All of that is accurate and correct. But is it moral?
And, no, I do no hold believers to account usually, but when they combine torture and faith as she has done here, it becomes necessary. As far as I know Obama has done nothing to attract any attention for his Christian belief's, if indeed he has any.
"Small people talk about people, average people talk about events, great people talk about ideas" Eleanor Roosevelt
"A nation can survive its fools, and even the ambitious. But it cannot survive treason from within. An enemy at the gates is less formidable, for he is known and carries his banner openly. But the traitor moves amongst those within the gate freely, his sly whispers rustling through all the alleys, heard in the very halls of government itself. For the traitor appears not a traitor; he speaks in accents familiar to his victims, and he wears their face and their arguments, he appeals to the baseness that lies deep in the hearts of all men. He rots the soul of a nation, he works secretly and unknown in the night to undermine the pillars of the city, he infects the body politic so that it can no longer resist. A murder is less to fear"
Cicero Marcus Tullius
And see, from the start, I never took Palin's comment as being related to religion. Granted her words were spoken, but in any recap I've seen the word baptism/baptized is not capitalized, as it would be if a Christian was using it in the sacramental sense, nor did she speak about Baptizing terrorists "into the church" which is what the sacrament entails. She more spoke about baptism in a more secular way, as in "introducing" terrorists into the way she, as leader of the country, would operate. As well, this was basically a keynote speaker kind of rouse the crowd oratory that she's come to be famous for and not anything in the way of a serious policy discussion that would go along with a run for office.
Anyway, we all look at these things differently and perhaps I give her a little more slack than some because I find her refreshingly blunt and entertaining in the way she approaches public and political issues/discussions. She's doesn't have the canned, politically correct answers to all controversial questions. She's pretty much reached the stage, for me, of the old grandmother who'll blurt out something outrageous and everyone has a good laugh. I remember considering Ann Richards, the former Democrat Governor of Texas in the same way after she left politics - refreshingly candid.
A Canadian conservative is one who believes in limited government and that the government should stay out of our wallets and out of our bedrooms.
What line would she have crossed?