Conservative Rebellion Or Civil War

Writing in the Washington Post, blogger extraordinaire Ed Morrissey declares:

Well, he's finally done it. By nominating White House lawyer Harriet Miers to the Supreme Court, George Bush has managed to accomplish what Al Gore, John Kerry, Tom Daschle and any number of Democratic heavyweights have been unable to do: He has cracked the Republican monolith. Split his own party activists. And how.

We should have seen this coming. By blogosphere standards, the signs were evident long ago. The first major crack I recall in the right side of the blogosphere's support for the President resulted from the President's January 2004 proposal for immigration reform. The inclusion of a guest worker program that allowed those here illegally to stay was deemed an amnesty, a reward for braking the law that could only encourage more illegal immigration.

Even then, Morrissey gave President Bush credit for doing what Democrats couldn't, George Bush, split the right and shake his base.

There was also the dissatisfaction with the inadequate defense of the President's judicial nominees filibustered by the Democrats. There is also the President's signing of the McCain-Feingold so-called campaign finance reform, ongoing disappointment over the accelerating growth of the Federal government and lack of fiscal responsibility. The list could go on.

Are conservatives engaged in a civil war as Morrissey suggests? Conservatives are indeed split into three opposing groups, but this "civil war" is more like a rebellion. A rebellion is defined as opposition to one in authority or dominance or a usually unsuccessful defiance of or resistance against authority.

The rebel alliance described by Morrissey is not likely to prevail. The President may have blundered with the Miers nomination. Nevertheless, he has made it clear that he will battle for her confirmation. Like most rebellions, this one will fail resulting in Miers being confirmed.

What then, will the rebels abandon President Bush? Morrissey writes that a complete abandonment by the conservative rebels is merely a fringe position. On this point I think Morrissey discounts the anger and the sense of betrayal felt by the rebels. The outpouring of outrage, frustration and anger flowing from the rebel blogs is unlike anything I've read, except for that constantly served up by the Bush-hating lunatic leftwingnuts.

The question becomes whether the losses from this struggle will deplete the the coalition that elected and reelected President Bush and maintained Republican control of the Congress to such a degree that the Democrats regain control of the government.

Whether Miers is confirmed no longer matters in this uprising. What should matter to conservatives is whether the conservative movement will still be able to make a relevant difference in the direction of the country.

On the left there is a growing sense of a sea change about to occurr. This is what Morrissey's Loyalist Army and Trench-Dwelling Dogfaces must work to avoid. It is why many have joined Patrick Ruffini's Coalition of the Chillin'.

Congatulations to Captain Ed for the well deserved recognition he has received by the Washington Post. You can also join the discusion about the Three-Part Disharmony at Capain's Quarters

[How Harriet Unleashed a Storm on the Right]

UPDATE: The Anchoress posts that if conservatives defeat Miers, the GOP Senate "will continue to cower and duck and bobble and weave - but everyone else will have been weakened; the president, the next “acceptable” nominee, the conservative pundits who have sneered at their own audience, the conservative movement as a whole…and ultimately the nation."

The Anchoress also wonders what the President was to do in light of assertions that the GOP told the President they would not fight for Owen, Luttig, or Brown.

At PoliBlog, Steven Taylor joins the Rebel Alliance.

Patterico is strongly leaning towards joining the Rebel Alliance.