Your defense of state's rights in this issue is spot on. The life amendment is dead in its tracks. Our one great hope is overturning Roe and sending it back to the states. Every pro-lifer understands this. This is why the battlefield of this issue is set every time we have a new SCOTUS appointment.
I've answered their false accusations of a "windfall profit" tax over and over and over again. They don't seem to want to read my posts. Perhaps they will listen to good old Beldar who laid out the case for why a severance tax is totally different from a windfall profits tax. I have also answered questions about her fiscal policies, but they do not want to understand that spending is in the hands of the legislature. A governor can only veto spending, and Sarah Palin has done so dramatically.
By this person's standards Ronald Reagan wasn't a fiscal conservative because government grew in the 80s as did our deficit. And government grew in California too during his governorship. How could he have been a conservative then? In fact, as you mentioned, Reagan signed into law abortion legislation in California and he gave a borderline liberal SCOTUS judges like O'Connor and Kennedy. So was Reagan pure enough for these puritans? (Though I should say, for the record, that Reagan was of course a true conservative.)
Again, I applaud your efforts to address them directly. I can't because I have too much contempt for their smear of her pro-life record. I would end up cursing them out, and that's not productive. Let cooler heads like yours prevail.
ROTFLMAO!!!