Know a feminist? Friend of a women’s libber? Got a babe for a neighbor? Get ‘em a bumper sticker so they can proudly display their support of the real women’s movement.

Click here to get yours today.

Investor’s Business Daily always seems to hit the nail on the head…

Based on the 1900s-style offerings included in their agenda of identity politics, it’s almost as if Democrats regard women as the dim bulbs of their coalition.

Change with the times they do not. It may be 2008, but Democrats still think that abortion, along with a Big Labor-inspired “Pay Equity Act,” are about all it takes to satisfy female voters.

“Barack Obama has been a consistent champion of reproductive choice; he received 100% ratings from choice groups throughout his career,” one of Obama’s flyers begins.

On the empowerment front, however, it’s another story. Despite the claims to represent women, Democrats still didn’t put Hillary Clinton on the Democratic presidential ticket. Despite a strong performance in the primaries, Clinton wasn’t even considered.

No wonder then that Sarah Palin, the new face on the Republican ticket, resonates so powerfully with women. Palin presents an authentic picture of women’s empowerment, yet owes nothing to the Democrats’ feminist agenda. She was named by John McCain to be his running mate solely on her own merit and political skills as governor of Alaska, all things she earned herself.

That’s what makes the Democratic offerings to women look like such thin gruel. Regardless of how one feels about abortion, abortion rights have been around since 1972 and empower no one. There’s even reason to question why it’s exclusively a women’s issue to Democrats, because they ghettoize it as that.

At the Democratic Convention’s Women’s Caucus, most speeches revolved around abortion and little else. Rep. Louise Slaughter of New York vowed that a President Obama and a Democratic Congress would ensure that doctors who invoke conscience clauses against performing abortions would be forced to perform them.

The intensity of focus on this single issue, alongside a goody bag of other government programs, looked fairly tired to many women. Instead of walking the walk by naming a living, breathing female to the ticket, Democrats sent the message that only government programs, especially the right to abortion, are of interest to women.

Democrats seem to realize how hollow this was — which explains their distracting offerings like movie star Eva Longoria on the podium last week, hardly a model for the average woman. House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, a Democrat of actual power who wrote a book called “Know Your Power,” had better things to do that day.

Meanwhile, Palin is now as close as anyone before to winning real power as a flesh and blood woman. No wonder she resonates among women — as Democrats’ government programs do not.

Palin, a mother of five, didn’t actually have much use for abortion, a right many Democrats think she should have reflexively made use of when she learned her fifth child would be born with Down syndrome. Her beloved son Trig not only brought her joy, but didn’t require her to step down from power. Maybe you can have it all.

That brings up the second problem Palin brings to the Democratic feminist agenda — the canard that a woman cannot succeed in the world with the “drag” of children. The left has been fast to question whether she can be a good mother while in public service.

Although Michelle Obama loudly spoke out against that attitude at the Women’s Caucus last Thursday, the Democratic party line since Palin arrived has been to tell her to go home and take care of kids and leave the careers to the big boys — and childless feminists.

But the fact is Palin was chosen for McCain’s vice presidential spot while Democrats fell down on the job at naming a woman to a real position of power. This exposes the lie behind their agenda.

Palin’s no show-pony. She will bring critical expertise on energy to the Republican ticket. She will be the embodiment of how far a woman can go, not based on a package of rights or a list of government programs, but on her own merit.

McCain gave her the No. 2 spot because of what she adds as a political leader, not as a woman. That just might resonate with women more than anything government can give. That makes her a real revolutionary — and a threat to the outdated feminist agenda.

And the same Democrats who complained about McCain playing identity politics by choosing Palin as his running mate as a ploy to go after women voters are showing their true hypocritical colors:

Senator Barack Obama will increasingly lean on prominent Democratic women to undercut Gov. Sarah Palin and Senator John McCain, dispatching Senator Hillary Rodham Clinton to Florida on Monday and bolstering his plan to deploy female surrogates to battleground states, Obama advisers said Thursday.
…
Obama aides said they were counting on not only Mrs. Clinton but also Democratic female governors to rebut Ms. Palin — and, by extension, Mr. McCain. Those governors include Janet Napolitano of Arizona and Kathleen Sebelius of Kansas.

