Althouse: "How a bipartisan group that hoped to make Washington more functional became yet another cog in the D.C. moneymaking machine

July 29, 2014

"How a bipartisan group that hoped to make Washington more functional became yet another cog in the D.C. moneymaking machine — and infuriated Democrats."

Finally, an answer to the question that's been bugging me for years: Whatever happened to "No Labels"?

Now, I wonder if anyone can tell me: What's brewing in The Coffee Party?

20 comments:

great Unknown said...: "What's brewing in the Coffee Party?" Dregs.; 7/29/14, 8:37 AM
Hagar said...: Years ago I made a small contribution to Common Cause - but it turned out to be just a scam to get moderate Republicans to contribute to the Democratic machine.; 7/29/14, 8:51 AM
Deirdre Mundy said...: No Labels had branding issues. They needed a catchier logo.; 7/29/14, 9:01 AM
Paco Wové said...: infuriated Democrats

If you're not for the Democrats, you're against the Democrats.; 7/29/14, 9:08 AM
Hammond X. Gritzkofe said...: Of the two major political parties, Democrats are *far* more associated with emotional tactics (i.e. name-calling, "labeling") than Republicans. Ergo, no surprise than a self-described "No Labels" outfit would be more frequently associated with Republican logical argument tactics.

Not unusual for any organization - however funded - to spend a large amount of intake on self-maintenance and self-promotion. Why, heck! Elected officials and bureaucrats, no less than private corporations and "non-profits" put retention of personal employment as first priority.

If, indeed "No Labels" shows Republican favoritism, it's because the organization is a way for wealthy donors - who need to buy political favors (read "corruption") from both parties to entertain Republican influence peddlers without being outed and castigated by screaming name-calling Democrat partisans.; 7/29/14, 9:20 AM
lgv said...: It is just another non-profit group or agency that works to not entirely accomplish its goal. If they successfully eliminate gridlock, then they no longer need to exist. Therefore, they must show a few victories in the battle so they can raise more money and continue the mission, which is keep themselves employed.; 7/29/14, 10:01 AM
Sam L. said...: There was no chance that the No Labels group was any different from the Dems. What's brewing in the Coffee Party is bitter bile and gall.

I didn't donate to Common Cause; they sounded too good to be true.; 7/29/14, 10:43 AM
Mike (MJB Wolf) said...: Dang it is just SO HARD to construct a decent Potemkin village nowadays. The actors keep wandering off the set and losing interest in the charade.; 7/29/14, 10:44 AM
traditionalguy said...: There will always be a place for a party that refuses to fight any enemies. They can meet at mostly empty Episcopalian Churches.; 7/29/14, 10:48 AM
Biff said...: I think the criticism is mostly coming from the (surprising) fact that No Labels has supported some nominal Republicans and that it has not acted as much as an undercover Democrat organization as the Dems originally expected. In other words, it lived up to its stated mission more than anyone ever expected.; 7/29/14, 10:48 AM
Mitch H. said...: Huh. You know, if that's true, it might be a bona fide refutation of O'Sullivan's Law. But more likely, it's not what they're saying, and it's some sort of inside baseball pissing match between Establishment factions.; 7/29/14, 11:00 AM
Quaestor said...: And I thought nothing related to coffee could be a soporific. Shows what I know... yup.; 7/29/14, 11:33 AM
NotWhoIUsedtoBe said...: "Much of the group’s budget goes toward sustaining or promoting itself. According to No Labels’ confidential document, the group employed 22 paid staffers and eight consultants as of May. Of its projected $4.5 million budget for 2014, only 4 percent — or $180,000 — of spending was slotted for “Congressional Relations.” By contrast, administrative and operational expenses got $1.035 million over the same time period. Another 5 percent was set for travel. A further 30 percent ($1.35 million) was earmarked for digital growth and press, and 14 percent for fundraising."

Uh huh.; 7/29/14, 11:36 AM
CatherineM said...: Who didn't see this coming?; 7/29/14, 11:56 AM
furious_a said...: Dang it is just SO HARD to construct a decent Potemkin village nowadays.

Astroturf doesn't grow back after it wears out.; 7/29/14, 12:53 PM
Sal said...: I never understood what Coffee Party was supposed to be. Grassroots statism?; 7/29/14, 3:36 PM
gadfly said...: No Labels blocks out the constituents what got these Ruling Class people into office in the first place. That sounds something like a Harry Reid tactic and it is pretty much the way everyday politics are played by the both political parties.

So No Labels is trying to play the rent-seeking unionist role representing any and all takers that will join the union. In other words they are just another useless cog in a broken gear assembly.; 7/29/14, 4:00 PM
Anonymous said...: Well, let's see: Chloe started a vegan kindergarten non-profit, Sara moved on to Park Slope because Matt's back at Deutsche Bank, and Connor finally came out of the closet.

Add to that Organizing For Action's been poaching our table at Ye Olde Fair Trade Coffee Roost, and the thing just fell apart.; 7/29/14, 6:44 PM
Hyphenated American said...: One word comes to mind, "solyndra". With obama's rise, the level of liberal intellectuals went down considerably.; 7/30/14, 6:11 AM
Achilles said...: Mike said...
Dang it is just SO HARD to construct a decent Potemkin village nowadays. The actors keep wandering off the set and losing interest in the charade.

The .001% is having trouble finding good minions these days.; 7/30/14, 11:07 AM