I think he has now perfected the skill--or perhaps the art form-- of looking authentically inauthentic.

We need someone willing to say anything to anybody to get ahead. After all, by the odds, he will be right some of the time. A stopped clock is right twice a day. It takes a President of conviction like W to fall below that level.

Dubya's primary personal defect as President is that he values tenacity and personal conviction over discourse or analysis. Hence he picks advisors who tell him what he wants to hear and when confronted by evidence that his ideas aren't working, he usually digs in and holds. Personal tenacity is a virtue to a degree, but when overdone or when you ignore the basic evidence that you're wrong, it's a vice.

Romney's primary personal defect is almost the opposite. He enters the political debate as a chameleon, always trying to pick what plurarity he can most quickly impress, and then changes his personal convictions to suit the new stance. The man appears to reinvent himself every morning. If you want somebody who will tell you whatever he guesses you most want to hear, Romney is definitely your man.

I must say, it's terribly impressive that someone who knows both of these men so well and intimately would take the time to share those insights with the rest of us little people here on the board.