing positive things about Republican politicians.

There has been a concerted effort by Democrats and their allies to throw as much mud as Issa as they can. I'm 99% sure this Lizza story is part of that effort. I strongly suspect that many of the other sources used in that story are also part of that effort. That does not make them invalid as Wikipedia sources, but it does mandate exercising more care than this article seems to be getting.

IMO, any negative story about Issa that has only one source should be treated as a presumptive BLP violation. Cheers, CWC 11:26, 20 December 2011 (UTC)

Oops, was I supposed to revert? ;)

The New Yorker is at the very top of the reliability pyramid. If there is going to be one source, we couldn't do better. I'm sure we can find a second source to address the single source issue.   Will Beback  talk  11:45, 20 December 2011 (UTC)

I've looked and found numerous sources for this, including at least one article that's entirely about the incident.

• A powerful politician's San Jose past. Herhold, Scott. San Jose Mercury News [San Jose, Calif] 06 Feb 2011: B.1.
• Issa Likely to Run Even if Vote Delayed; In a shift, Republican says he will probably be a candidate for governor even if the recall election against Davis is held in the spring instead of fall.: Garvey, Megan. Los Angeles Times [Los Angeles, Calif] 04 July 2003: B.10.
• M&R: Presidio YMCA fights rent hike plan / Democrats come out swinging at Issa: Phillip Matier, Andrew. San Francisco Chronicle [San Francisco, Calif] 30 June 2003: B.1.
• Bull's-eye pinned on recall leader ; Inland congressman's brushes with law decades ago prove grist for critics. Vitucci, Claire. The Press - Enterprise [Riverside, Calif] 03 July 2003: A01.
• Past puts California recall proponent on spot ; Lawmaker blames brother for legal woes: [Fourth Edition]. Jim Puzzanghera and Dion Nissenbaum. Seattle Times [Seattle, Wash] 27 June 2003: A17.

These are all reliable sources and they indicate the notability of the matter. I'm going to restore it.   Will Beback  talk  07:43, 3 January 2012 (UTC)

Thanks. You've certainly taken care of the sourcing problem. I still think the amount of detail is excessive. Per WP:UNDUE and WP:BLP, I would trim this down to something like "When Issa's older brother William stole and sold Issa's Mercedes-Benz in 1979, Issa tried to cover for William, as he admitted in 2011.[ref=Lizza]", drop the wall-of-car-theft-OMG UNDUE/SYNTH paragraph and the first sentence of the next paragraph. But I don't have time to work on this page now. Cheers, CWC 11:51, 9 January 2012 (UTC)

Weight issues are debatable. This issue deserves a mention and some weight due tot he extensive coverage, including one article just about it. However I won't defend the current text. It seems like it could be half as long and still be appropriate.   Will Beback  talk  20:49, 9 January 2012 (UTC)

Sandra Fluke

The issue of whether to include information about Fluke's non-appearance at the hearing on contraception insurance coverage has been bouncing around in the article for the last couple of days. Casprings, the creator of the Fluke article, put it into the controversies section. I at first reverted it completely, but another editor restored it, so I decided to keep it but reorder the article so it had a place in Issa's history but not as a controversy. I also reworded it because it wasn't source-compliant (only one source, The Washington Post) and to improve some of the wording. Casprings reverted, not only putting it back in the controversies section but restoring the poor wording. Silly. I reverted one more time, and it stuck for a bit until Chris, another editor, came along and removed it completely, saying it was "incomplete" and was sourced to a "hostile opinion blogger". On an unrelated matter, Chris also added a "descriptor" ("a liberal advocacy organization") for American Family Voices. Chris implied it came from the organization itself, but I looked at their website and didn't see it on the homepage or in the About Us part.

