Sarah Palin has become the foxiest VP candidate since John Nance Garner (but not the world's hottest politician by a damn sight). John McCain selected her in order to woo the dames, right-wingers, and Alaska's massive electorate, and also because he decided that a president doesn't need any experience after all.
My biggest problem with Sarah Palin is her stance on teaching creationism in schools:
"Teach both [creationism and evolution]. You know, don't be afraid of information....Healthy debate is so important and it's so valuable in our schools. I am a proponent of teaching both. And you know, I say this too as the daughter of a science teacher. Growing up with being so privileged and blessed to be given a lot of information on, on both sides of the subject -- creationism and evolution. It's been a healthy foundation for me. But don't be afraid of information and let kids debate both sides."
The problem isn't that she thinks creationism should be taught in schools. The problem is that she frames the issue dishonestly when saying so. Sarah Palin is in favor of teaching creationism either because she wants to stay friendly to evangelicals, she thinks creationism is a valid theory, or both. It has nothing to do with wanting to expose children to the maximum amount of information for its own sake. If that were true she would advocate teaching the creation myths of all of the world's major religions and then some. I doubt this is her stance, and I doubt that she could justify singling out a particular religious theory of creation beyond the fact that it happens to coincide with the beliefs of a large number of voters.
Posing the question as "Why do you hate debate so much?" as opposed to "Why should I have to justify placing creationism (or anything else) alongside valence theory, photosynthesis, and algebra in the public education system?" is cowardly and dishonest.