Conservatives suddenly defending childfree women?

Wonders never cease! Political conservatives usually attack women who choose not to have children. I myself have been the brunt of such attacks on CNN and numerous radio shows. But after Barbara Boxer made remarks about Secretary of State Condoleeza Rice's lack of children, saying Rice couldn't truly comprehend the cost of war because she didn't have children, suddenly every conservative commentator is rushing to defend Rice's choice.

Ultra-conservative Rush Limbaugh not only responds with a laundry list of childfree legislators, but goes as far as to use the derogatory term for kids "crumb crunchers:

Here are some of the childless members of the United States Senate. Maria Cantwell: single, no crumb crunchers. Barbara Mikulski: single, no crumb crunchers. Olympia Snowe, Maine: married, no crumb crunchers. Susan Collins, Republican, Maine: single, no crumb crunchers. Libby Dole: North Carolina, married, no kids. Six members of the US Senate also without children, and I'll bet you Barbara Boxer has not once insulted them over the fact that they have no children and told them that their judgment and their decisions on anything having to do with children are irrelevant and perhaps flawed because they don't have any.

Over at The Conservative Voice, they are outraged:

Is it not outrageous that Senator Barbara Boxer (Dem, Cal) verbally attacked Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice for not having children as Rice appeared before the Senate Foreign Relations Committee on Thursday to discuss the Administrations position on Bush's Iraq military "surge" plans? Is this an acceptable criticism of a political official? Is the fact that an official might not have children reason to doubt their capacity for policy making or ability to advise an administration?

And here's Fox News' take:

Tony Snow called the senator's question to Rice a "great leap backward for feminism." And Tony nailed it.

Feminists like Barbara Boxer want it both ways. They want abortion rights, they want women to have access to the workplace, but if the woman takes that freedom, does not marry, does not have children, evidently Boxer thinks that woman is unqualified to use her education, experience and judgment in her career. Now, according to Boxer, that woman has to have children to have her career.

Fox news defending abortion rights? This is truly a first! Of course, they're only taking this position because it's politically expedient to do so. It's just a matter of time before these same conservatives return to calling childfree people "selfish" and "un-American" again. But in the meantime, I'm enjoying the sudden boost of moral support from un unlikely place.