My main concern is the Fluke stuff. I am going to restore the article to before Chris's removal of the material completely and also remove the descriptor. I invite Chris and Casprings to come here to discuss these issues rather than edit-war over them. I think the Fluke material is noteworthy and belongs in the article. I don't see a major problem with the Washington Post blog cite. A lot of major newspapers now have so-called blog sections - that doesn't necessarily make them unreliable. I don't know what Chris means by "incomplete", and I don't see the piece as particularly "hostile".

However, I don't think it belongs in the controversies section for two reasons. First, such sections are disfavored at Wikipedia - it's far better to integrate any "criticism" of the subject into the main part of the article rather than have it stand out in a criticism section. Second, one source is insufficient to say that what Issa did was "widely criticized".

As for the descriptor, I never like those things, but if it is going to be included, then it needs a source.--Bbb23 (talk) 15:58, 4 March 2012 (UTC)

Darrell Issa received significant criticism for not allowing her to speak. He also went on the Rush Limbaugh show and stated:

I am struck by your clear failure to recognize your own contributions to the denigration of this discussion and attacks on people of religious faith” in the debate, Issa wrote. “I propose that you join me in a broader condemnation of the attacks on people of faith, the false and incendiary claims made about this committee’s efforts to examine the threat to religious freedom, and the regrettable personal attacks that have come from individuals on both sides of the issue.”

He went on to complain that Democratic committee members “have appeared outright giddy” in criticizing the hearing on the contraceptive coverage rule. Read more: http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0312/73557.html#ixzz1oAnIOPcg

How is he not part of this and how is not the right section? Casprings (talk) 18:12, 4 March 2012 (UTC)

I see nothing that says that Issa went on the Limbaugh show. The quote from Issa was in a letter he sent to Democrats, not something he said on the Limbaugh show. I think you need to focus only on the role Issa played at the hearing and on the legislation, not on the whole Fluke/Limbaugh contretemps. Leave that for the Fluke article and the Fluke AfD.--Bbb23 (talk) 18:21, 4 March 2012 (UTC)

Chris (AKA CWC) here.

Re American Family Voices. I took the words "liberal advocacy organization" from the first sentence of the CBS news story we use as a source. In fact, I saw that paragraph, wondered who "American Family Voices" are, glanced at the cited article and added the descriptor, all within a couple of minutes. I should have spent more time and made my edit comment clearer. I still think the descriptor adds some useful context to that para, but it's not a big deal.

Re Issa and Fluke. (1) Ezra Klein is an opinion blogger with open enmity to the GOP. That does not mean his stuff is necessarily unreliable, just that it needs to be used with care. Using one of his opinion pieces as the sole source for a hostile claim in a BLP seems wrong to me. (2) I thought that paragraph was too disjointed and unbalanced. Later I read this (not a WP:RS), which shows that there is indeed another side to the story. The Politico Casprings linked to covers the same ground. If we cover this, we need to give both sides. (3) I see no reason this incident is that significant in this article, at least not yet. I think our current coverage violates WP:V, WP:NPOV and WP:BLP, and I recommend removing the coverage until we get better sources, specifically a news story instead of an opinion piece.

Also, I completely agree about "Controversy" sections, especially in BLPs. Merging their content into the rest of the article can take some work, but the result is a much better article. Cheers — CWC 18:41, 4 March 2012 (UTC)

Chris, thanks much for clarifying your points. Now that I understand the source of the AFV phrase, I don't have an objection to it; at the same time, I don't feel strongly that it needs to be included - so count me as neutral on that one. As for the hearing story, my view is that if it goes anywhere, it goes in the regular part of the article, not in the so-called controversies section. I tend to agree with you that it is not of any great significance and therefore could be left out, but it doesn't bother me to include it - and there was another editor who also felt it should be included based on his edit summary, although he hasn't contributed to the article since or to this discussion.

As for Klein, I think based on the current wording, we are using it "with care". If it were going to remain in the article, would you reword it in some way? As for other sources, it would be great to find another source, but I don't think it's necessary.--Bbb23 (talk) 18:55, 4 March 2012 (UTC)