We've all had the job - the one where the manager buys into some cockeyed theory about supervising that makes their obvious failings the double-secret-reverse method of improving the workplace. They aren't obsessively checking your computer logs because they're a prying dick who doesn't trust you, they're doing it because it encourages accountability and honesty. They aren't having painfully useless staff meetings because they need to play ridiculous dominance games, they're doing it because they're shown to increase staff coherence by 27%. They don't hold you responsible for your hours in a way they don't hold their friends accountable because they're a petty, tribalistic asshole, but because you're just starting out and need to be shown the right way before you can veer off course.
One of the biggest disconnects for the media this entire cycle has been the fact that McCain's supposed to be a more decent guy than his campaign is making him, and Matt touches on this in the same light I did this morning - the idea that McCain's just somehow being buffeted by a campaign strategy that's pushing him away from his moorings.
Something else I was thinking about as well: if we assume McCain's not being passive, and that he's making active managerial decisions, he's the single worst manager imaginable. He's chosen people who don't agree with his leadership philosophy, who can't work towards his vision, who give him material he can't keep straight, who say things he doesn't agree with and who, at the end of the day, make him look like a worse person.
I really do think that he should be given full control of a nuclear arsenal, so that when his National Security Advisor, Murder O'Plenty, decides that we need to nuke China, we can have a wall-to-wall week of coverage on how this is actually good news for John McCain, because we'll finally see the kind-hearted maverick we know and love in the tenderly crafted psuedo-apology to the last three residents of Guangzhou.