It's one of the few shots of the White House economic crisis distraction meeting taken today from McCain's end of the room.
It's also a good opportunity to call out one of McCain's characteristic expressions. Sitting there pretending he's being constructive just after colluding with House Republicans to blow up intense, three-day-old bipartisan negotiations, that's the look of the cat that ate the canary.
Like I said in my tweet earlier today (after McCain did-but-really-didn't suspended his campaign, but before I knew about the House meetings): "After yesterday, you'd think the notion of someone crashing all those fighter planes wouldn't look all that random."
Update: I just finished reading the TPM post by David Kurtz about McCain's supposedly strange and sudden swerve in casting his economic lot with the right-wingers. Actually though, the move is perfectly consistent with John McCain's psychology.
Speaking as a clinician now and not just a visual analyst, what McCain demonstrates time-and-again -- as the hallmark of his psychology -- is oppositional-defiant disorder. What McCain gets off on, also reflected in the expression above, is throwing over the status quo. (Although the disorder is primarily attributed to children and closely fits McCain's repeated, indulgent descriptions of his earlier acting out, his touchiness, anger and authority issues are all still very much in evidence.)
Without an appreciation for the psychopathology underlying this behavior, people tend to chalk up the swerve-after-swerve in McCain's career to independence of mind or this ridiculous "maverick" label. I say ridiculous because what we are seeing play out once more is not a constructive trait but an impulsive pathological reaction -- one which manifests itself in a pernicious and destructive way.
For an additional clinical take, check out psychologist Bryant Welch's piece at HuffPost about McCain's "authority problem" written just after the RNC.
For more politics with the sound off, visit BAGnewsNotes.com. Or BAGnewsNotes via Twitter.
(image: Tim Sloan/Getty Images/AFP. White House Cabinet Room. September 25, 2008. Washington, DC)
Follow Michael Shaw on Twitter: www.twitter.com/bagnewsnotes
New McCain: Loose Cannon.
There are old pilots
and there are bold pilots
But there are no old bold pilots.
Mitch McConnell always just looks as if he's thinking: "Oops, I soiled myself again - hope nobody notices..."
McCain has chosen to represent those that want the Republican Party to continue as a majror political party in America. McCain now is demanding that the current corporate welfare plan be repackaged and disguised as a Republican bailout package of further deregulation and tax incentives. If unsuccessful, they truly will lose both the election and their Party of Corporate Welfare. His smirk is utter fear at play.
As to the oppositional-defiant pathology mentioned. I tend to view it as a manifestation of his PTSD, exhibited by Boundary Maintenance. One need look no further than his decades old voting record of NO for any and all veterans issues bills. It's truly scary to think how this will be furthered if he is elected president.
You put into words what alot of people here have been putting into 'what if 'scenarios using their instincts about McCain and this decidly sick tendency.
Many people commented on his weird grinning during these talks.
I think you are absolutely right.
While the headline writer corrected the original "fighter pilot" to "bomber pilot," you still have
"fighter planes" in your article.
You and GEN Wesley Clark should do some due diligence or research on U.S. military aircraft, particularly the planes that Sen. McCain flew once he won his "wings of gold."
He flew a Douglas A-1 Skyraider and was shot down in a Douglas A-4 Skyhawk. As the "A-" designator indicates, BOTH planes are "attack aircraft" or bombers to you non-military personnel.
So while John McCain was an aviator during his naval career, he was at no time a "fighter pilot" or a pilot flying "fighter aircraft."
There IS a big difference between fighters and bombers, and in the interest of "journalistic accuracy," please try to remember that they ain't one and the same.