To: Dale Baker who wrote (557 ) 6/9/2005 8:39:22 AM From: Lane3 Read Replies (1) | Respond to of 541604 Let's not fall into the trap of dismissing someone on the other side of the argument because you spun their POV out to an extreme. I don't think I've done that. At least I haven't done it carelessly or dismissively. You keep emphasizing equal protection as a counter to my proposed piecemeal gains. What else should I conclude? I see it as formulating plans that can pass on a larger scale and have a national impact. So, then, what plans might they be? You just posted about gay rights. What plan could there possibly be for getting gay rights implemented nationally any time soon in this political climate? The way civil rights advocates have worked in the past was via the courts getting laws struck down as unconstitutional. That worked. Also caused the backlash that was largely responsible for the polarization and hostility we are now experiencing. Phyrric victory, perhaps? Certainly not somethng that will be effective in the near future. So, what else is there that can be implemented nationally? It seems to me that "pragmatic" requires at a minimum a plausible plan.(my ideal is to buy my own little island somewhere and make my own rules, like many folks dream of). I used to do that too. Finally mellowed out, got over it, and adapted to the realities of diversity. [In that case I would want to see a pragmatic evaluation of what each part of the agency cost My example wasn't clear enough, I guess. The scenario I described was temporary politics. Full funding was expected in a matter of weeks, no worse than a few months. I was surprised at how many people thought that fairness to employees meant that, if some had to suffer, all should be made to suffer.]