It’s a fair question, even if tomes like The Social Contract, The Rights of Man, William Shakespeare’s Hamlet or perhaps Fawn Brodie’s biography of Thomas Jefferson wasn’t on Steenis’ list.

Technically, Romney — a devout Mormon — should have said the Book of Mormon, because it’s allegedly the most recent and up-to-date reference from God, and because God allegedly told Joseph Smith, the first prophet of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, that all previous religions were corrupt and Smith was going to found a church that got everything right. But that answer might have ticked off the evangelical crowd, who are known to put the Bible above pretty much every book, except maybe those Left Behind novels that Tim LaHaye and his writing partner crank out now and then.

So, instead, Romney didn’t answer. Instead, he said this: "I don’t know that there’s any conflict at all between the values of the great faiths like mine, like yours, like other faiths, like Jews who don’t believe in the New Testament," he said. "People of faith have different doctrines and different beliefs on topics of a theological nature. But in terms of what it is we are going to believe and also based on the values for our country, I think we come from the same place."

There’s no conflict between the "great faiths"? Please! Jews don’t recognize Jesus Christ as the Messiah, and followers of Islam think both Jews and Christians are infidels. (Plus, and not to be nitpicky, but the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints hasn’t really been around long enough to be one of the "great faiths." We’re just saying.) And if you don’t think a Southern Baptist and a United Methodist have different values for our country, you’re just ignorant.

Anyway, as Time magazine reports, Steenis wasn’t buying Romney’s answer about which is better, the Bible of the Book of Mormon. We’re guessing few of her fellow evangelicals will, either.

"I asked if you had to look to one source what would it be. He didn’t really respond to that," Steenis said. "This is serious to me."

And to a lot of other evangelicals, we’re guessing.

Really? It wasn’t how she was raised? Because federal prosecutors sure thought Kenny’s late father, Charles Callin, was fully aware of Kenny’s bribe-taking. That must be because Kenny’s accountant, Daniel Geiger, testified Callin told him Kenny stood to come into "a lot of money" if a vote went through. Hell, she even named an illegitimate limited liability company created to accept bribe money Ovington Nevada LLC, which was Charles Ovington Callin’s middle name. And her father ran that outfit.

That wasn’t how she was raised? It seems her dad was a big part of her corrupt life.

» Quotable: "I do not recall." — Kenny, citing memory loss to say she’d forgotten about another allegedly corrupt deal in which she’d pushed building houses under McCarran International Airport’s flight path, over the objections of airport officials.

» Dare we call it double-dipping? We were quite interested to see the surprising admission in the Review-Journal that University of Nevada Reno political science professor Erik Herzik had given then-Controller Kathy Augustine political advice.

Herzik told the R-J’s Sean Whaley that Augustine asked him about running for state treasurer, and he advised her against the move. But Augustine went ahead and did it anyway, probably owing to the fact that "…she was a very determined political creature."

We wonder if Herzik disclosed to political reporter Molly Ball that he’d advised Augustine on her campaign when he talked for Ball’s July 21, 2006 story about Augustine’s chances of winning the treasurer’s race, had she not been murdered by her creepy husband?

Do you think Herzik had already signed on as an unofficial Augustine adviser when he told the Las Vegas Sun on Oct. 11, 2005, that Augustine had an "excellent resume" but would face an uphill battle? We know it was before he was commenting for the Sparks Tribune about the Republican primary. ("Augustine support is a protest," he said then.)

Our point? Herzik should not be giving advice to candidates and then handicapping their races, without first disclosing to reporters and their readers that he’s served as an unofficial consultant for that candidate. What if he’d told Augustine to go into a debate and say "Augustine stands on the cusp of greatness," and she did, and then he was called to comment on her speech? "Great speech!" he’d no doubt reply.

It’s called a conflict. And from now on, everybody should ask Herzik if he’s given advice before they ask him for the (usually Republican) point of view for their stories. Better yet, get another source, one who perhaps isn’t an apologist for Gov. Jim Gibbons and isn’t given to far-fetched defenses of Republican lawmakers.

» Las Vegas Sun Editor Brian Greenspun fires back at our corporate overlord Sherm Frederick, accusing the Review-Journal of helping to keep Nevada in a social stone age. Greenspun’s got some damn good points, but is there a way he could write about this stuff without including a reference to golf? We’re just wondering.

» And finally today, our friend and colleague Jeff Simpson, editor of InBusiness Las Vegas, spoke at length with Steve Wynn about that tip-stealing policy over at the Wynn Las Vegas in his Sunday Las Vegas Sun column. The casino mogul defended his plan to dip into the dealer’s tip pool and hand some money over to supervisors. Simpson agreed with Wynn, calling the plan fair and the right thing to do.

Pardon us, but we happen to disagree with Simpson, who we still happen to think is one of the best business writers in town. Although Simpson touches on this point, he doesn’t delve too deeply into the question: If Wynn was having trouble getting highly tipped dealers to take supervisory jobs, why not just increase their pay? (Wynn says he did, but obviously not enough.) That’s the free market. You don’t fix the problem by stealing from dealers to give to supervisors. That simply can’t be fair or right. At least that’s how we see it.