We lawyers are often called upon to formulate rather elaborate ways of avoiding saying something that we would rather not say. It’s a bit of an art, really. The trick is to avoid conceding a point while sticking to the literal truth. Sadly, when you need to do such a thing, you’re probably fated to lose anyway.
Despite years of practice in the trade, and having come up with many ways to avoid stating the obvious, I must take by hat off to the headline writer at the Day. By way of background, I have noticed that this person, whoever he or she may be, has a slight rightward tilt (the headline are not, or so I understand, penned by the reporters that write the articles). Anyway, here’s the headline that impressed me no end:
COURT DECLARES FRANKEN LEADING VOTE-GETTER
Okay, I’ll admit that the term “vote-getter” is a little clunky. The only “word” that comes close in artlessness is the baseball term “come-backer”. But really, you have to hand it to the unknown author. Anyone else might simply say: “Court Declares Franken Winner”, which is, after all, precisely what the court did. But if you want to avoid conceding that point, it would be hard to beat the Day’s formulation.
Post a Comment