I don't have enough time to completely refute this ridiculous claim, but I did visit website of the United States Securities and Exchange Commission, FREEDGAR, and pulled data from the audited Annual Report on Form 10-K of a few frequently villified large corporations. (In each case the most recent filing, the date of which is indicated):

Halliburton (Filed with SEC 2/18/2009): Total income tax expense: $1.2 billion. Total pre-tax income: $3.2 billion. Average tax rate: 38%.
ExxonMobil (Filed with SEC 2/27/2009): Total income tax expense: $36.5 billion. Total pre-tax income: $81.8 billion. Average tax rate: 45%.
United HealthCare (Filed with SEC 2/11/2009): Total income tax expense: $1.6 billion. Total pre-tax income: $4.6 billion. Average tax rate: 36%.

Note: Amounts rounded to save typing time, percent calculations are mine.

I also found a letter from Peter R. Orszag, Director, Congressional Budget Office, to the Honorable Kent Conrad, Chairman, Committee on the Budget, United States Senate, written May 18, 2007. Excerpt: "Total federal revenues grew by about $625 billion, or 35%, between fiscal year 2003 and fiscal year 2006. The bulk of the revenue increase was associated with corporate income taxes."

Even more interesting, this excerpt from the same letter: "Had revenues grown at the same rate as the overall economy between 2003 and 2006, federal receipts would have increased by only $373 billion."

So not only did federal revenues increase from 2003 to 2006, but the increase was IN EXCESS of what could be attributed solely to economic growth, and driven primarily by corporate income taxes.