Fairminded words?

The Hill newspaper is reporting the following comments by President Obama:

"This contraception fight in particular was illuminating. It was like being in a time machine. Republicans in Congress were going so far as to say an employer should be able to have a say in the health care decisions of its female employees. You know, for a party that prides itself on being rabidly anti-regulations of almost any kind, for folks who claim to believe in freedom from government interference and meddling, it doesn’t seem to bother them when it comes to a woman’s health."

Here is a link to the article: http://thehill.com/blogs/blog-briefing-room/news/224347-obama-bashes-romney-gop-as-being-in-a-time-machine-on-womens-issues

I hope that the President is being misquoted here. If he actually said these words---if, in other words, this is how he chooses to characterize the serious religious liberty concerns of Catholics, joined by Protestants, Jews, Muslims, and others who criticize the HHS mandate---then there is, it seems to me, no way around the conclusion that his statements, especially those at Notre Dame, about the need for "open hearts," "open minds," and "fairminded words" were utterly disingenuous.

I recognize that politics is "tackle" not "touch," and that we can't reasonably demand that politicians play it completely straight in criticizing the opposition. There will always be spinning and exaggerating and depicting the other guy's view in the worst possible light. The President will do that and I have no doubt that his opponent (Governor Romney, I assume) will do it, too, in the months ahead. Fine. That's the way the game is played. Both sides play it that way.

The difference here is that the mandate raises very important constitutional and moral issues---issues on which the President has listened to, and claims to have taken seriously, the carefully articulated concerns and arguments of Cardinal Timothy Dolan and other religious leaders whose sincerity and integrity are beyond question. Many of them are people who have long supported the concept of univeral health insurance coverage. To characterize their concerns and arguments as an effort to insinuate themselves into "the health care decisions of female employees" is beyond vulgar. It is deeply unfair and, one cannnot but say, dishonest. In light of what the President said at Notre Dame and elsewhere, it is also hypocritical.

But perhaps he was misquoted. I hope so.