The current problem w/political donations is that those who have the connections to launder funds or transfer them directly via Swiss bank accounts have an unfair advantage over other donors.
And that needs to end.
As to the 1st Amendment, it's never been an absolute right. The question is whether limits on buying politicians serve a "compelling" national interest. The question answers itself in my view - of course there should be limits on the ability of money to corrupt the political process.
"A nation can survive its fools, and even the ambitious. But it cannot survive treason from within. An enemy at the gates is less formidable, for he is known and carries his banner openly. But the traitor moves amongst those within the gate freely, his sly whispers rustling through all the alleys, heard in the very halls of government itself. For the traitor appears not a traitor; he speaks in accents familiar to his victims, and he wears their face and their arguments, he appeals to the baseness that lies deep in the hearts of all men. He rots the soul of a nation, he works secretly and unknown in the night to undermine the pillars of the city, he infects the body politic so that it can no longer resist. A murder is less to fear"
Cicero Marcus Tullius
Look. You made an extremely unfortunate statement; that corporations deserve the right to political speech more than a 5th grade dropout. We've all gone too far when making a point, it's understandable. However, instead of acknowledging your mistake you resort to personal insults and outright fabrications. So to answer your question, yes: I think I'm following what you're trying to do and no, it's not working.