How interesting it is to note the silence from the liberal women cheerleaders when a politically conservative woman "makes it to the top" — into a position of executive power.

Example: Condoleezza Rice.

More and more, with every passing week, closer and closer to the presidential election, Ms. Rice has been put into strategic speaking spots and administration positions, some concerning especially significant global issues.

It is Ms. Rice this past weekend who was the highlighted power mover in the Middle East. She represented parties concerned about peace. She stood for calm and reason. She deliberated with those in a most contentious situation. Ms. Rice dialogued with Israeli leadership. Likewise, she spoke with Palestinian representatives. She was there, in the middle of tension, intrigue and hope.

Ms. Rice, a talented spokeswoman, skilled speaker, deliberate thinker is a team player for the Bush Team. She has not tried to upstage her colleagues. Seemingly the President has utmost confidence in her abilities.

Therefore, it was Ms. Rice who spoke regarding putting forth another advance in the "road map to peace." It was a feminine voice. It was a woman speaking primarily with men.

Ms. Rice talked with Mahmoud Abbas on the West Bank on Saturday. Then she met with the Israeli leadership, beginning with Dov Weisglass.

Ms. Rice put the urgency of US pressure upon both parties, especially the Arabs, to shore up peace lines by quelling terrorists. She also spoke with Israelis about moving away from Gaza and Bethlehem. It was a delicate dialogue she maintained.

Understanding that Ms. Rice is front and center in these crucial deliberations is to understand that a female leader is putting in place peace frames for the future. It is a woman working ably among men. It is a female who is not touting her womanhood but is living it out graciously, yet forthrightly.

Noting Ms. Rice speak to one audience after another is an enriching experience. She is noble. She is impressive, persuasive and courteous. She is knowledgeable.

But does the feminist movement take note of this female leadership within a politically conservative context? No.

The feminist movement at such a juncture shows it bias. As women of politically liberal persuasion seek to evangelize other women for their liberal causes, they continue to put up the walls. They continue to parade their own exclusive natures. They are as closed-minded as closed-minded can be.

Of course, Ms. Rice does not appear to be concerned about being shunned by the political opposition. She evidently is too consumed with her mission to be drawn aside by those who are prone to ignore her abilities. She has chosen a higher road of principle than pandering for attention from feminists.

But it is irritating, yet confirming of their prejudice, that feminists who claim to be reaching out for the welfare of all women worldwide shut out any politically conservative females. The latter are an especial threat to the politically liberal agenda. Therefore, feminists fright at any accomplishments by women of conservative persuasion.

J. Grant Swank, Jr.