Criticism toward first lady’s obesity campaign unfounded

As we all probably know by now, the key to a happy and healthy life is to enjoy food in moderation and eat fewer processed foods.

Michelle Obama knows this as well as anyone, and has used her prominent position to promote healthier eating and fight childhood obesity in America with her “Let’s Move!” campaign.

It is, of course, only one of her many causes as first lady, alongside supporting military families, promoting art education and the arts, so on and so forth. But for whatever reason, the issue of healthier eating has easily been the most contentious with critics.

Representative Michelle Bachmann (R-Minn.), for instance, said Michelle Obama’s suggestion that mothers breast-feed their children more (as breast-fed babies are less likely to become obese) was an example of the “nanny state” President Obama is trying to set up. The tip, Bachmann claimed, was “very consistent with where the hard left is coming from,” since it believes “government is the answer to every problem.”

Maybe a little hyperbolic, but sure.

Sarah Palin also chimed in by saying Michelle Obama’s efforts are a perfect example of “government thinking that they need to take over and make decisions for us.”

With these fightin’ words spewed all over The New York Times, I couldn’t help but wonder what Bachmann or Palin think about obesity. What do they think should be done about it? That parents should be the only ones speaking out against it?

Well, that would be a grand plan, but for a few minor caveats. After all, wouldn’t these be the same parents encouraging you to have another helping? Or perhaps the ones that already have a tough time figuring out how to eat healthy themselves?

Or maybe Bachmann and Palin feel that obesity isn’t really the epidemic that it’s cracked up to be, and that it’s just a temporary problem we can ignore?

They aren’t the only ones speaking out, of course. Rush Limbaugh, the conservative radio talk show host notorious for his vitriolic rants against President Obama and the left, suggested Michelle Obama was a hypocrite for chowing down on barbecued ribs, and slyly made negative comments about the first lady’s own waistline.

It’s difficult to try to imagine what inspired these pointed attacks on a campaign that has been as inoffensive as Michelle Obama’s.

She has encouraged such radical ideas as consuming smaller portions of food, eating locally and organically when possible and planting gardens.

These concepts, apparently, are the ones that have incited the accusations of a “nanny state.” If that sounds a little ridiculous, it’s probably because it is.

Listening to critics of Michelle Obama’s causes, it sounds as if the first lady has thrown the country into some culinary gulag, where proud American citizens are threatened with death if their hands stray toward non-organic beef broth.

But the first lady is doing no such thing. She’s helping us remember what we’ve always known, but have strayed from: we benefit from eating less, eating healthier and exercising more. Even a child can understand the elegance of that simple solution to an ever-growing obesity epidemic.

The adult obesity rate in the United States is the highest in the developed world, with 34.3 percent of the country’s adults obese, according to the Center for Disease Control’s website.

The CDC’s statistics also reveal that childhood obesity in those aged six to 11, although lower than the adult rate, still more than tripled in the last 30 years, jumping from 6.5 percent in 1980 to 19.6 percent in 2008.

With this in mind, the fact that some, such as Bachmann and Palin, would steal the spotlight from Michelle Obama’s cause to spout exaggerated claims of an overly controlling government should raise some eyebrows.

What harm, exactly, will come of tending a small garden in the backyard? A tan?

In the same way we can figure out that eating healthier is probably good for us, we should also reason that indulging once in a while isn’t going to destroy your heart and soul.

Yes, the first lady’s willingness to eat some pork ribs or have a Super Bowl party full of the traditional junk foods seems in conflict with her speeches about being food-conscious. But anyone who loves food also knows that knowing when and how to indulge is the key to maintaining a healthy body.

Both sides of this story are worth keeping in mind as we head into a relaxing spring break filled, hopefully, with delicious meals.

Michelle Obama’s critics, who only see the looming nanny state within her encouragements, are exaggerating. Maybe during spring break they should not include so much George Orwell reading.

Eddie Kim is a sophomore majoring in print journalism . His column, “Food  As Life,” runs Thursdays.