"Cut and Run Russ?" Who says?

This story from the Green Bay Press Gazette raises some questions:

Feingold keeps up heat on Iraq policy
Not all colleagues joining his call to pull out troops by ’07

By Brian Tumulty
Press-Gazette Washington bureau

WASHINGTON — Although critics are labeling him as “cut-and-run Russ,” Sen. Russ Feingold says he’s getting a favorable response to his call a week ago for a complete pullout of U.S. troops from Iraq by the end of 2006.

“I’m extremely enthusiastic about the very strong positive response from people who are very grateful that somebody said something other than the slogans we are getting from the president,” the Wisconsin Democrat said.

As for how his plan has been cast by critics, Feingold said, “It’s different from just cut and run. It’s an attempt to create a plan and a time frame to finish the job and bring the troops home. It’s the people who are defensive about this, who realize the president is not doing a very good job, and are trying to spin what I am saying in a way that is simply inaccurate.”

No other member of Congress has joined Feingold in setting the end of next year for a full troop pullout, although a small number — including Rep. Gwen Moore, D-Milwaukee — are advocating a start of the pullout by October 2006. Three other Wisconsin lawmakers interviewed this week indicated they aren’t ready to join their colleagues.

“When you set calendar dates, you send a signal to the enemy that they have to wait only so many months,” U.S. Rep. Mark Green, R-Hobart, said Thursday. Feingold holds a minority view, said Green, pointing out that 118 House members have joined the Victory in Iraq Caucus he co-founded.

But Green distanced himself from other critics who have labeled Feingold as “cut and run Russ,” saying the senator is a principled person who happens to be wrong on Iraq policy.

The article refers to 'critics' who have labeled Feingold “cut-and-run Russ,” but it never says who they are or that they spoke on background or asked for anonymity.

In fact Green 'distances' himself from these 'critics' yet we have no idea who they are. If the article is going to lead with a reference to 'critics' with a quote shouldn't we at least know who they are or that they didn't want anyone to know who they are? Or that they aren't Mark Green's staffers, off the record?