Posted on 01/19/2008 9:20:07 PM PST by Names Ash Housewares
I guess he has the Ralph Kramdon vote locked.
Too bad all the worse-than-useless "social" programs can't be held to the same standard.
NASA does have its own problems, like any organization, but it's worse because it's a government bureaucracy.
I’d like to see every program in every department of government have to justifuy their continued existence every year (or all right, every two years). They would have to show that clearly definable goals hare being met, and if not, the program is not reauthorized.
It would give an incentive to the bureaucratic minions to do some actual good, rather than writing reports demanding more money.
It's the union equivalent of "Don't Kill the Job".
Not that I think social problems can be eliminated, but at the very least, they shouldn't encourage poverty, dependency, and anti-social behavior.
At least the big science endeavors have a goals.
” I am convinced that the nations that lead on the frontiers, dictate the course of human history.
I hope ALL the candidates will support NASA and vision for space exploration as strongly as this.”
Oh, I agree with your sentiment. But I disagree that NASA is the way to get it done. Open it to competition. Privatize. That’s the way to innovation. I’m having a hard time thinking of many successful NASA projects in the last few years, and those that HAVE been successful aren’t anywhere near on the scale of shooting for the moon. It’s a mess.
I have a better idea: Privatize space flight, take a tiny fraction of the taxpayer money that would be saved, to build a wall from Tijuana to the Gulf Coast, and give the rest back to the taxpayers to invest, say, in the new companies that will be doing a better job of building rockets than the government can do.
We may never live in an age without human presence in space.
The space station passes over our heads everyday.
NASA has indeed accomplished much, even after Apollo.
not all of it sexy. But learning how to construct in orbit is important we learn by doing, and by making mistakes too.
But think of the twin Mars rovers and orbiters, Hubble, Galileo at Jupiter, Cassini at Saturn now. Asteroid and comet fly bys. Probes to study the sun. NASA does so much that the public isnt very aware of.
Private industry will play its part, I was a supportor of the X-prize.
But as a nation, it is all together appropriate we do these things as well.
There is a military benefit too obviouly.
Shuttle did fly secret to this day defense missions.
HA! ....while your at it send $hrillary, too! POW! "straight to the moon!" (George Cramden-Jackie Gleeson :)
$he always wanted to be the first *itch on the moon.
“Many of us would like to see Giuliani sent to the moon, McCain, too!”
Yes, Rudy and McCain are the very worst!!
Southern Baptist leader, Dr. Richard Land, said that if Rudy gets the nomination, the Dem candidate will win, because religious conservatives won’t vote for Rudy.
(BTW, isn't it great that Rudy's such a fiscal conservative, to make up for his social liberalism? < /sarc >)
Both are surrounded by conspiracy theories.
American voters plan to send the greasy Mayor back to Yankee Stadium...
Exactly. Luna is the high ground. Defensively speaking, we would be foolish to let the Chinese perch up there above us without having a presence ourselves. Ever read THE MOON IS A HARSH MISTRESS? The novel is dated in some ways, but Heinlein was right about one thing -- whoever is up there can easily thrown rocks at the Earth. Big ones.
That's not the sort of thing you can say to the great unwashed, because they'll just think you're being paranoid. But the forward-thinking leaders are well aware of this issue, mark my words.
He'll just buy the dumb hippies that run NASA a couple tickets on the Chinese rocket lay off all the engineers and enjoy the great outsourcing dividend, while acknowledging that Chinese communists have always been smarter than us arrogant Americans. ....Oh wait that's Hillary's plan.
Why???
Isn’t NASA’s headquarters in TEXAS? If so, wouldn’t Texas be the center of the United States’ space program?
I am for this but not at the predicted cost of $100 billion. This is considerably less than the first time around, adjusted for inflation, but we should be able to do much better.
I have thought for 50 years that NASA was putting the cart before the horse in spending its money for various costly operations rather than first developing a genuinely economical launch system.
In fact, given the relative success of recent private efforts, and the maturity of the technology, I suspect that NASA’s new Orion/Ares project will be superceded by events before it ever gets off the ground.
Would have THE UNITED STATES lead.
If Europe and others want to develop their space capabilities, good for them. But they should be viewed as competitors every bit as much as Russia, China, and other 'non-westerners.'
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.