You are WRONG (pointing out an error, not blaming you).
Moveon.org Is PAC (political action commmittee). They are NOT a non-profit group.
They can only accept donations from American citizens (and got caught in 2004 illegaly accepting foreign contributions that they had to give back).
They also have a federally mandated limit as to how much any contributor can donate.
So this is pure politics.
moveOn.org Political Action is a federal PAC. Note the different name. These two groups bleed over on each other. Just look at the moveone.org site and you will see that the site promotes both entities.
Many of these so-called "non-profits" feed off of each other in ways that's technically akin to money laundering. All you have to do is go to guidestar.org and look at some of the 990's these outfits file with the IRS. People give tax deductible charitable donations to a 501(c)(3) which in turn sends money to a 501(c)(4).
For example, the Tides Foundation, a tax deductible 501(c)(3)in year 2005 gave the moveon.org 501(c)(4) $65,102 for something called "To Support the MoveON-2005 Hurricane Katrina Fund". The Electronic Frontier Foundation, another 501(c)(c) gave the moveone.org non-profit $10,000 for the "Good Mail Project".
When I first started posting here on Free Rrepublic years ago about these so-called "charities" (that's the way the IRS looks at them) there were about 500,000 of them. Today, there are more than 1,500,000 of them and growing fast. There are nonprofits that are in business only to serve nonprofits!
The Anti-Defamation League is a non-profit, but it pays it's handler, Abe Foxman $400,000+ a year. How about Judicial Watch? they have raised $75+ million dollars over the years and paid their handlers handsomely. But a charity?
Or, I'm sure you have heard of Consumers Union who publishes Consumer Reports. They are a tax deductible 501(c)(3) CHARITY. They had $206 million in revenue in 2005 and had $258 million in total assets for that year. James Guest is shown on the IRS form 990 as President and CEO and that he spends 35 hours a week in that job. In 2005 he was paid $408,212 in direct compensation and $97,179 in benefits.
The original intent in this country to allow "charities" to be formed is so they could help people. Feed someone, clothe someone, give someone a hand up. And in return for that we would give these poor entities helping poor people a pass on paying taxes. We, the taxpayers, would help pay to keep them in "business". Well, the way things have turned out has gotten so far out-of-hand it's amazing! As I have posted over and over here on FR "many of these groups are in business to do nothing but push their own political agendas and/or enrich their handlers".
We need to reform the nonprofit laws in this country and we need to do it now!
Sorry for the rant but this subject has been my pet peeve for years. And I get really really mad when one of these groups that pay no taxes try to destroy a REAL tax paying business like the one Rush Limbaugh has while at the same time PRODUCING NOTHING of value.
You are right, in this case it is purely political and I'm outraged that these FAKE businesses can even exist in this country! If they want to COMPETE with Rush Limbaugh let them start a COMPETING business!