Yesterday, I pointed out that the New York Times reported that Willard would give a speech about America’s "grand tradition of religious tolerance" and, rather sloppily, failed to mention that he has publicly espoused religious bigotry against Muslims.

Willard’s "No Muslims Need Apply" stunt was everywhere the week previous, and there were several follow-up articles in the days after. Clearly, his previous comments about Muslims certainly calls into question whether he’s a credible messenger for religious tolerance and at the very least, this contradiction deserved a passing mention by the Times.

So I wrote one of the reporters who penned the article, wondering why this was. Here is that exchange:

Dear Mr. Luo,

I am a blogger at FireDogLake and just blogged about your story about Romney this morning. I’m curious — why did you leave out the fact that Romney has said publicly that he would not have Muslims in his cabinet? Seems like a rather glaring omission to me, but again, I’m really curious what your thought process was on this.

Best regards,

Blue Texan FDL

Hi,
thanks for your note. The answer, of course, is I had 400 words and a half-hour deadline in a story that had to wrap in the other events of the day. If you saw, half of the story had nothing to do with the speech.
-mike

So the Paper of Record’s excuse is: there wasn’t enough time to get the story right? Wow.

No mention on whether they’re planning a follow-up, but I guess we probably know the answer to that.