The unexpected complexity may come from the fact that he's much more a cultural, rather than a political, writer. He is certainly not "hating on" Palin. He is a fairly recent adult convert to Eastern Orthodox Christianity, and he takes the faith and morals and the sacraments of this faith seriously and literally. Maybe more so, possibly, that adherents of other faith communities who see it as just a symbolic thing.
So if Palin has managed to treat with a certain rhetorical levity both torture and the Sacrament of Baptism, she would be well advice not to do so again.
I am certain Dreher respects Palin's excellent qualities as a woman, as a conservative activist, and as a pro-life advocate.
I'm not sure Dreher really does respect Sarah Palin, though. From what he writes, it sounds like he turned against her very early on -- a few weeks after she'd been nominated, back when the rest of us still found some hope and something to praise in her. If Dreher had respect for Palin, he would have left out some of the things he's said about her.
Rod Dreher does “hate Palin, and he didn’t vote for her/McCain in 2008.
Here is RedState in January, 2009:
“Dreher also proves to be overtaken by Parkeritis, which would be defined as an ostensibly conservative writer that hates Sarah Palin so much that it seems to make him lose his mind in the process.”
Dreher:
“”What would a healthy conservative populism look like? Not like Sarah Palin’s saccharine shtick, which candy-coated conventional Republican ideas with a bright red culture-war gloss. Palinism co-opts and deflects legitimate populist anger by allowing its adherents to hate elites without really challenging the system. A true conservative populism would not tolerate an arrangement in which the few profit at the expense of the many – which, no matter how many flags she waves or hockey games she attends, is all Palin offers.””
Here he is today, on gay marriage:
“”The problem is tolerance is not the goal here; mandatory affirmation is, to the point where individuals and institutions who won’t affirm are to be marginalized and punished. The other day I saw a tweet in which someone said that Ross Douthat, a Catholic who articulately defends the teachings of his Church on human sexuality, ought to be thought of as suffering from a psychological disorder. This is how religious and political disagreement becomes a matter of pathology — not a moral argument to be grappled with, but a disease to be cured. This is where we’re headed. It would be wise for conservative Christians, Jews, Muslims, and others to quit fighting a battle they (we) lost a long time ago, and start figuring out how to defend, constitutionally, our religious and cultural institutions from the coming legal assault. Ironically, if we traditionalists are going to be able to hold our ground, we’re going to have to function as libertarians.””
In 2012, it looks like he leaned Obama when you read his articles.