It couldn't happen to a nicer crowd of Bush enablers. Although silly Forbes still thinks the DLC are Democrats:

In a previously unreported action, the Internal Revenue Service has revoked the DLC's tax exemption on the grounds that it primarily benefited a private group--Democrats, and particularly "New Democrats" running for or holding office--rather than the community at large. The DLC has sued in federal court to overturn the decision;

So that's why these guys were meeting with Bloomberg. And to think we thought Al From was just whoring marketing his, erm, services. Not that there's anything wrong with that.

The DLC isn't a 501(c)(3) charity like the United Way. It won exemption in 1986 under section 501(c)(4) of the code, covering civic and social welfare groups. Contributions to civic groups aren't deductible. But 501(c)(4)s are allowed to lobby more than charities and to even get involved in partisan politics. The National Rifle Association, MoveOn.org, Planned Parenthood and the National Right to Life Committee are all 501(c)(4)s.

What's the practical value of a (c)(4) designation if it doesn't generate writeoffs for its donors? A (c)(4) isn't taxed as a for-profit business would be and doesn't have to disclose its donors, as a political action committee does.

Hmmm... I wonder why they don't want to disclose their donors?

Interestingly, the "D"LC is claiming its exemption on the grounds that "Democratic" is really a misnomer:

The DLC responds that its exclusive purpose is to develop and promote its "Third Way" agenda and that some causes it has lobbied for--e.g., welfare reform, fast-track approval of free-trade agreements--got more Republican than Democratic votes in Congress.

Some people call for the DLC to be executed. But heck, that's not how we do things in the USA. After all, it was the IRS that finally put Al Capone away....

NOTE A owe this tip to an alert reader, though I did have to subscribe to Forbes--Female, 18, 90210--to get to the article.