Citizens United: Partisan Injustice
Linkedin

Citizens United: Partisan Injustice

Washington : DC : USA | Jun 09, 2012 at 12:24 PM PDT
XX XX
Views: Pending
 
CNN: Inside the Supreme Court

Mitt Romney is the “stick man," the proxy and product of the 2010 Citizens United Supreme Court’s ruling that no ban should be put on corporation’s political contributions, for they are people too.

Hum, what if one works in or is a part of a corporation, and doesn’t agree with the corporation’s political ideology or party affiliation, is that corporation really a person and doesn’t it then become handicapped or afflicted?

For instance, if a person has no control of his mind and is in fact deemed afflicted, then he or she often can’t make decisions on their own, and as a result has others (a proxy) make the decisions for them … decisions that may or may not be the afflicted person’s or employees ultimate choice or decision. Then if that afflicted person or employee is “persuaded” or “coerced” to vote or spend their money, either company worth, shares, or savings (really the employees money), by an entity such as a corporation, and doesn’t realize what the proxy is doing behind the scenes, then (the proxy) can vote or spend money accrued by the person the employee / afflicted person in the corporation’s own partisan favor. Is that practice morally just? Furthermore, at that point the proxy has assumed the mind of the employee / afflicted person, which is not just by any stretch of one’s imagination.

This then is an example of the Supreme Court’s 2010 ruling regarding a corporation’s First Amendment right.

Adam Liptak of the New York Times states in a 2010 article titled Justices, 5-4, Reject Corporate Spending.

“WASHINGTON — Overruling two important precedents about the First Amendment rights of corporations, a bitterly divided Supreme Court on Thursday ruled that the government may not ban political spending by corporations in candidate elections.”

The First Amendment of the Constitution of the United States of America:

“Congress shall make no law respecting the establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or press, or the rights of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.”

I don’t see anywhere in the amendment the word corporation – hum? But, I see the word people, meaning the people of the United States of America, and they aren’t corporations they’re citizens. And free to speak on their own behalf, to cast a vote for who they wish, and to voice an opinion when and where they wish. Therefore, if one’s part of a corporation, they should not be treated as an afflicted person having no control, by any individual in corporate leadership assuming their mind by voting and spending on their behalf. Especially when they don’t know or realize where the money is going, what it’s for, and might well reject it entirely.

So, the result and product of someone speaking and spending on behalf of another is Mitt Romney – the “stick man” – fitting.

If you like to write about U.S. politics and Campaign 2012, enter "The American Pundit" competition. Allvoices is awarding four $250 prizes each month between now and November. These monthly winners earn eligibility for the $5,000 grand prize, to be awarded after the November election.

Back
1 of 2
Next
The US Supreme Court
TimothyDaily is based in Raleigh, North Carolina, United States of America, and is a Stringer for Allvoices.
Report Credibility
 
  • Clear
  • Share:
  • Share
  • Clear
  • Clear
  • Clear
  • Clear
 
 
Advertisement
 
Posted By itobin53 itobin53 | 11 months ago
as one dissenting decision said, corporations have none of the traits of humans. Sadly, i think the supreme court is very political and does not render fair decisions. There have been recent polls that show most Americans agree that the Sup. ct is influenced by partisan politics.
Advertisement
 

News Stories

 
  • As Obama-Care Decision Looms, NYTimes Fronts Odd Poll Saying Conservative ...

    Newsbusters
    Is the New York Times trying to soften up the Supreme Court before its Obama-care ruling, which may come later in June and could see the law declared unconstitutional? An unusual poll conducted by the Times and poll partner CBS News and plastered on...
  • Gaffes don't matter

    Washington Post
    The top Google result for Mitt Romney gaffes is About.com's Top 10 Dumbest Mitt Romney Gaffes. The second is Mediaite's The 12 Worst Mitt Romney Gaffes Caught On Tape. TheWeek.com lists Mitt Romney's 9 worst clueless-rich-man gaffes. ABC News offers...
  • Tom Schorr: War just isn't the answer

    Summit Daily News
    As a fiscal conservative, it troubles me that the Republican Party continually ignores the connection between our gigantic military and inability to tame the federal deficit. If you include the CIA, war spending, and border patrol, the United States...

Images

 >
 

More From Allvoices

Related People

Report Your News Got a similar story?
Add it to the network!

Or add related content to this report

 
Tap_logo_330_110_event
 


Use of this site is governed by our Terms of Use Agreement and Privacy Policy.

© Allvoices, Inc 2008-2013. All rights reserved.