plooger's Journal - Some thoughts, for what they're worth...

Selection of Palin reflects on McCain's judgement, intellectual rigor, and his independence. (If she's not fond of Palin, I would think that would translate to a rightly-diminished view of McCain.)
- Palin is supremely unqualified to assume the Presidency, so by McCain's own measure he failed in his first commander-in-chief level decision; (If she needs to see how unqualified Palin is, this Charlie Rose interview is essential viewing. My thoughts on the interview are here and here.)
- McCain was the presumptive Republican nominee for 6+ months, the last-minute rashness of the Palin selection, with very minimal background vetting, does not demonstrate a rigorous, intelligent approach to solving problems; (recommended listen: Rachel Maddow Show; Sep. 4, from 61:18-64:05)
- Palin's selection is one tangible example that McCain's promises of non-partisan politics is a facade; McCain wanted a more moderate running mate (Ridge, Lieberman), but succumbed to the extremists in the Republican Party who were pushing for Palin; this first CinC level decision also demonstrates that McCain is not free to be independent; the negative tone of the Republican convention is another tangible example of McCain's actions speaking louder than his promises, relative to non-partisan governing;
- Promises of transparency and reform have been quickly contradicted by McCain's actions within 7 days of teaming with Palin. She's been isolated from media interviews, and McCain has lawyers in Alaska trying to derail the bipartisan ethics investigation into Palin's firing of the very popular Public Safety head.
McCain has been repeatedly wrong on national security
- The most basic fact is that John McCain didn't just vote for the invasion of Iraq. As early as weeks after 9/11, John McCain advocated invading Iraq, the biggest strategic blunder in the history of the country -- the after-effects of which we're not yet close to fully understanding, as predicted by Obama in his 2002 speech in opposition to the invasion...
  (For example, bin Laden stills walks free; al Qaeda has expanded internationally; London, Madrid and Bali have experienced blowback attacks; thousands of soldiers dead and tens of thousands wounded; hundreds of thousands of Iraqi civilians killed and millions displaced; alientated relationships around the world; oil prices skyrocketing due to geopolitical instability; deficits and US debt out of control; and the US economy in tatters.)
- McCain wants people to focus on The Surge(tm), as though the lessened violence was the goal and all that matters, and is pretending that the increase of troops in and around Baghdad, The Surge, is the sole reason for the decrease in violence. McCain's talking points require that the viewer be ignorant of the Shia cease-fire and that the Sunni Awakening, where we're paying Sunni militia to fight on our side. But, most importantly, The Surge is just a tactic; the strategy of political reconciliation and stabilization has not yet been achieved.... and CANNOT be achieved so long as American forces occupy the country and the Iraqi government is viewed as a puppet of Washington.
- Did I mention that John McCain was an advocate for the biggest strategic blunder in United States history?
- When Barack Obama commented that the US may find the necessity to act unilaterally in the nether regions of the Pakistan mountains, if targets are identified and the Pakistan government is unable to act, John McCain derided Obama. The US military is now following Obama's plan, by necessity.
I want someone smarter than me as President.

Fred Thompson's praise of McCain's Naval Academy failure aside (RMS, from 73:45-74:25), rather than someone who graduated at the bottom of his class from the Naval Academy, I'd prefer someone who not only graduated from Harvard Law, but was so respected by his peers that he was elected as the first-ever African American editor of the Harvard Law Review.