Rule shift = retreat = shell game

Mr. Obama is the lad who kicked the hornet's nest when he decided to force Catholic institutions to provide contraception drugs to their employees. He has now modified the decision, which the New York Times calls a "rule shift" and the Washington Post calls a "retreat." It's actually neither of these. The only shifting is expense--if the bishops don't want to pay for activities that offend their religious sensibilities, well, what the heck? We'll make the insurers provide the drugs "free."

Free, of course, means free only to the recipient. The pills still cost money--$600 a year has been mentioned--a cost that is shifted to everyone else who buys insurance. (Under ObamaCare, that will be everybody.) So the man with prostate cancer, on top of the co-pay for his radiation treatment, will now be dinged for birth control pills and what he might consider to be abortifacients. Wouldn't a sane society pay for the expensive, uncommon treatment, and let the consumer for the routine and comparatively inexpensive one?

Speaking of media reaction, the Wall Street Journal has the most hilarious take on Mr. Obama's head-butt with the bishops: "Immaculate Contraception." Blue skies! -- Dan Ford