Its been a wild week in the GOP as a party that prefers coronations can't coalesce around a candidate. The mainstream punditry has been conned into believing its all about disarray, but beneath the surface it seems just a tad too tidy. In case you've missed it, here's a recap of Social-Con Republican Endorsement Week, and why what may look like divisiveness should not be dismissed by anyone concerned about sexual and reproductive health.

• Brownback endorses McCain: Yawn. Both Brownback's Iowa supporters have now publicly said his endorsement of McCain does not bind them and they are candidate shopping. Better hurry, only 52 days until Caucus Christmas, held on the 11th night of the 12 Days of the Christmas Feast. Brownback's endorsement proves only that the clubby nature of the Senate takes priority. Sam figures he'll get to endorse someone else in a few weeks.
• Robertson endorses Giuliani:Giuliani needed someone with Social-Con street cred to endorse him. Rudy got Pat Robertson, who once damned Dover, Pennsylvania to hell because the community dared suggest that, in the 21st Century, science was more important to teach than the parables and metaphors of creationism. That doesn't matter to Rudy any more than his old pal Bernie Kerrick's indictment. Rudy will just keep doing his, "Gosh, I'm not perfect, but I can win" stump speech and people will believe him if he says "strict constructionist" as often as he invokes 9-11.
• Right to Life Committee endorses Thompson: This is a legitimate endorsement that could have gone to someone else and puts behind Thompson his pro-choice "client problem." This endorsement is a triumph of savvy political maneuvering. It gives Thompson's campaign genuine ground troops accustomed to mobilizing caucus and primary voters. A real boon to a campaign that is famous only for its lack of vigor, naps, mistakes and weekly staff dismissals. Thompson's strategy of overturning Roe by appointing more justices, not by federal legislation or amending the Constitution, may have confused Robert Novak (not hard to do), but should be seen for what it is by anyone who believes in individual rights and bodily autonomy — a very real threat.
• Paul Weyrich endorses Romney: This also is a legitimate endorsement though many Social-Cons don't think the "M" in mono-theism stands for Morman. Weyrich, like Robertson, actually helped revise the King James Version and delete parts of the Bible more inclusive and respectful of women. On the sixth day he created the Moral Majority. There, he personally collected the addresses of every person who believes we need more guilt and shame in our national discourse. Romney's not short on cash so Weyrich's value is not the list, but the signal it sends to Social-Cons as the consummate insider.
• Wildmon endorses Huckabee: Who? That's Donald Wildmon, chairman of the American Family Association who according to Talking Points Memo once accused Mighty Mouse of teaching children to snort cocaine. What is the obsession the GOP has with cartoons? Oh yes, and there was this "wild man" of God who endorsed Huckabee then prayed for (some might say cursed) the death of his critics. Huckabee has been surprised and disappointed by some of the endorsements others have received, but is satisfied with his dramatic rise in the Iowa polls, hoping to pull an upset as another southern Governor did in 1976. Known then as Jimmy Who?, former President Carter combined his genuine compassion, optimism and honesty to rack up surprising finishes in early states over well known politicians as the nation recovered from an administration that lied to the people, was plagued by scandal, and was trying to get out of an unpopular and un-winnable war.

One interpretation of the diversity of endorsements, coincidentally(?) timed within days of one another, is that Social-Cons have not found any one person to rally around, that they are divided; or maturing as a movement, no longer monolithic, depending upon perspective. Another is that they are covering their bases, making sure that there is a strong sense that every candidate is safe to Social-Con voters in some way, making it easier to unite in the general election.

My bet is the latter interpretation is closer to reality. With a stalwart of the Social-Con movement in the midst of every GOP campaign with a shot at the nomination, they ensure their representation early and can work behind the scenes to minimize problems the campaigns might encounter in the rough and tumble of a competitive primary season.

Far from being divided, Social-Con Republican Endorsement Week, which has eerie qualities of having been coordinated on some level, demonstrates the power of unifying behind shared beliefs and principles, of working together to ensure whomever is nominated is acceptable to the base, and that each campaign repeats the mantra of one, two or three more Supreme Court Justices, a.k.a., Dominion-ism wrought by right-wing judicial activism. Since they aren't a majority in the country, they need the majority on the Court, and moderates in the GOP are willing to give it to them, selling the soul of the Constitution for power.

This may be a "change election" and the Social-Cons may be playing a new game, not outwardly together as early as they like, but when push comes to shove, their tactics are the same and the one advantage they have had for 30+ years is their ability to unite.