nbcrusader
Blue Crack Addict
Hysteria? It's called honor and respect. For the man, he office and the country.
Ronald Reagan Mark II (the soap box thread)
- Thread starter melon
- Start date
The friendliest place on the web for anyone that follows U2.
If you have answers, please help by responding to the unanswered posts.
If you have answers, please help by responding to the unanswered posts.
LoveTown
Refugee
I've been quiet on this subject on purpose. I never did support Reagan's politics and I was always vocal about that. But, since his passing I've been very quiet because I can respect him as a human being that once lived and I am sure he did what he thought was right deep down in his heart. So, I'm urging people, even if you disliked him as president, maybe just take a step back and see him as a person that deserves respect simply for having lived in this world.
Angela Harlem
Jesus Online
An interesting little side debate evolved in here a few pages back on that kind of thing, LoveTown. On how we do this for some and not others. Lists of particularly historically evil people came up and chances are we won't be shedding a tear of giving any kind of respect. Difference being that Reagan doesn't compare to them. The point of it was, that not everyone sees death as a reason to begin respecting anyone. If you didn't when he was alive, does death make a difference?
nbc, do you think the media circus is all about that?
nbc, do you think the media circus is all about that?
LoveTown
Refugee
well, maybe I'm being too simplistic here but unless a person has orchestrated some horrible acts I think yes, we should show them some respect in death, even if that just means being silent so those who did respect them in life can have a moment of peace to mourn.
LoveTown
Refugee
btw, I watched Reagan's funeral on tv last night and it was one of the most touching things I've seen in a long time. I never really liked Nancy but last night when she put her head down on his coffin and wept my heart broke for her. I cried with her, and I prayed that she finds some comfort.
Leeloo
War Child
LoveTown said:
That's it
If you can't respect the person and death itself at least allow those do time to grieve and honor them without your hate-filled rhetoric. I don't think anyone is saying you can never say anything about a deceased person after they die, but couldn't you at least wait until after the funeral and the final respects have been paid?
Last edited:
Scarletwine
New Yorker
But the endless media fest was unreal. Why in the world should CSPAN just have a camera 24/7 on the coffin?
But I do think the funeral was incredibly touching and I feel for his family.
But I do think the funeral was incredibly touching and I feel for his family.
The problem is, that people who boarder on extremism cannot stand for someone with opposite beliefs from them getting shred of credit, period.
Inside I laugh, because on the one hand they will praise JFK up and down as a great president, however they fail to recognize the shortfalls of the man and his administration. He and Robert blackmailed people by misusing the FBI, yet that is whitewashed over. They illegally deported people, who won in court add, yet that is whitewashed over.
Why? Because of their civil rights record? An issue that they were pressured into? They would not meet MLK publically, and made him sneak in the back door to meet with them?
I am not saying Reagan was perfect. He had his flaws, but I cannot understand how we can't wait until he is in the ground to be CIVIL in our discussion of him. The pure venom that has been demonstrated in some of the posts is disheartening to me. It leads me to believe that there are many who would leave no room for a different opinion.
I wonder how many would spit on my grave because of my beliefs. And no, this is not a oh poor me I am a minority here in FYM post.
At the end of the day, Ronald Reagan was able to sit down with his political opposite and have a beer. Unfortunatley, the responses of the past week lead me to believe many would be incapable of doing the same with others in here. And that, may very well be the problem with politics in the world today. Manners and civilitiy towards one another be damned.
Inside I laugh, because on the one hand they will praise JFK up and down as a great president, however they fail to recognize the shortfalls of the man and his administration. He and Robert blackmailed people by misusing the FBI, yet that is whitewashed over. They illegally deported people, who won in court add, yet that is whitewashed over.
Why? Because of their civil rights record? An issue that they were pressured into? They would not meet MLK publically, and made him sneak in the back door to meet with them?
I am not saying Reagan was perfect. He had his flaws, but I cannot understand how we can't wait until he is in the ground to be CIVIL in our discussion of him. The pure venom that has been demonstrated in some of the posts is disheartening to me. It leads me to believe that there are many who would leave no room for a different opinion.
I wonder how many would spit on my grave because of my beliefs. And no, this is not a oh poor me I am a minority here in FYM post.
At the end of the day, Ronald Reagan was able to sit down with his political opposite and have a beer. Unfortunatley, the responses of the past week lead me to believe many would be incapable of doing the same with others in here. And that, may very well be the problem with politics in the world today. Manners and civilitiy towards one another be damned.
