Yeah that's not a great example. It takes awhile to surf the net for old stuff. Here are some other examples:
Why aren't women furious about Sarah Palin? | Salon Life
You missed an important clue from the author profile at the bottom there:
Cintra Wilson's new book, "Caligula for President: Better American Living Through Tyranny," will be in bookstores this October.
What Wilson is known for is over-the-top absurdist, savagely funny pieces meant primarily to entertain. She's not exactly a 'comedy writer' per se, and I don't doubt her sincere loathing of Palin, but this isn't by any stretch meant as an earnest, sober piece of 'feminist analysis,' and Wilson would roar with laughter at any attempts to discuss it as such.
More to the point, though--
Again, what do either of those links have to do with what you were actually being asked about, by several of us, which was your assertion that:
There were feminists that used sexist arguments against Palin running like that she couldn't have kids and run at the same time. That's old news.
I still don't see where you've answered this. Whether 'feminism' necessarily entails a commitment to a liberal
economic agenda specifically might be a worthwhile discussion at some point, but it's not the one you were responding to.
Second Wave feminism was indeed historically associated in the political sphere with Democrats, and for obvious reasons--the Republicans were (among other things) the party of social and cultural conservatism, and women moving en masse into the workplace, availing themselves of contraception, etc. obviously didn't fit too well with that agenda. Things have changed, of course--the aforementioned two shifts have now attained near-universal acceptance, something they certainly didn't have yet in the '60s--but there's a decades-old legacy of party affiliation involved by now, and conservative failures to accept the inevitable and make it their own earlier on have as much to do with that as anything else.
John Roberts is not a conservative. He's an ex-Muchmusic VJ. Anyways the Republican response corrected him.
Those articles hint that you have to support liberal social projects to be a true feminist and to be supportive of equal rights for women?
Again the syllogistic fallacy here. You seem to want to blame liberals for whatever perceptions exist that 'feminism' essentially entails a liberal economic agenda, but then you also seem to want to say that because so-and-so isn't a conservative, then s/he must be a 'feminist,' so that you can claim them as support for your 'feminists attacked Palin for being a working mother' argument.