Romney will do as he's told

Much has been made over the last few days about Mitt Romney's inability/unwillingness to answer Bob Schieffer's question about whether or not, if elected, he would keep President Obama's new directive on young immigrants in place. We all know that Romney is between a rock and a hard place on this one - wanting to not alienate Latino voters or his nativist base.  But I find one of his first responses to this question to be enlightening.

“I’d like to see legislation that deals with this issue,” he said. “And I happen to agree with Marco Rubio, as he will consider this issue."

First of all, it makes no sense. He agrees with Rubio as Rubio is considering the issue. Huh? So when Rubio figures out a position, Romney will take it?

You can almost see the synapses in Romney's head blowing up in an attempt to find some mooring outside himself (ie, in Rubio) that will give him direction on where to go.

It reminded me of some of the things Romney has said about Israel. Here's an example  from an interview in which he was asked about the subject of the location of the American embassy in Israel.

The actions that I will take will be actions recommended and supported by Israeli leaders. I don’t seek to take actions independent of what our allies think is best, and if Israel’s leaders thought that a move of that nature would be helpful to their efforts, then that’s something I’ll be inclined to do. 

Once again, when asked what HE would do on a controversial topic, Romney's synapses explode and he basically says he'll do what Israeli leaders tell him to do.

This goes beyond mere pandering to the different factions in the Republican Party and the American electorate. The man literally doesn't know what he thinks about controversial topics until he gets some indication from others.

I'm not so sure I buy the idea that he's hiding his policies so much as that he literally doesn't know - and won't until someone tells him. And I'd suggest that is nothing short of terrifying in someone who is running to be President of the United States. It gives us no clue about his moral compass - because he doesn't seem to have one.

But it does demonstrate why Mitt Romney is the only possible candidate that had any chance of traversing the current divide in the Republican Party. Someone with strong convictions would have alienated either the establishment or the tea party base. In Romney, both sides think they got someone they can control. Remember what Grover Norquist said about the nominee.

All we have to do is replace Obama. ...We are not auditioning for fearless leader. We don't need a president to tell us in what direction to go. We know what direction to go... We just need a president to sign this stuff. We don't need someone to think it up or design it.

What it comes down to is that Romney will do as he's told. The question that begs is "Who will be doing the telling?"