Last week, Mitt Romney was in a world of hurt because someone had alleged that he had said that he would not hire a Muslim into a senior position. At the time, I wrote:
This may open the door to a more open discussion of Romney’s religion. If he is discriminating on the basis of religion — perhaps even a wrong-but-politically-useful position in an Iowa Republican caucus — then why can’t other people drill down on his religion? Arguing "no bigotry" is a lot easier than arguing "bigotry for me but not for thee." A combination of hypocrisy and implausible repeated non-denials is good material for a feeding frenzy. At the same time as he’s getting drilled for other things. There’s a lot of bad synergy going on right now for Romney.
How does Romney now give a speech on "Religious Freedom" having advocated for excluding people based on their religion? (Yes, I know he denied having said it, but people kept coming forward to confirm the story of the people who heard him)