The "Meaning" of Lora Rae Anderson's Departure from the GOP

I told you MTW was going to be a lot of fun!

So today there is a bizarre and mysterious post on MTW that explains why several earlier posts have been deleted:

As the Lora Rae Anderson situation is losing meaning as a substantive political issue in Wisconsin, Mike Tate Watch has deleted all posts regarding the subject and deciding to not report further on this matter.

That's odd because the press release is still up on the DPW website.

Our basis for the decision is that what was supposed to be a simple news subject has became a issue blown out of proportion by other bloggers who have been seeking to find gains on the issue.

In other words: Maichle can't seem to find any more ways to twist this story into a convenient mental compartment, so he's just going to drop it altogether.

We first reported on the situation after Chairman Tate was engaging in press release politics to score cheap political points on the situation when he knew his party is down in the polls. On the other hand, many others have seen this situation as their domain to spew the ideological garbage towards those involved in the center right movement.

Listen, if you're going to make a claim like this, throw in some links or at least cite some examples. This just sounds like you're making stuff up.

This is why the issue lost its meaning as a substantive issue.

Wait -- because people have said things that have hurt Maichle's feelings, the entire issue has lost meaning? Now that's an existential conundrum!

In the best interests of discussing the real issues at hand, we decided to take down all three related posts in regards to Ms. Anderson and the Wisconsin Federation of College Republicans.

Let's look at what he's really saying here: "In the best interests of discussing the real issues at hand" -- his exact words -- we're not only going to stop discussing the story altogether, but we're going to whitewash any record of having discussed it previously and forget it ever happened ... and this is somehow the best way for the discussion to move forward?

Since Maichle's clearly run out of fuel in his tank, we'll take it upon ourselves to pluck some more meaning from this cautionary tale to help move this story right along.

Here we go:

One of things that should have been immediately apparent from Anderson's initial press release were her reasons for leaving the party. They were all social issues. She cited gay marriage, a racially insensitive undercurrent, the anti-sex ed threats of a Wisconsin DA and the demagoguery of various conservative celebrities. There's nothing to suggest Anderson doesn't still retrain fiscally conservative opinions. In fact, here's a piece she wrote for the UW-EC student newspaper arguing against the stimulus.

I'd say the combination of the above views puts Anderson squarely into the Libertarian camp. Perhaps it might help the state GOP -- and the state CRs, in particular -- to do some soul searching on the role of Libertarians in the party? Are they welcome? Do they make a contribution? Are young conservatives giving up on the social issues religious conservatives championed for the last 30 years? Does the GOP need social conservatives anymore?

So far as I can tell, no one has bothered addressing these questions.

Next comes the problem of Anderson's stature. Like it or not, when a leader of an organization like the CRs departs with acrimony, it's kinda big deal. For one thing, the symbolism doesn't look good. For another, it basically means that two potential leaders have left the organization: one being the person who held the title of "chairman" and the other being the person who could have held the title in her place.

Moving on: What does it say about an organization that it would elect someone so disillusioned by the post? I assume Anderson didn't win her position in a steel cage match or just appointed herself chairman ... she was elected, and if she was the best choice according to the candidates at the time, well, that really doesn't speak well to the rest of the leadership.

The last thing I'll mention is this bit from the second of her press releases:

The Wisconsin Federation of College Republicans has a new group of leadership who was elected Saturday, April 24th. “These people are amazing,” said Anderson, “I understand that they have had to do a significant amount of ‘dealing with’ my previous press release."

I don't know if the CRs want such a ringing endorsement of their new leadership cadre from someone they are about to shun. If I were the old gaurd, I would be worried they new crew still had ties to the old chair. I don't know what Republicans do in that type of situation these days ... loyalty oaths? polygraphs? waterboarding?

Anyway, the "meaning" of the Anderson departure is hardly a settled issue. There are many more things to discuss on the topic. I wish Anderson would say more about the issue, but I do hope she decides to stop participating in a blogger flame war via press release. That's just not going to get her anywhere.