Public officials sometimes have a non-obvious agenda behind
their actions. Sometimes the true agenda is even the opposite of
what an action seems to mean. That's what I think...but it's
hard to prove unless the instigators eventually spill the whole

The recent NY Times obituary of a key judge in the civil rights
era mentions just the kind of action I have in mind. I
saved the article at
Also available (free registration required) at

In this case the instigator eventually admitted -- toward the end of
his life -- that he had had a "larger calculated strategy" in staying
his own 1961 ruling integrating the University of Georgia.

For Is it likely to have made any difference
if the U. of Georgia _had_ appealed before the plaintiffs apparently
beat them to the punch and took their case to the Court of Appeals?

For Aren't liberals are smarter than
conservatives when it comes to using strategems like this?

[email protected] (Charles Packer)