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
story.

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
http://cpacker.org/timesfan/bootle.html
Also available (free registration required) at
http://www.nytimes.com/2005/01/27/na.../27bootle.html

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 misc.legal: 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 alt.fan.rush-limbaugh: Aren't liberals are smarter than
conservatives when it comes to using strategems like this?

--
[email protected] (Charles Packer)
http://cpacker.org/whatnews