Not to trivialize the contributions of Keith Olbermann and the liberal blogosphere to Wal-Mart’s accidental display of mere humanity, but I did want to point out one element of the Wal-Mart vs. Jim and Debbie Shank travesty that hasn’t been touched upon as much. That element is the fact that, in addition to the bad PR the pressure from Olbermann and the liberal blogs provided, Wal-Mart’s decision to acquiesce to their vestigial sense of decency came after the Supreme Court declined to hear the Shanks’ case, leaving intact the retail giant’s successful lawsuit against the couple. While I would be remiss to suggest that the court case was the primary motive for Wal-Mart’s decision, especially considering that the evidence points elsewhere, I can’t ignore the fact that the case sets up the precedent that it’s okay in the eyes of the law for large companies with legions of well-heeled lawyers to so totally and egregiously ratfuck their employees like that. And it’s hard to believe that such Catbertian considerations didn’t occur to Wal-Mart executives at some point during this incident.
It’s the sort of thing that gives “ambulance-chasing” a whole new meaning.
Moreover, Glenn Beck’s reaction to the case is both reprehensible and revealing. Reprehensible in the sense that he’s actually defending Wal-Mart’s position on this on principle, and that he resorts to blatant lies, misinformation and outright character assassination to do so. Revealing in the sense that it shines a light on just how deeply conservatives hold the “mythical little guy” in contempt.
