Given how Obama and the Progressives are throttling the Golden Egg machines….

From Cornell University Law School:

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

There certainly is a lot of phlegm sputtering going on amongst those that think that "NO" doesn’t mean just that – and that in their sight, it does allow them to "redistribute the wealth" of free speech.

Make no mistake – there is a price for "no speech" as there is for speech.  One only has to remember how easily the Obama crew have used the "Chicago way" on those companies that have tried to speak out against their agenda (remember Humana that tried to talk to their policy holders?).

If there was a time that corporations needed the ability to speak out on behalf of their shareholders (before their private property rights (e.g., wealth) is stripped from them, now is that time.

If corporations used to owe it to their shareholders to lie low, staying out of politics, in other words, they now owe it to their shareholders to speak up, defending themselves.  Board members and executives will still feel squeamish about political activity, but at annual meetings from now on shareholders will rise to challenge them.

I mean, you can just see it, can’t you? “The proposed cap-and-trade legislation is going to raise our cost of doing business,” some cranky, dyspeptic shareholder will now almost certainly argue before the executives of, let us say, the Massey Energy Company. “Mr. CEO, members of the board, the Supreme Court has already told you that you have a constitutional right to fight back. What I’m telling you now is that you have a fiduciary duty to do so.”

And you know what? That cranky, dyspeptic shareholder will prove very, very difficult to refute.

One loses their Rights more easily when they are not exercised….

(H/T: NRO)