Skip to main content

Crossposted from Hillbilly Report.

Before ever electing a corporate vulture like Mitt Romney to the White House Americans should consider one thing. Mitt Romney not only does not care about the plight of working Americans but he thinks that corporations should be afforded the same, if not more rights than average Americans. You see, unlike the rest of us Mitt Romney and the trash he represents think that corporations are people and people are garbage to be exploited by them.

Once again, do not take our word for it. Listen to Mitt Romney in his own, elitist words:

Yes, you heard it right. Mitt Romney thinks corporations are people. He has no problem with them exploiting their workers for huge profits while stagnating wages for them. He thinks they should be able to use their huge profits to buy American elections and keep the good times rolling for themselves while our country as a whole suffers.

Elizabeth Warren, Senate candidate in Massachusetts recently took Mitt Romney to task over this view, pulling no punches:

Massachusetts Senate hopeful Elizabeth Warren took aim at Mitt Romney’s infamous “corporations are people” remark when she introduced President Obama at a fundraiser in Boston on Monday. “Mitt Romney tells us, in his own words, he believes corporations are people,” Warren said. “No, Mitt, corporations are not people. People have hearts. They have kids. They get jobs. They get sick. They love and they cry and they dance. They live and they die. Learn the difference.”
http://livewire.talkingpointsmemo.com/...

Indeed, Mitt Romney and the whole Republican Party should learn the difference. Corporations are not people and care little for people as long as the profits roll in. They care nothing for their country or their neighbors except how to exploit them for profit. Even the most uncaring person in America has someone they love. Corporations only love profit.

Fortunately Elizabeth Warren is not alone in her beliefs. A poll from earlier this year showed that Americans en masse do not agree with Mitt Romney and the Republicans he now leads:

In particular, voters widely reject the notion that corporations have the same constitutional rights as people, including 3-to-1 opposition to unlimited corporate spending in campaigns.

Public opinion research conducted for Legal Progress in 2010 and in 2011 found that voters strongly believed that corporate favoritism in the political sphere carried over to the judicial system, where most individuals did not enjoy the same protections and access to a fair hearing as corporations and those with deep pockets.

Digging deeper into attitudes toward corporate rights, the 2011 survey tested the proposition that “corporations are people.” It also tested this concept by applying it to the Citizens United decision.

The “corporations are people” argument loses by 31 points (56 percent to 25 percent) to a counter-argument rejecting corporate personhood. The public’s assessments are even worse for conservatives when invoking the consequences of Citizens United: By a 48-point margin (65 percent to 17 percent), voters believe corporations should not be able to spend unlimited amounts of money in political campaigns.

http://www.americanprogress.org/...

See this chart:

Photobucket

And while it is really encouraging that Americans feel this way what is really frustrating is that they continue elect folks that believe like Mitt Romney and the Republicans to office. Folks that do not care about their country or the great unwashed masses that live within as long as the good times roll on for them.

That is why it angers us so much when our President refuses to fight these people and indeed capitulates to them at every turn. They are wrong, and the American people are dead-set against them. What they really need is someone to fight for them and President Obama has not. If he would have, he would be winning in a landslide.

So now Democrats must decide. Will we be the party that fights for America, or the cowards that would not fight as she was destroyed?

EMAIL TO A FRIEND X
Your Email has been sent.
You must add at least one tag to this diary before publishing it.

Add keywords that describe this diary. Separate multiple keywords with commas.
Tagging tips - Search For Tags - Browse For Tags

?

More Tagging tips:

A tag is a way to search for this diary. If someone is searching for "Barack Obama," is this a diary they'd be trying to find?

Use a person's full name, without any title. Senator Obama may become President Obama, and Michelle Obama might run for office.

If your diary covers an election or elected official, use election tags, which are generally the state abbreviation followed by the office. CA-01 is the first district House seat. CA-Sen covers both senate races. NY-GOV covers the New York governor's race.

Tags do not compound: that is, "education reform" is a completely different tag from "education". A tag like "reform" alone is probably not meaningful.

Consider if one or more of these tags fits your diary: Civil Rights, Community, Congress, Culture, Economy, Education, Elections, Energy, Environment, Health Care, International, Labor, Law, Media, Meta, National Security, Science, Transportation, or White House. If your diary is specific to a state, consider adding the state (California, Texas, etc). Keep in mind, though, that there are many wonderful and important diaries that don't fit in any of these tags. Don't worry if yours doesn't.

You can add a private note to this diary when hotlisting it:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary from your hotlist?
Are you sure you want to remove your recommendation? You can only recommend a diary once, so you will not be able to re-recommend it afterwards.
Rescue this diary, and add a note:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary from Rescue?
Choose where to republish this diary. The diary will be added to the queue for that group. Publish it from the queue to make it appear.

You must be a member of a group to use this feature.

Add a quick update to your diary without changing the diary itself:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary?
(The diary will be removed from the site and returned to your drafts for further editing.)
(The diary will be removed.)
Are you sure you want to save these changes to the published diary?

Comment Preferences

  •  It is this passive acceptance of corporate (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    FiredUpInCA

    personhood that has brought us to this point in our political sphere.  

    I am 51, and when in high school I read Upton Sinclair's The Jungle.  I never thought that these kind of excesses would exist again, let alone in my lifetime.  

    However, look at what they are able to do in the countries where they offshore jobs.  Look at how they are lobbying to dismantle our already frayed social safety net at home.

    This is one of those issues that deeply disturbs me and makes me fear for America.  

    It gets on my nerves, and you know how I am about my nerves...

    by ciganka on Tue Jun 26, 2012 at 11:34:59 AM PDT

  •  The Origins of Corporate Personhood (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    ciganka

    As I vaguely understand it, Corporate Personhood originated from a long ago Supreme Court decision on a case involving some sort of corporate suit.  The thing about the case though, was that it was not about whether the corporation did or did not have the same rights as individuals.  Nor did the court's decision in that case rule on whether the corporation had such rights.

    It came about when a SCOTUS Law Clerk helping to write the decision in the case for the majority, reportedly inadvertantly referred to the corporation in a tense that inferred it was a "person".  No one caught the error at the time, and since it was part of a SCOTUS ruling, it became the law of the land.

    I am sketchy on the details, so I would appreciate any elaboration or corrections anyone can offer.

    If this story is true (as I believe it is), the issue of whether a corporation has the same rights as an individual has never really been presented and litigated before the court.  Whenever we retake the clear majority on the Court, this is the first case that needs to be brought.  Corporate Personhood is the linch pin to all the other SCOTUS decisions like Citizen's United.  If Corporations can be stripped of their Personhood status, all the other pro-Corporate decisions will fall (or at least have to be re-litigated.

    "Some men see things as they are and ask, 'Why?' I dream of things that never were and ask, 'Why not?"

    by Doctor Who on Tue Jun 26, 2012 at 12:22:34 PM PDT

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site