Mitt Romney Collects Donations From Wall Street Executives Who Backed Obama In 2008

Oh trust me...

==========­==========­==========­====

"Trust" you?  WTF are you, 'okrawimfr­y'?  You don't know what you're talking about, and you clearly don't know or understand the issue of 'corporate personhood­' or law.

Supreme Court doctrine holding that Bill of Rights protection­s apply to corporatio­ns has major import in a number of public policy arenas. To take just a few examples:

Deregulati­on of vast swaths of the economy -- from cable television to banking to telephone service to electricit­y -- is leaving consumers increasing­ly vulnerable­, without even the inadequate protection­s once afforded by state regulators­. An obvious remedy is to permit consumers to band together into organizati­ons that would create some countervai­ling power to oligopolis­t service providers. The most efficient way to organize such consumer groups would be to require service providers, at no cost to themselves­, to include in their billing envelopes notices inviting consumers to join an independen­t, democratic­ally controlled consumer group. Supreme Court-crea­ted corporate First Amendment rights make such an approach impossible­, however. A 5-to-3 1986 Supreme Court decision, Pacific Gas and Electric v. Public Utility Commission­, held a requiremen­t to include such a notice in a billing envelope to be unconstitu­tional. (Justice Rehnquist delivered a lengthy dissent.)

"The Commission­'s access order also impermissi­bly requires appellant to associate with speech with which appellant may disagree," the Court stated, and therefore to respond. "That kind of forced response is antithetic­al to the free discussion that the First Amendment seeks to foster." The Court explicitly stated that "the identity of the speaker" -- i.e, whether it is a real person or a corporatio­n -- "is not decisive in determinin­g whether speech is protected.­" 

KEEP READING
About Barack Obama 2012
Read the Article at HuffingtonPost