LoveTown
Refugee
as I re-read what I wrote earlier about people deserving some amount of respect unless they orchestrated some horrible act....
well, I take part of my statement back. Even those who we as a society deem the worst among us are loved by somebody and therefore their loved ones deserve a moment of peace and silence to mourn their loss as well. And yes, this even means that somebody like Hitler or a serial killer has a mother, a father, a wife or a husband or even just a close friend that once cared about them and they too deserve to have a moment to grieve.
99% of the ceremony after a death is really to apply some sort of salve to the souls of those left behind. And I think anybody dealing with the loss of somebody they cared about deserves the utmost respect.
well, I take part of my statement back. Even those who we as a society deem the worst among us are loved by somebody and therefore their loved ones deserve a moment of peace and silence to mourn their loss as well. And yes, this even means that somebody like Hitler or a serial killer has a mother, a father, a wife or a husband or even just a close friend that once cared about them and they too deserve to have a moment to grieve.
99% of the ceremony after a death is really to apply some sort of salve to the souls of those left behind. And I think anybody dealing with the loss of somebody they cared about deserves the utmost respect.
Diane L
Rock n' Roll Doggie FOB
LoveTown said:
I agree with this post. I'd been avoiding the TV coverage of Reagan's death and funeral, but I tuned in last night and saw the moment that Love Town has mentioned.
Maybe I was so moved because my grandmother and grandfather were extremely close, and Nancy reminded me of my grandma at my grandpa's funeral.
Anyway, my heart did go out to Nancy at that moment.
verte76
Blue Crack Addict
LoveTown said:
Exactly. It comes down to death being something that has to be dealt with by the family. If it's an acquaintance and not family, then your heart aches for the family, because they're the ones dealing with the most pain.
najeena
War Child
It's done now. Respect has been paid, people who wanted to (and many who didn't) have been witness to the ceremonies, the processionals, the funeral, the days of mourning. Let's let history judge the man, and get back to the business of the living.
nbcrusader
Blue Crack Addict
Part of the business of the living is to learn from those who have gone before us.
Seabird
War Child
There's one more thing he did I want to bring up and thank him for- ending the nonsense of forcing us into converting to the metric system! From the mid 70's on, we were told we had to convert everything and basically learn a new language. I recall being in junior high in 1975 when all we did in science or math class was an entire blackboard of metric conversion problems. The teacher would leave the room or sit there and read a novel while we had to silently do this drudgery. In the last 5 minutes she'd give us the answers. It was constantly being drilled into us that we had to know this because everything was going to switch over. There were government programs funded with large amounts of money to get people to 'think metric' and learn. They said we were behind the rest of the world and had to do it. But I say, why? We were not some itty bitty isolated country, we are big enough to have our own system and work things our way even if no one else does. If we deal with someone on the other system, oh well, you can 'translate' like you do with another language!
When Reagan got in, after I was out of school, he canned the ridiculous programs and said we were staying put with our old system. I will never forget the story on the news when they announced it, they brought up metaphors relating to our system of inches, yards, etc. and one thing they showed was a football kicker missing his field goal. They said, "and a miss will still be as good as a mile!"
It was financially unreasonable for us to convert. Every gas pump, drink bottle, factory who filled liquids of various kinds into pints, gallons, etc., were all going to have to be replaced! It was mandatory under the government plan. It would have cost private industry billions, as well as the inconvenience and annoyance of the people who had to relearn everything. Reagan saw this, and spared us all, and I thank him for it
When Reagan got in, after I was out of school, he canned the ridiculous programs and said we were staying put with our old system. I will never forget the story on the news when they announced it, they brought up metaphors relating to our system of inches, yards, etc. and one thing they showed was a football kicker missing his field goal. They said, "and a miss will still be as good as a mile!"
It was financially unreasonable for us to convert. Every gas pump, drink bottle, factory who filled liquids of various kinds into pints, gallons, etc., were all going to have to be replaced! It was mandatory under the government plan. It would have cost private industry billions, as well as the inconvenience and annoyance of the people who had to relearn everything. Reagan saw this, and spared us all, and I thank him for it
Last edited:
Popmartijn
Blue Crack Supplier
Well, I don't think the metric system is nonsense. 
As for the financial consequences, by holding on to the old system it only cost you a couple of space-explorers.
