Well, let none say that I'm not fair.
Though I'm even less likely to vote for him than I was when I wrote those posts, I think he is reported as giving a much wiser response to the question of Romney's faith. In fact... you'd think he read my blog! Check it out:
"I'm just not going to go off into evaluating other people's doctrines and faiths. I think that is absolutely not a role for a president"Isn't that almost exactly what I suggested he might have said, in the context of this race?
"I don't think it's relevant to the presidency. I really don't," he said. "You know, I get all these questions about somebody else's religion. I only want to address the ones about my own, and I think some of those get a little bit almost unfortunately laborious because, you know, we ought to be talking about education and health care and energy independence and all these other things."
"If I'm invited to be the president of a theological school, that'll be a perfectly appropriate question, but to be the president of the United States, I don't know that that's going to be the most important issue that I'll be facing when I'm sworn in"
Everybody wave at the nice man!
UPDATE: but then, there he goes again: "Education is a state function."
The heck it is, Governor; or at least, the heck it should be.
Whatever happened to Reagan's vision to abolish the Department of Education? Good idea then, good idea now. (Sub-update: Huck then says "The more state it is, and the less federal it is, the better off we are." I say, the more parentally-controlled and the less state, the better off we are. And I reiterate: what about abolishing the Dept. of Ed? Is there any aspect of government he'd like to shrink?)