From what I have read on the internet, you are correct on all fronts.
She is all for war, even to the point of after birth abortion by sending her own son to war, as cannon fodder.
Thanks America for bringing her to our notice.
This pistol packing Mother is one of the worst examples of motherhood, so it seems by all reports I have see thus far.
http://4spotmore43.blog-city.com/top_ten_most_disturbing_facts_and_impressions_of_sarah_palin.htm

i love to read 'progressive' rants against the right. as though anybody cared about your opinion...

mccain wants to be president. his support team but dubya in office, twice- evidence of great competence, i suggest. he and they have an opinion about how to do it, involving ms palin. don't dismiss them easily, the process of presidential selection nowadays has more in common with 'american idol' than the lincoln-douglas debates.

of course, the dems may yet get in, polls are suggesting obama remains the favorite. considering what a mess bush has made, the reps are conducting a remarkable campaign, to get within shouting distance. i therefore assume they know what they're doing.

it's not about logic, it's not about good sense. it's not about fair play or justice- the game is the struggle for power, so the tools are emotional- the appeal of a beautiful woman with a strong character.

at least that's one step up from gunfire and poison, be thankful.

That's a lot of assumptions based on reading from the very biased left wing media in the US, who have already had to start backing off their shrill accusations and misinterpretations - e.g. she's not a creationist, but she's open to debate in schools - are you afraid of information? Another example .. please go check, she does not say Global Warming is not a proven phenomema, she says MAN MADE Global Warming is questionable, so like so much of the hysterical left, you pull things out of context to suit your own intolerent point of view.

Where is the evidence she has abused power? Is there proof, no it's just an accusation. What a gutless abusive piece of gutter tripe that is.

The US is a very different place to Australia - she's popular because she gets results and is not just a blowhard (US Expression, think Kevin Rudd, Wayne Swan) who just promises and spins, but oh such pretty speeches (Kevin Rudd, Barack Obama etc).

I guess this just shows how frightened you all are that a woman might make it to the Whitehouse, who is not from the left. Is she the "wrong type of woman", if she gets there before a woman from the left you're all going to be miffed aren't you, because it's not supposed to work like that and you're the great champions of women, except you really aren't, (think Hilary Clinton)

We picked a blowhard here in Australia, the economy is suddenly in a mess, it's everyone else's fault, yes there are world problems, always are and we weathered them before because we had leadership, repent at leisure is what we're doing - do you wish that upon the Americans?

The author's ignorance says it all. He writes 'She’s an evangelical Christian who believes in creationism and thinks this fantasy belongs in the school science curriculum alongside evolution.'

Even our own two bob each way Prime Minister said during the week
'"As you know I'm a believer and I've never pretended not to be and I respect those who have no religious belief - it's a free country,'' Mr Rudd said.For me, it's ultimately the order of the cosmos or what I describe as the creation."

Did you hear that 'what I describe as creation' coming from a Labour Prime Minister. More and more people know that evolution is not science based but a load of crap. This woman is brave enough to say it.
Fred Hoyle says it well

'The chance that higher life forms might have emerged in this way is comparable with the chance that a tornado sweeping through a junk-yard might assemble a Boeing 747 from the materials therein... I am at a loss to understand biologists' widespread compulsion to deny what seems to me to be obvious." (Sir Fred Hoyle) In other words you need to be gullible or willfully ignorant to swallow the evolution myth.

Runner,

I choose to believe in creation, but I have difficulty even as a Christian accepting the 6 days idea. The Bible tells us that light was separated from darkness, thus creating the first day. This day could not have been a day as we know it (ie 24 hours) as God did not create the sun until the fourth day.

The theory of evolution as you know, is exactly that. It is full of problems, but I accept it as a theory (not fact). I like the quote from the movie "The King And I" when Anna said to the King, that the Bible was written by men of faith, who say the Earth was created in 6 days. Men of Science say the world was created in millions of years, but both tell the same remarkable story of the creation of this world.

I do find the mix of liberal causes in this article perplexing. Evangelical Christian creationist: bad. Killing children in the womb: good. Opposing human generated global warming scenario: bad. Drilling for oil in the Antarctic: bad. Sending her son off to war in Iraq: bad.

What strikes me about this list is that it lacks any coherence as an ethical system, it is simply a list of left, right, causes that have become fashionable. War is bad but uterine infanticide is good. This illustrates an ethical confusion because ethics have become the result of competing causes. Freedom of choice in all things competes with an abhorrence of violence. And so we get this mix of causes that looks like a new kind of PC.

Peter Sellick