*doesn't understand the non-metric system*
As for the financial consequences, by holding on to the old system it only cost you a couple of space-explorers.
*doesn't understand the non-metric system*
Seabird
War Child
I don't mean it's nonsense, only that it was nonsense for us to go to so much trouble to switch over to it. The price of spacecraft? That's not going to pay for all the switchovers for private industries who would have had to totally replace all their machinery, not the government.
Last edited:
Popmartijn
Blue Crack Supplier
Why should private industries replace their machinery?
Seabird
War Child
Because they were all based on gallons/pints/inches/yards etc. and would have to be replaced with metric ones. So would all the bottles, cans, everything that is weighed or measured. It was too big of a task.
Seabird
War Child
Examples:
food- cereal, candy, bags of flour, sugar, everything that is sold by weight or even labeled for packaging. All those factories would have to switch. Stores that weigh and sell things like meat and vegetables by weight would all have to have new scales.
drinks- milk, bottles, cans, and at that time soda bottles were mostly the returnable reusable kind
other containers- gas cans, gas tanks, gas pumps, jars, chemicals, cleaners, etc.
The machines that fill these things were all gauged in our system and entire factories and all their machinery would have also been outdated.
Then you get into other things measured in length and width, like window shades, and the machines that make them.
All of these things and more I'm sure I'm missing would have had to be replaced at the expense of the company or private business who owned them.
road signs- redo every single sign in the country with KM instead of miles. This would be paid for by state governments. In some places near the Canadian border the signs are in both miles and KM but this has been gradually done over time as they got old and needed replacing.
food- cereal, candy, bags of flour, sugar, everything that is sold by weight or even labeled for packaging. All those factories would have to switch. Stores that weigh and sell things like meat and vegetables by weight would all have to have new scales.
drinks- milk, bottles, cans, and at that time soda bottles were mostly the returnable reusable kind
other containers- gas cans, gas tanks, gas pumps, jars, chemicals, cleaners, etc.
The machines that fill these things were all gauged in our system and entire factories and all their machinery would have also been outdated.
Then you get into other things measured in length and width, like window shades, and the machines that make them.
All of these things and more I'm sure I'm missing would have had to be replaced at the expense of the company or private business who owned them.
road signs- redo every single sign in the country with KM instead of miles. This would be paid for by state governments. In some places near the Canadian border the signs are in both miles and KM but this has been gradually done over time as they got old and needed replacing.
Last edited:
Popmartijn
Blue Crack Supplier
Couldn't they then reprogram them? Besides, even though they were based on gallons/inches/etc. that doesn't mean they have to do a totally different job. I mean, they'd still have to fill the bottle. Maybe the label would show a different text, but the contents could be the same.
Seabird
War Child
I don't think it works that way, especially since in those days things weren't so computerized. When these stories were reported on the news they always said they'd have to be REPLACED so that was a major drawback of switching over. If it had been easy they would have done it, so there were some serious valid reasons for being against it, it was no small or easy problem. There were good reasons for not doing it and not finding it worthwhile and that's why it was scrapped.
I do think it's worthwhile, because standardization with the rest of the world is worthwhile.
If you are, for example, in the scientific community, you can bet your ass that as an American, you are working with the metric system. If you think that you're conducting experiments in liquid ounces, you've got another thing coming.
Besides, I don't see why machinery would have to change. For example, we in Canada get your same Tropicana juice containers that you get in the States. I believe in the US, they are a half gallon. Usually in Canada, we would standardize drinks to be 2L, but all they do with Tropicana is print 1.89 Litres on the container and that's the end of that. No machinery change, nothing.
As for printing labels, it is neither a big deal nor very costly. I know this because it constantly comes up when there is talk of getting rid of French labels on foods in English Canada and time and time again studies suggest that adding extra on labels is really not costly, and that essentially you are not replacing the items on the shelves, but just infusing the market with the new labels until the old ones are all sold out. No big deal, really.
If you are, for example, in the scientific community, you can bet your ass that as an American, you are working with the metric system. If you think that you're conducting experiments in liquid ounces, you've got another thing coming.
Besides, I don't see why machinery would have to change. For example, we in Canada get your same Tropicana juice containers that you get in the States. I believe in the US, they are a half gallon. Usually in Canada, we would standardize drinks to be 2L, but all they do with Tropicana is print 1.89 Litres on the container and that's the end of that. No machinery change, nothing.
