This is on my mind

I am sick of the Left whining about Corporations in general and Wal-Mart in specific.
In regards to the Corporation whining, I am thinking specifically of nader voters who, much like Southern politicians in the 40s, 50s, and 60s, would drop "nigger" or "commie" at ever occasion, drop "corporate" everytime they feel the need to slander someone or something. This is ineffective for several reasons.

1) They actually don't hate corporations. Why? Because Corporations are more than just the big ones that are blamed for global oppression. Corporations have an essential function in our economic system, specifically, shielding investors, big or small, from financial liability in the operation of a business enterprise. Whether those investors are wealthy persons who own lots of stock in a multi national, or it is a mom-and-pop grocery store, the corporate form of organizing their enterprise is beneficial. I guess my complaint here is that moron lefties, or righties for that matter, don't fundamentally understand what a corporation is, how it functions, and what good it has done for many many people, and because of that ignorance, they use a term to be derogatory that is inherently overbroad. Assholes.

2) Who are corporations? Well, this is a complicated question as some legal scholars see a corporation as a "nexus of contractual obligations" or some such crap. I mean more broadly than beyond the legal personhood granted corporations. Alright, lemme cut to the chase, corporations are Shareholders (real people!), Boards of directors (Real people!), Officers (Real people!), and employees (real people!). By real people I mean natural persons as opposed to legal persons. So why is that important? Because by slandering corporations or attempting to make corporations a derogatory term, in essence, one is slandering large numbers of people in a very oblique way, which ultimately hurts one's political position in two ways. First, the slander is oblique, and others might not know what you are talking about. Speaking in such a manner, where one is using one's own "code words" to talk about something makes one look out of the mainstream, because of the failure to use commonly known or talked about ideas, and further makes one look snobbish, or elitist for the same reason. Secondly, if people DO catch on to what one is saying, they might be angry or feel slighted. Imagine a low level employee at a large corporation that receives corporate stock as part of a retirement package. So here one has someone who in addition to being an employee is also a shareholder, and one is telling them that they are evil because of their role in the corporation? Way piss off voters douchebag.

3) Lambasting corporations is also ineffective because it doesn't get at the root of the problem people have with the influence of money and economic power in our government. Why do wealthy people and, as an aggregation of capital, corporations have too much influence in the current system? Because they can buy it. So is one really pissed off at corporations or at the structure that allows wealth to upset legal equality in terms of voice in the national government? Frankly, a whole host of reforms could be implemented to address the destabilizing effects of wealth in the political process, none of which would affect the corporate form. So just whining about corporations doesn't address the root of the issue, and makes those whiners look detached and foolish. The only reason I care about them looking detached and foolish is they claim to be leftists, and frankly I don't want their type of garbage ruining my image. One can be a fucking moron all they want, just don't reach out to me like I would associate with such a jackass.

Lastly, I want to say something about folks who whine about Wal-Mart. THIS ISSUE DOES NOT RESONATE WITH THE AMERICAN PEOPLE! LET IT GO!

It seems to me that mostly coastal lefty types who have never really been to a wal-mart on a regular basis are the most vocal about it. Oh we cannot unionize wal-mart, oh wal-mart screws its employees, oh wal-mart destroys small town america. First of all, Lefties, Small town america needs to be destroyed. Small town america is a den of vice and corruption, meth and teen pregnancies, ignorance and hatred. And, they all vote republican anyways. Really, small town america isn't some moral good ol' fashioned family values type place. It really sucks. I challenge anyone who thinks small town america is awesome to move out here to the great middle and live for awhile. I would love to see David Brooks take a sabbatical, take 100 bucks in his pocket, or hell give him 500, and have him move to any small town, defined as under 10,000 people, in the great state of Missouri, just to see how "great" it is. Hell, I will pick one for him. How about, Monett, Mansfield, Buffalo, West Plains, or more centrally located, Waynesville or Eldon. Don't like MO, try Coffeyville, KS or Emporia, KS, or Pierre, SD, oh oh, how about Myamuh (miami) OK, or Harrison AR. I would also recommend Weatherford, Clinton, Hydro, or Elk City OK. I know Kansas has some really shithole towns, but I can never remember their names, seriously, who would want to, it is fucking Kansas. I purposefully left off the former confederacy, mostly because that is too dang easy.

More seriously, what has done more for the destruction of small town america? Capitalistic collectivization in the form of agri-business, or the fact that a wal-mart moved into town? Considering the vast majority of people in small town america, in the past were dependent upon agriculture for income, I'm going with the agri-business.

Alright, this is too rambling, and I have wasted too much time. Just a rant I had