The Slick “No Labels” Plan to Duck Debate, Cut Social Security and Coddle The 1%
http://www.nationofchange.org/slick-no-labels-plan-duck-debate-cut-social-security-and-coddle-1-1342537940
Labeling would tell them that the group was designed and created by and for political backs from both parties, who scrupulously hide their funding sources but are associated with people like anti-Social Security billionaire Pete Peterson.
The Slick No Labels Plan to Duck Debate, Cut Social Security and Coddle The 1%
Why won't you publish your list of donors?
What's wrong with having legislators debate the issues publicly? Isn't that how representative democracy works?
How can you call yourself 'centrist' when so many of your ideas are unpopular, and in fact are too conservative for most Tea Party members?
He might have another question, too:
What's wrong with labels? Don't they let us know what we're buying?
No Labels is just one small cadre in a great army of mercenaries pushing the austerity cause. Their brigades have colorful (that is to say, silly) names like Americans Elect, I.O.U.S.A, the Committee for a Responsible Federal Budget, and my personal favorite, Budgetball - which I like to think of as 'The Fountainhead' Meets 'Deathrace 2000'.
Even if every one of these groups fails individually - which so far they all have - the hope seems to be that they'll have the cumulative effect of making it look like there's a tidal wave of support for Simpson Bowles austerity.
These programs uniformly attempt to stigmatize the majority's opinions and interests as extreme. These front groups always try to stigmatize the popular goals of protecting Social Security and Medicare benefits and fighting Simpson Bowles austerity as those of a tiny minority which ruthlessly punishes those who step out of line.
There's a word for a political system where politicians face dire consequences for defying the will and interests of the people. That word is democracy.