Amanda writes about the “ZOMG John Edwards is a trial lawyar!!!11!“ smearing, and unfortunately, as is so often the case, people are reduced to putting “tort reform” into quotes to make clear that the National Association of Manufacturers/Chamber of Commerce/DRI crowd isn’t about actually reforming the tort system. Yet it’s hard to find a good term, since ‘corporate welfare’ is both a mouthful and pretty broad, including as it does those who think government assistance is bad when given to an African-American single mother, but good when it’s given to a legal entity that trades on NASDAQ.
I would suggest the term McTools for these folks. “Tools”, obviously; the ones who aren’t actually corporate masters themselves are happy in their role as paid zealous advocate, in or out of the courtroom. The “Mc” because if they hadn’t invented a distorted version of the McDonald’s coffee-injury case, they’d have to invent it, being as they are friend to anything with “Inc.” after its name that is dedicated to making money, large multinational corporations being a favorite.
Hey, they didn’t get the public’s ire up about the ATLA to AAJ name change. Why not give them something else to cause another epic fit of monocle-clutching?
mythago
4 Responses to “A humble suggestion regarding nomenclature”
Sorry, the comment form is closed at this time.
Great post! I like “McTools” but I’m afraid it would take too much explanation, unlike a terrific term like “McMansions” which makes everyone laugh immediately!
I really wish we had a catchy term for “corporate welfare”…
Oh my God yes.
Please Mr. Corporate Pundit Man, tell me what I can do to prevent any interruption in the flow of wealth upwards.
Heh, I remember when a fellow attorney told me that the amount the money the “3d degree burns in her crotch from coffee” plaintiff was only ONE DAY of revenues from the state in which the injury occurred for McDonalds. It really put it in a whole different light than the way it was painted in the MSM.
That was how the jury got the punitives – I believe it was one day’s worth of McDonald’s coffee sales.
The whole approach taken by the McDonald’s team is a case study on How Not To Defend a Lawsuit.