They already told women voters what they think of them when they failed to add Hillary Clinton to the ticket. Now they think they’ll win back the women voters by toting a few high-profile female politicians on their campaign’s arm like a high-priced escort at a cocktail party. They don’t trust them with the power, but they come in handy when you need to look good and impress your friends.

Now that you’ve vetted Bristol Palin, is Barack Obama next?

The speech…

While the liberal pundits in the mainstream media are trying to concoct a narrative that Sarah Palin is a liability for John McCain, Barack Obama is probably the candidate most likely rethinking his choice of running mates.

Apparently Joe Biden thinks that between Sarah Palin and Barack Obama, she’s the one that’s ready to be elected.

On Sarah Palin:

“First of all, I don’t know the governor. There’s no reason not to respect her and I believe she’s qualified to be the vice president.”

On Barack Obama:

Stephanopoulos, to Biden: “You were asked: ‘Is [Barack Obama] ready?’ You said, ‘I think he can be ready, but right now I don’t believe he is. The presidency is not something that lends itself to on-the-job training.’”

Biden: “I think I stand by the statement.”

Looks like she’s winning cross-over votes already.

Compare and contrast the coverage…

(Note: USWeekly is owned by Obama supporter Jann Wenner)

If there’s no bias, why is 17-year old Bristol Palin’s pregnancy a “scandal” while 16-year old Jamie Lynn Spears’ pregnancy is something to celebrate?

If there’s no bias, why is Sarah Palin called a hypocrite for supporting abstinence-only education in light of her daughter’s pregnancy, but Al Gore is praised for supporting a fight against global warming while increasing his own energy consumption?

If there’s no bias, then why do we hear more about a VP Candidate’s spouse’s two-decade old DUI, but not so much about a Presidential Candidate’s own admitted use of cocaine and marijuana?

If there’s no bias, why are there more media researchers in Alaska trying to dig up dirt on a VP Candidate and her family than there are in Chicago to review actual evidence of a Presidential Candidate’s affiliation with a convicted domestic terrorist?

If there’s no bias, why is the mainstream media questioning McCain’s vetting process (to further their manufactured narrative questioning his judgement) as his VP pick is hounded on personal issues that were known to the campaign, but not questioning Obama on his vetting process after his own vetter had to quit the campaign suddenly over questionable sweetheart deals in the subprime loan mess or the revelation that his VP pick, Biden also has close ties to convicted Obama friend Tony Rezko.

If there’s no bias, why was Dick Cheney’s 5 draft deferments a “campaign issue to be covered by the NY Times“, but Joe Biden’s 5 deferments are a side-story to be covered in a local paper?

If there’s no bias, why was the Democrat VP Candidate in 2004 hailed as a “rising star“, despite only having the experience of a one-term Senator and a lifelong trial lawyer… yet the current Republican VP Candidate, who has more executive experience than either of the men on the top of the current tickets and more years in elected office than the Democrat Presidential Candidate is derided as simply “too young and inexperienced“? (Nevermind the current hype over a guy who’s entire, brief political career has been spent campaigning for the next job rather than accomplishing anything of susbtance…)

If there’s no bias… then I am a fan of Michael Moore.

UPDATE: Let’s not forget why they do it…

“There’s one other base here: the media. Let’s talk a little media bias here. The media, I think, wants Kerry to win. And I think they’re going to portray Kerry and Edwards — I’m talking about the establishment media, not Fox, but — they’re going to portray Kerry and Edwards as being young and dynamic and optimistic and all, there’s going to be this glow about them that some, is going to be worth, collectively, the two of them, that’s going to be worth maybe 15 points.”

Ever since John McCain announced Governor Sarah Palin as his running mate, the Democrats have been running around talking about inexperience. Not really a subject the Democrats should be putting front and center in their campaign that features a candidate at the top of their ticket who’s biggest accomplishments are “community organizing” and a speech in 2002.

Nevertheless, experience is suddenly an issue for them in the campaign as they attack Palin’s experience… which happens to be more executive experience, and more experience on energy and troop command than either of the two guys on the Democrat ticket.

And the MSM is also suddenly concerned about experience in the Presidential race… and in their breathless support of their Democrat candidates they’re trying to paint the Presidential matchup as being between the Republican VP nominee and the Democrat Presidential choice - because they know John McCain has more experience than Obama has years on this earth.

