Well... I'm still waiting for the answer to my fundamental question. What's the REAL lobbying status of USMA? If it is true it's not permissible for it to undertake that job, can they still consider like Pat suggested founding an umbrella that could? Marcus On Fri, 1 Jun 2001 12:49:14 Andy Johnson wrote: >The obvious group to lead us to metrication is THIS >group. The obvious first step in overcoming the >lassitude and lethargy and defeatist attitude is to >agree that this group actually does stand for >something, i.e., Congressional action. > >If the group is in agreement, then I can ignore nuts >like Elwell just as I can ignore nuts who are involved >in all good causes. > >But if this group is more concerned about friendships >and nice chats and tea parties than in winning >metrication, then I want no part. > >I want to stay fired up. It is hard to stay fired up >for any cause if you hang out with folks who are >against the essence of the cause or who laugh at you >or who tell you to calm down. I want to find some >folks who will encourage each other with words like, >"Word harder," and "Be more forceful," and "Don't be >patient." > >A few more emails from Elwell and I would be come as >reconciled to inaction just as though I had listened >to some boring sermon from a preacher who tells us to >feel good, don't worry, be happy. > >This feel good, don't worry, be happy stuff will never >win metrication. > >I say: >don't feel good, do worry, do consider that Elwell >folks could give us another 100 years of confusion. > >I am not out to start a new group. But I would like to >help jumpstart this sleepy-headed group. > >Elwell might be a nice guy for a next-door neighbor. >But that does not remediate the fact that he destroys >the efficacy of the usma group...if anyone is >listening to him. >--- Ma Be <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >> I've finally come to the 'beginning of the rest' >> (gee, I was just swamped with so much to read and >> write lately... :-S ). So, here I go. >> >> On Thu, 24 May 2001 14:55:42 >> Andy Johnson wrote: >> >...But here is Jim Elwell again distributing >> information >> >which is not correct, information where there is >> not >> >even a colorable argument that it might be true. >> > >> Here I'd have to side with Andy. I, too, find it >> extremely difficult to believe that there could be >> any 'loophole' in the Constitution charter that >> could allow anyone to dispute the simplicity of its >> claim that Congress does have the power to *fix* >> measurements (in brief). >> >> >And for me to complain causes Joe Reid and Harry >> Wyeth >> >to go nuts, so I am leaving as some as the >> unsubcribe >> >takes effect. I want to be far removed from such >> >stuff. >> >... >> Again, I can also understand Andy's frustration >> here. What if we were laboring towards the >> legislative goal only to find that some purported >> friends of the cause could be fighting 'on the other >> side' to thwart our hard efforts. Perhaps the only >> solution here may lie on the legislative approach we >> would have to espouse that hopefully could be more >> readily acceptable by those. Therefore, perhaps not >> everything is lost, Andy! :-) >> >> >Congress does have the power to mandate that metric >> is >> >the one and only system of measurement. >> > >> And I don't honestly think anyone can really dispute >> that. Why? Because that's *exactly* what the >> Constitution says, period! >> >> >I am leaving, not to come back, ever, until this >> group >> >is very sure that of course our goal is for >> Congress >> >to mandate metrication. >> > >> Well... This one I admit seems quite hard to get, >> unfortunately. I've been trying to stir this group >> into action in the sense of creating a *real* >> pro-active organized group in the US to undertake >> this task for years now, but without much success, >> I'm afraid... :-S >> >> >...There will not be metrication until such time >> groups >> >like this decide to get rid of people like Elwell. >> > >> Actually, Andy, the thing seems more serious than >> that. Instead of saying this, I'd rather focus on >> something a lot more grave. The real source of the >> problem is actually not that, but simply a lack of >> real action and coordination towards a feasible >> workable plan to get metrication back into your >> country's agenda. Leadership, that's what's really >> missing, Andy! >> >> >...And, again, if there are groups out there with a >> >definite commitment to lobbying Congress for a >> >Congressional decision to mandate metric, then >> count >> >me in. >> > >> Then, how about... starting one, Andy? :-) Or >> convincing a real powerhouse to bank this cause? >> >> >...If you want metric, if you are for metric, >> >then Elwell is your enemy. >> > >> Perhaps if we all came with a legislative plan of >> action that could prove to be less threatening and >> that would address Jim's concerns we might who knows >> be able to bring him on board on this. Why not? >> >> >Metricating his business does not offset the damage >> he >> >does if he is busy convincing people that Congress >> >does not have the Constitutional power to mandate >> >metric... >> >> I certainly hope and expect that this is not what >> Jim is or would be doing. There are ways of >> drafting legislation that would safeguard and >> address some of the concerns behind Jim's position, >> I don't know. Jim has already come up with an >> encouraging list of things, legislativewise that >> he's indicated he could live with. Perhaps we could >> expand from there. >> >> Anyways, this is just a thought... >> >> Marcus >> >> >> Get 250 color business cards for FREE! >> http://businesscards.lycos.com/vp/fastpath/ > > >__________________________________________________ >Do You Yahoo!? >Get personalized email addresses from Yahoo! Mail - only $35 >a year! http://personal.mail.yahoo.com/ > Get 250 color business cards for FREE! http://businesscards.lycos.com/vp/fastpath/
