I fall into the latter camp, personally. I feel she puts forth such a false persona that regularly varies from ill-informed to bald-faced lying, often with a healthy smattering of damn near illiteracy thrown in. I will not take Palin at her word without significant evidence.
Since no journalists are remotely close to being allowed to investigate (or, frankly, slightly question) her, and she wasnt that far from being leader of the worlds superpower, this is one conspiracy that Im willing to give some weight.
This all leads me back to a point I have been making about Palin and her Tea Party movement supporters: its not even a matter of relative fact or truth, it is a matter of blatant absence and denial of fact or truth. And when there is no allowance for simple, proven fact, there can be no conversation, let alone compromise.