Here, motivation is (as it so often is elsewhere) of primary importance. As the premise stated, above, is patently a risible one to any serious, objective observer over the either the mental or chronological age of two, the logical questions then become who stands to benefit most from the relentless parroting of such idiocies; and, more importantly, why?
Ponder these, for more than a moment or two, and the obvious answers to both should readily present themselves. ;)
Of course. She drew crowds. She energized the right. Therefore she has to be marginalized and destroyed. Anyone doubting the press and the left (but I repeat myself) isn't playing for keeps is wrong.
Also, in the sentence "(Palin) waltzed into hotel rooms full of men wearing nothing but a towel ... " I believe I let the participle dangle. :)