At the University of Mobile’s Center for Leadership, I explain two reasons — I think unnoted by anybody else — why the latest “accomodation” within the HHS abortifacient mandate actually catches Obama in logical (and semi-legal) traps. The first is the misuse of what I call the “Fram oil” explanation. (You’ll have to read it to understand.) HHS is trying to have it both ways. The second is more logical than legal — and, I must admit, less legal than I had originally thought. It involves the “alternate” way that the “accomodation” can be “paid for,” namely by reducing the fees that particular insurance companies pay to the insurance “exchanges.” I have since been told by an authoritative source (I forgot to ask if I could quote his private email, so I won’t name him) that a concern I had over the letter of Obama’s (weak) executive order forbidding government financing of abortion is, indeed, not applicable. I thought the executive order would cover abortifacient drugs such as Ella, but apparently it doesn’t. But the effective new subsidy for abortifacients certainly still violates the spirit of the executive order, and worse, it clearly violates the spirit of the promise Obama made to pro-life Democrats in order to secure their reluctant votes for ObamaCare.
Anyway, it’s hard to understand all this unless you read it. So please do.
A man of faith in a godless age is hitting Americans where it hurts.
Mr. and Mrs. American Spectator Reader, let P.J. O’Rourke talk sense to your kids.
In Britain, defending your property can get you life.
It won’t take long for conservatives to scratch this presidential wannabe off their 2008 scorecard.
Was the President done in by the economy, or by the politics of the economy?