In response to Senator Boxer’s charge that Palin is “against birth control,” it’s worth quoting again from a debate which Byron cites below:

Q: In a recent survey you said that you would support abstinence-until-marriage education but that you would not support explicit sex-ed programs. What are explicit sex-ed programs, and does that include talking about condoms in school?
A: No, I don’t think that it includes something that is relatively benign. Explicit means explicit. No, I am pro-contraception, and I think kids who may not hear about it at home should hear about it in other avenues. So I’m not anti-contraception. But yeah, abstinence is another alternative that should be discussed with kids. I don’t have a problem with that. That doesn’t scare me, so it’s something that I would support also.

Reviewing answers like this, and the various things Palin has had to say about the life issues, assisted suicide, and similar matters, it’s pretty clear that it is not going to be easy for the Democrats to paint Palin as a cultural extremist or a “Christianist.” She is very clearly pro-life and a social conservative—the answers she gives are always on that side of the aisle—but always with a light and humble touch, with an eye to federalism and a sense of the limits of government power, and without overbearing religionism. As they review this record, the Democrats will find she is not who they hoped she might be. She is, for the most part, a social conservative with a soft touch—their worst nightmare.