Alright, I understand people are sick of the Romney-Mormonism topic for the moment, and I don’t have anything to add to NR’s editorial take on it. But if only because Hitchens is held in such ridiculously high esteem on the Right these days, I’d like to point out that his case is sloppily and even nuttily argued.

If candidates can be asked to declare their preference as between briefs and boxers, then we already have a precedent, and Romney can be asked whether, as a true believer should, he wears Mormon underwear.

Anyone “can” ask Romney anything, and anyone “can” draw any conclusion he wants from whether Romney answers. But the fact that Clinton had the poor judgment to answer the boxers-or-briefs question does not establish that we should want Romney to answer idiotic questions, too.