Not really. Emphasizing the atomic bombs alone in contrast to the reality that they were part of an entire campaign of strategic bombing that had been going on for four years is gross oversimplification.
If you have a problem with Hiroshima and Nagasaki, then you have a problem with almost the entire Allied strategy in the Pacific War. Without constant pressure through bombing and destruction on the Japanese mainland, it is unlikely the Pacific military campaigns would have succeeded.
With that aside, I don't think NRO's alleged defense of the atomic bomb in any way is relevant to the discussion. However I do agree that it is dumb to get wound up about Palin's comment (which was equally dumb).
It would have saved a lot more lives to have surrendered on Dec 8, 1941. /s