Correct! My mistake.

Maybe, but also bear mind the way the Catholic Church in the US has been tainted by huge child abuse scandals. Fighting the bishops now, and thus putting the bishops on the same side as the frothing winguts of the Tea Party etc, might be a shrewd tactic. Obama is a very astute politician.

In the realm of mere facts, as opposed to giving God's opinion on policies, it's worth noting this - it was already illegal during Dubya's first term for employers not to provide birth control as part of a medical insurance package:
http://motherjones.com/politics/2012/02/controver...

Also, far from simply reacting to Obama's initiative, the Catholic church was gearing up for a general attack on his presidency months ago. He's too nice to the gays, you see...
http://www.nytimes.com/2012/02/10/us/bishops-plan...

An excellent post, leaving open the tantalising question of who the hell would we elect as president, if the job were like that of Her Maj i.e. all about opening/launching/awarding things and not starting wars? Ignoring the Mr Hyde part of me that just said 'Carol Vorderman', I'd suggest David Attenborough about a decade ago, Michael Palin now, or - bit of a wild card - Simon Armitage in about ten years.

Nitpicking like buggery, can I point you that you open a bracket after Prince Charles but then fail to close it? Also, I'm on tenterhooks about those Germans - what can't we imagine finding in Germany? If your answer is 'comedians' you lose several points.