CHINA SUCCESSFULLY SOFT-LANDS PROBE ON THE MOON

BEIJING (AP) -- China on Saturday successfully carried out the world's first soft landing of a space probe on the moon in nearly four decades, the next stage in an ambitious space program that aims to eventually have a Chinese astronaut set foot on the moon.

The unmanned Chang'e 3 lander, named after a mythical Chinese goddess of the moon, touched down on Earth's nearest neighbor following a 12-minute landing process.

Fixed

Not really. Sending jobs out of the country had something to do with this entitlement spending. Likewise, the loss of tax paying workers has something to do with our deficits.

Besides, the entitlement vote is big enough that we're stuck with it, at least until we can win some of them over to Conservative values. We can start by bringing jobs back here.

On the other hand, putting money into the Chinese space program (and economy, and military), is a CHOICE we make by choosing to save $.25 on a note pad over buying American.

Having said all of this, I won't fault anyone for refusing to buy a UAW built car, or products from companies that push the leftist agenda.

Not talking about consumer spending preferences, which is what corporations do to achieve the lowest competitive price.

NASA and DOD are funded by the Gov, which in turn choses - by political will - where to spend it. The Gov choses to spend money on Entitlements, not space exploration.

Entitlement programs only create more Entitlement programs, unlike space exploration which has brought a list of more things than can be enumerated here. Those new things have created our modern society and all the industries and jobs which go with them.

People cannot easily be persuaded to lower spending on Entitlements when there is no reasonable and easily understandable argument why. The same can be said for paying a bit more for some product.

Winning more people over to one side or another is a slow process, subject to reversal at one moment or another and; as such, that method cannot be relied on as a successful strategy.

Sending jobs to China is more a Gov regulatory and political will choice - cf. the Clinton and Obama administrations.

I have argued for some time, in one way or another, that American conservative are trying the wrong tactics: they are too focused on trying to bring back the past and the conservative values they believe rested there, too focused - as a political movement - in the status quo of the Republican Party.

Liberals are focused on heidoism and debauchery, conservatives on sniffing their socks. Which one is more appealing to the public?

The only way, in my opinion, to bring back jobs is to create a compelling reason to do so. That task can only be accomplished through inspiration and hope - two things American conservatism does not offer and, in fact, seems to go out of its way to avoid.

Twice in our country’s history we have created inspiration and hope, not just here, but worldwide: the American Revolution and all that went with it, and the Apollo Program and the lunar landings.

The American Revolution created a unique system of Governance - failure of political will is undoing it.

The Apollo Program and the lunar landings created the modern techno-centric age - failure of political will has undone the US manned space exploration program.

To create a new jobs, generate NEW money, and meaning-filled work, the US conservative movement can either bring the Second American Revolution (and all the bloodshed that entails), go back into space in a big way, or some third unknown thing.

To do any of those, there must be a clear set of goals (both real and political) laid out which, by their very nature, generate inspiration and hope.

The Chinese are looking to the future in the long term, while the US is mired in the past, with short term fixes for mistakes (which should not have been made in the first place), and thereby creating new mistakes for future generations to fix, if the can.

For me, you can keep a Second American Revolution. I prefer going onward to a renewed manned space program - private and government. That alone would demand more industry and jobs, while supplying the tax base with NEW money, allowing current Entitlements to remain. It would also demand a better educational system with far higher standards that exist presently - all those dreaming kids - can you remember or imagine?

We could still be there to greet the first Chinese when they land, you know, if there was a political will.

Not talking about consumer spending preferences, which is what corporations do to achieve the lowest competitive price.

Consumer spending preferences can mean the difference between paying for our miltary and space program, or paying for China's.

NASA and DOD are funded by the Gov, which in turn choses - by political will - where to spend it. The Gov choses to spend money on Entitlements, not space exploration.

That's because Americans voted for representatives who promised them entitlements, instead of voting for those who would continue the space program. You can't get away from that.

People cannot easily be persuaded to lower spending on Entitlements when there is no reasonable and easily understandable argument why.

Because we can't sustain this is an understandable reason why. The problem isn't understanding, but that many (not all) prefer to keep collecting.

The same can be said for paying a bit more for some product.

How about the money sent out of the country that funds China's military and space program, which we have to spend more with fewer tax payers to keep up. How about that money that could be creating tax paying jobs in the US are creating them in other countries instead. In the case of people who have lost their jobs to outsourcing, ask how affordable that lower priced Chinese made stuff now?

Consider all of this, and that $.25 you save on a foreign made note pad doesn't sound like much of a bargain after all.

Winning more people over to one side or another is a slow process, subject to reversal at one moment or another and; as such, that method cannot be relied on as a successful strategy.

What's the alternative? If we're going to replace our current government mindset with Reagan Conservatives, we're going to need to convince American voters to vote for them.

Sending jobs to China is more a Gov regulatory and political will choice - cf. the Clinton and Obama administrations.

It's actually a consumer choice, who by buying the cheaper foreign made stuff is making it profitable to outsource manufacturing.

First, the past includes slavery, lynching, Jim Crow, and the KKK. No one wants to go back to this, no matter how much some on our side would like to pretend this wasn't a part of "the good old days". Second, this was all brought to us by the Democrats and it was the Republicans who faught against it. Our Conservative values rest in everyone having the opportunity to make their own way in the world. That's what we should focus on.

Liberals are focused on heidoism and debauchery, conservatives on sniffing their socks. Which one is more appealing to the public?

Granted, American socienty has descended into something resembling Sodom and Gomorrah. Here is one of my answers (warning, graphic images).

To do any of those, there must be a clear set of goals (both real and political) laid out which, by their very nature, generate inspiration and hope.

Unfortunately, we will have to convince a large part of our population to look past the EBT cards, free abortion, free health care, etc, to something greater.

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.