To: Walmart
Re: The ads that equate limiting store size to Nazi book burnings
Making big stores and/or having big stores to shop in are not "constitutional freedoms" that are being "infringed". If I ever manage to locate the human being responsible for this, I will sodomize him or her or them with a baseball bat.
A wooden one.
Hopefully there will be splinters.
Of course, this comes after Walmart donated nearly $300,000 (US!) to the cause of rejecting the proposition that would, Heaven forfend, limit the size of "big box" stores. Alexis Johnson, a local attorney, has it right:
"I think America's due now to revisit the necessity and vitality of allowing campaign contributions from entities that don't vote."
Walmart, meanwhile, says it "is adamantly opposed to any ordinance that would restrict consumer choice." And furthermore, it wasn't them who made the billboards, just somebody on their side. You know, the side that's funded with their money? So they're totally blameless. Of course.
And (even) more distressingly, does anyone else on this goddamned continent see a problem with the elevation of something as banal as "consumer choice" into some sort of moral good? Anyone? Anyone? Bueller?
Making big stores and/or having big stores to shop in are not "constitutional freedoms" that are being "infringed". If I ever manage to locate the human being responsible for this, I will sodomize him or her or them with a baseball bat.
A wooden one.
Hopefully there will be splinters.
Of course, this comes after Walmart donated nearly $300,000 (US!) to the cause of rejecting the proposition that would, Heaven forfend, limit the size of "big box" stores. Alexis Johnson, a local attorney, has it right:
"I think America's due now to revisit the necessity and vitality of allowing campaign contributions from entities that don't vote."
Walmart, meanwhile, says it "is adamantly opposed to any ordinance that would restrict consumer choice." And furthermore, it wasn't them who made the billboards, just somebody on their side. You know, the side that's funded with their money? So they're totally blameless. Of course.
And (even) more distressingly, does anyone else on this goddamned continent see a problem with the elevation of something as banal as "consumer choice" into some sort of moral good? Anyone? Anyone? Bueller?
