If you read Wired? Yes. If you read LGF and get the full context of what she said? No. That makes twice already today that quotes of hers were bowdlerized to make them more nutroots-friendly.

Lot o’ debunking to do before November 4.

In an interview Thursday, Palin said she meant only to say that discussion of alternative views should be allowed to arise in Alaska classrooms:

“I don’t think there should be a prohibition against debate if it comes up in class. It doesn’t have to be part of the curriculum.”

She added that, if elected, she would not push the state Board of Education to add such creation-based alternatives to the state’s required curriculum.

Members of the state school board, which sets minimum requirements, are appointed by the governor and confirmed by the Legislature.

“I won’t have religion as a litmus test, or anybody’s personal opinion on evolution or creationism,” Palin said.

That puts her to Jindal’s left, actually. Here’s a bit more, unquoted by LGF, from the Anchorage Daily News article Charles links to:

Palin said she thought there was value in discussing alternatives.

“It’s OK to let kids know that there are theories out there,” she said in the interview. “They gain information just by being in a discussion.”

That was how she was brought up, she said. Her father was a public school science teacher.

“My dad did talk a lot about his theories of evolution,” she said. “He would show us fossils and say, ‘How old do you think these are?'”

I don’t know how to parse all that — she’s happy to let it come up in classroom discussion so long as it’s introduced by kids’ questions and not the teacher himself, I guess — but as long as she doesn’t want to add it to the curriculum I can’t believe she’ll have any problem with independents. In any case, creationism’s not what this election’s about. What this election’s about is whether Palin supported a guy nine years ago who’s still — tragically — so mainstream that you can’t turn on MSNBC or Fox News without stumbling across him. Ben Smith cites old press reports indicating that Palin backed Steve Forbes in 1999, but Buchanan, ever eager to slay the neocon dragon even if it means blaming Churchill for World War II, evidently claimed on Hardball tonight that she was one of his. I can’t wait for the “Countdown” segment explaining why anyone who would associate with Pat Buchanan is unfit for office, followed immediately by yet another 20-minute pundit roundtable featuring Pat Buchanan.

Update: A crucial news bulletin: Palin never actually donated to Buchanan but may have been at a fundraiser for him 12 years ago. Ergo, she hates Jews. I literally laughed aloud at the thought of Chris Matthews trying to paint her as a hatemonger with the hatemonger-in-chief sitting right across from him on his own show.