As for printing labels, it is neither a big deal nor very costly. I know this because it constantly comes up when there is talk of getting rid of French labels on foods in English Canada and time and time again studies suggest that adding extra on labels is really not costly, and that essentially you are not replacing the items on the shelves, but just infusing the market with the new labels until the old ones are all sold out. No big deal, really.
Seabird
War Child
Well it must have been a big deal, big enough for them to give up and can the idea. If someone has a job where they have to deal with it, they'll have to learn it, but it's not forced on the entire public. It's like if you deal with outside interests you might have to learn another language but not everyone does. It's not necessary.
It has a lot to do with our sheer size. We are bigger in land mass and population than several European countries combined, so we have enough people to function just fine with our own system.
It has a lot to do with our sheer size. We are bigger in land mass and population than several European countries combined, so we have enough people to function just fine with our own system.
Last edited:
beli
Blue Crack Addict
The world appears to be defaulting to English as the international language and metric as the system of measurement.
Its not that big a deal to change over to metric. In Australia the metric system was legalised in 1947 and we commenced using it properly in the 1970's. I dont understand why the USA is so many decades behind on this issue. I never knew Reagan blocked it but it fits in with my image of Reagan not having a 'world view' and why I didnt like him. It was obviously having difficulties before then though.
Times change, life goes on, and improves. I think this is one case of where change is good. It would be much easier if the world all used the same maths systems.
I order radioactive substances internationally for importation to Australia and having to think in both microcuries and megabecquerels gives me the whoops. And this is not in an area I want to make a mistake in as one measurement is 37 times LARGER than the other.
The USA have invented their own spelling of the English language which, although personally annoying, largely does not hinder. But measurement, thats a much bigger deal.
We have some USA foods here - Whitmans chockies for example. They just write the measurement in both systems on the box. No big deal. No altering the amount of chockies etc.
The USA may well be the size of a few European countries but it isnt the majority of the people on the planet.
Its not that big a deal to change over to metric. In Australia the metric system was legalised in 1947 and we commenced using it properly in the 1970's. I dont understand why the USA is so many decades behind on this issue. I never knew Reagan blocked it but it fits in with my image of Reagan not having a 'world view' and why I didnt like him. It was obviously having difficulties before then though.
Times change, life goes on, and improves. I think this is one case of where change is good. It would be much easier if the world all used the same maths systems.
I order radioactive substances internationally for importation to Australia and having to think in both microcuries and megabecquerels gives me the whoops. And this is not in an area I want to make a mistake in as one measurement is 37 times LARGER than the other.
The USA have invented their own spelling of the English language which, although personally annoying, largely does not hinder. But measurement, thats a much bigger deal.
We have some USA foods here - Whitmans chockies for example. They just write the measurement in both systems on the box. No big deal. No altering the amount of chockies etc.
The USA may well be the size of a few European countries but it isnt the majority of the people on the planet.
Last edited:
verte76
Blue Crack Addict
I remember the metric controversy. If we'd gone metric in the USA, chemistry lab would have been easier, for one thing. I was a chemistry student during the Reagan Administration. I hated having to do measurement changes.
joyfulgirl
Blue Crack Addict
- Joined
- Apr 11, 2001
- Messages
- 16,690
This American wishes we had made the switch to metric a long long time ago. Both my work and my personal life are very international and I feel stupid with our system. Math is hard enough for me and I have difficulty making the conversions in my head. Typically when I place an ad in a European newspaper, for example, and I fumble over the sizing, the person can always tell me the conversion to inches on the spot and I am pissed that I was never taught this. Well, I was taught it but when you don't have to use something you don't really learn it except to pass the test, then it's gone. 
joyfulgirl
Blue Crack Addict
- Joined
- Apr 11, 2001
- Messages
- 16,690
Seabird said:
I think it has something to do with ego and pride as well. America is used to everyone following us, not vice versa.
zoney!
ONE love, blood, life
I love the humo(u)r in the statements below....
AND
uh, only goofy aussIES would turn the word "Chocolates" to "chockies"
~ zoney, who also wished he new the metric system for the benefit of his job
beli said:
AND
beli said:
uh, only goofy aussIES would turn the word "Chocolates" to "chockies"
~ zoney, who also wished he new the metric system for the benefit of his job
Last edited:
beli
Blue Crack Addict
caught
Similar threads