It’s ironic that they’re questioning the McCain/Palin ticket because the V.P. might not be ready to lead this country, while they’re supporting a ticket where the TOP of the ticket is equally, or more, ill-equipped to lead the nation.

But it seems even the Democrat candidates themselves are trying to, subconciously or not, confuse the American public as to who’s actually at the top of their ticket.

Here’s Joe Biden this weekend:

“I will be back, I’ll be back to campaign in earnest,” Biden said, “but today is not the moment for me to campaign. Today is the moment for me as a United States senator running for president to put aside the national politics and focus on what’s happening down there” in the Gulf Coast.

And here was Obama introducing Biden as his running mate:

“So let me introduce to you the next president…

Maybe they figure they’ll catch some folks not paying attention who will vote for the Biden/Obama ticket. Then again, they think their base is made up of idiots, so it might work.

UPDATE: Obama responds to the issue that McCain’s VP choice actually has more executive experience than he does by claiming that his running for President makes him more qualified to be President. Huh?

“Well, you know, my understanding is that, uh, Governor Palin’s town of Wasilly [sic] has, uh, 50 employees, uh, uh, we’ve got 2500, uh, in this campaign. I think their budget is maybe $12 million a year. Uh, uh, we have a budget of about three times that just for the month. Uh, so I think that, uh, our ability to manage large systems, uh, and to, uh, execute, uh, I think has been made clear over the last couple of years. Uh, and certainly, in terms of, uh, the legislation that I’ve passed just dealing with this issue post-Katrina, uh, of how we handle emergency management. The fact that, uh, many of my recommendations were adopted and are being put in place, uh, as we speak indicates to extent to which we can provide the kinds of support and good service that the American people expect.”

As Ed puts it:

By that standard, anyone who ever ran for any public office has executive experience — and that also kills their own experience argument against Palin anyway.

It is interesting, though, that everytime the Democrats refer to Palin’s executive experience, (aside from forgetting that the highly experienced John McCain is running against Obama at the top of the ticket) they point to her experience as a Mayor of a small town and completely ignore the fact that she’s been governor of a state for several years. And the motive is obvious.

It’s now confirmed that John McCain has picked Alaska Governor Sarah Palin as his running mate.

Here’s her bio on wikipedia.

This was a smart pick on a number of levels. It shows the McCain camp has been listening to conservatives. Palin is a strong conservative candidate. She’s a reformer who even took on some in her own party and cleaned up governement in Alaska. She’s a member of the NRA and pro-life. She supports drilling in ANWR and she’s a tax reformer.

It exploits the opportunity created by Democrats in their snubbing of Hillary Clinton. A side benefit might be that while she’s a great public speaker and will hold her own in the debates, you’ll see a big contrast between her and bitter Biden. If he attacks too hard, it could cost him points with female voters.

She’s also a Washington outsider. If people are looking for hope and change from the status quo of Washington, D.C., she brings more credibility than either of the insiders on the Democrat ticket.

It also takes some of the hype off of the Messiah’s campaign in that this election will be historic if either side wins now. The timing of the announcement is great, too. Coverage of the pick is overshadowing the MSM’s lovefest for Obama in some respects. (Though they’re trying hard not to let “news” get in the way of their salivation over The One.)

It also brings youth to the ticket. Of course, CNN is already claiming she’s too inexperienced… which is wildly amusing considering the “experience” of their candidate of choice. But consider this… of the 4 principles on the two main party tickets, she’s the only one with executive experience.

Good job, McCain campaign.

UPDATE: So let’s think about this. While the Democrat Convention seemed to focus so much on women’s rights and breaking glass ceilings… which party has a woman on the ticket? HotAir has a good roundup of the benefits of the Palin choice.

UPDATE 2: Once again showing that they’re long on talk and catchy slogans and short on substance when it comes to treating women with equality, the next Democrat talking point, as promoted by CNN, is that by running for V.P., Palin’s neglecting her son, Trig, who was born with Down’s Syndrome. Of course, if she were a Democrat, they’d be praising her “progressiveness” and running supporting stories of how her disabled son serves as an inspiration for her political career. Sorry, sweetie.