I'm in the camp that thinks that we should be giving Palin enough rope to hang herself, since it's clear she's unready and we don't want to seem too much like bullies. That said, there's one point that I don't think has been mentioned enough that really boggles my mind. That is, (and no offense to the Alaskans among us) how does running Alaska give you 'executive experience'.
Alaska is one of the smallest states (by population) in the union, it's legislature appears to only be active for 90 days a year. But the bigger issue for me is, Alaska runs a surplus based solely on it's oil sales.
According to wikipedia, there was a payment to each and every Alaskan of nearly $2,000 in 2000 out of the Permanent Fund. I believe the biggest argument (especially for conservatives) about executive experience is the ability to manage a state is the ability to manage finances. She's even be touted for ability to trim the state budget in her time as governor. But it's been done with training wheels. There's no income or sales tax in Alaska for crying out loud.
Maybe this is a conservative utopia where big conglomerates underwrite the state in order to plunder it and the citizens avoid paying taxes (yet she still has the gall to complain about property taxes?), but I don't see how running this state comes near to running any other modern US state or the federal government.
Also, given the correlation between natural resources and lack of democracy, maybe her firing the head of Public Safety isn't that bad, you know, compared to other petrodictators.