When did the party of Hillary Clinton nutcrackers, C.U.N.T. T-shirts and rape jokes become the standard-bearer for the women’s movement?The minute they nominated a woman for the vice presidency.Sarah Palin’s sudden rise up the ranks of the Republican Party has generated a firestorm of media coverage. Palin has caused evangelicals to swoon and empty their pocket books, liberals to grind their teeth and foreign policy realists of all persuasions to shake their heads in abject horror that a politician who doesn’t understand “The Bush Doctrine” could be just one heartbeat away from the presidency.Well, at least being a woman is no longer anathema to the conservative movement. Better late than never.Of course, this newfound allegiance to female empowerment has not led to public repudiations of past Republican transgressions. Gendered humor such as the nutcrackers found in airports across the country and the acronym-emblazoned T-shirts were all fair game when the target was a Democrat. Clinton Derangement Syndrome kept the G.O.P. afloat for the better part of two decades, so who can blame conservatives from trying to make an honest buck? I’m sure the conservative consulting firm that came up with “Citizens United Not Timid” had to go through hundreds of permutations on the letters C, U, N and T — and kudos to them for making that cheddar and picking the best name possible given their stringent letter requirements.But now that the high-heeled shoe is on the other foot, Republican pundits across the country are dying to let everyone know they were just joshing — and John McCain’s selection of a woman negates his well-covered penchant for telling rape jokes.Have I been living on a liberal Fantasy Island — where dogs talk, birds keep people as pets in cages, and a midget named Tattoo roams the island pointing at the sky while chanting “The plane! The plane!” Where did all these right-wing feminists come from, and why have they only appeared now that it’s politically expedient?It’s surreal.Republican talking heads are acting like a scene out of a Greek Tragedy. When they’re not wailing at the unfairness of Us Weekly’s attacks, their rending their garments and falling to the ground in paroxysms of outrage and gall that anyone disrespect women in politics.What’s next? Will Rush Limbaugh burn his bra while calling the Miss America pageant a cattle show? Will Sean Hannity whip out his guitar and sing Joan Baez while Alan Colmes spits hot fire on the bass?It would be funny if it weren’t so tragic — and while I respect my colleague Matt McEntire for not being part of the Republican culture of hypocrisy, I’m unconvinced by his attempts to label the rumor-mongering of Us Weekly as a bell-weather by which we can determine the tone and tenor of political coverage.McEntire and I both agree that unfounded rumors about the paternity of Palin’s child do not merit discussion — and given their introduction to the discourse in a tabloid, I won’t waste another inch debating them or giving them weight.But McEntire is right — questions about Palin’s ability to be an effective vice president because of her newborn with special needs are something not asked of any male candidates. Perhaps these questions do reflect a latent sexism afflicting our political discourse. But perhaps they’re asked because Palin’s the only candidate who has a newborn child with special needs. I consider myself a feminist — or at least someone who strives for it. I have no doubt a woman can be president and can be every bit as qualified and good as any man. But even I had questions about how Palin and her husband would be able to balance the needs of their breast-feeding newborn with the responsibilities that would soon be incumbent upon both of them should they take up residence in the U.S. Naval Observatory in Washington.And if either Obama or Biden had a newborn with those needs, I’d still have the questions — and I’d accept their answers to these questions at their word and consider the matter closed just as I did with Palin.Perhaps McEntire is right when he suggests the National Organization of Woman should have come to Palin’s defense — but I suspect issuing press releases on Palin’s behalf would have only extended the life of the story and further harmed Palin’s historic candidacy. NOW did Palin a favor by killing the story and focusing their problems with Palin on policy rather than identity. But it’s this myopic view of feminism — that gender somehow trumps ideology — that brings us back to the problem. Palin is the first woman to receive the Republican nomination for vice president — but the Republican party has done nothing to distance herself from the sexism of the past.While Republicans suggest Palin’s gender should appeal to other women and Democrats, I’m left with different questions. If Palin were a Democrat, would Republicans hesitate to pull out a C.U.N.T. T-shirt and put her face on it? Would the Palin nutcracker have replaced the Clinton nutcracker as a top-seller?The Republican move to denounce sexism because of Us Weekly while remaining silent about their past behavior is like an arsonist asking for a fire truck — and I’m more inclined to send the fire truck than I am to restart the culture wars.—-contact Neal Hebert at [email protected]