It might be easier to infiltrate the FMI and then speak out in public on their
behalf. You may even be able to find some closeted supporters to back you up.
Jerry
________________________________
From: Pierre Abbat <p...@phma.optus.nu>
To: U.S. Metric Association <usma@colostate.edu>
Sent: Sunday, March 15, 2009 9:38:02 AM
Subject: [USMA:43873] Re: Metric personal data was Re: 24 hour time
On Saturday 14 March 2009 21:52:09 Victor Jockin wrote:
> My opinion: it's better to make a measured pitch for limited change through
> carefully chosen channels than to simply ask the President where he stands.
> I'd wince if he were asked about metrication in a press conference,
> because he probably will not have thought about the issue until that
> moment, and therefore is not likely to have a reasoned and informed
> response (he would probably just be safe and advocate the status quo).
>
> These kinds of strategic issues, by the way, is why we need a staff of
> political strategists and lobbyists tackling those problems for us. If we
> have no money for that, and therefore no chance of success, then let's
> focus on raising that money.
>
> Think about it: We just had a national campaign lasting more than a year,
> with both parties fielding candidates, and probably thousands of hours of
> discussion and debate, and metrication never came up. Politically, we
> don't exist. So we can either (a) pretend, or (b) try to raise money. I
> vote for (b).
>
> Does anyone have a list of the grant proposals submitted by USMA in the
> last year?
How much money would we have to raise to match the influence of the FMI and
anyone else? Where would it come from? Where would it go to?
Pierre
