You've said nothing I would argue about Bobby.  My message was only meant to
encourage people to look beneath the surface a politician's agenda as much as
they are able, and to consider more universal consequences than just how a
piece of disability rights legislation will affect the person with a
disability.

My impression is that activists will go farther in this fight if they appear
not to be fighting, and lend opponents the impression that their interests
are on behalf of the whole, rather than a select few.

In a message dated 4/10/2002 1:52:21 AM Eastern Standard Time,
[log in to unmask] writes:


> Betty,
>
>     I hate to sound cynical. You position that we must consider broader
> agendas is valid and correct. However, most candidates who reach the
> national
> level are bought and paid for by special interests groups who do not have
> the
> disability rights, welfare of immigrants, etc. in the fore front. Thus
> hidden
> agendas such as Singer at Princeton will always be active. You live in and
> around "foggy bottom" and you know better than anyone what goes on. I am
> afraid the Clinton era will go down as the moral low point of our entire
> history, but consider all the  millionaires produced by
> Wall Street during that same era! Morals what are those?
>
> Bobby
>