Posted on 02/09/2010 8:41:08 AM PST by Names Ash Housewares
So, Homer, go.
No one is stopping you.
(Homer apparently depends on The Government for inspiration.)
But if you go, please take Stretchface, Harry and Bawney Fwank with you.
The $4 billion that was taken away from NASA has been given to “community organizers” like ACORN. This is an outrage. Stripping away resources from the most innovative and productive, to give to groups who consolidate the power of the irresponsible and unproductive.
I agree. However the Obama administration has a different agenda.
Returning to the moon and establishing a permanent base
is hardly just repeating what we did 40 years ago.
If you want the truth, socialism killed our chances of
a continous moon/space program, sucking precious research
dollars out and flushing them down nonproductive feel good
“welfare” rat holes in order to buy voters to continue
the march of socialism in one of the last free countries.
I met this gentlemen in Huntsville, Alabama at the space flight center several years ago. My son had his picture taken with him. Homer is a 1st class scientist and a true gentlemen. He is so far over BO’s head in intellect the kenyan village idiot can’t be compared to a real rocket scientist. God Bless this man for speaking out.
The sad part is that the law of the sea treaty will do the same thing to the oceans as the outer space treaty did to space. The end result will be the same clowns screaming that private industry should go and they won’t even acknowledge that private industry is prevented from going.
Gotta love a coal country rocketeer.
This is Obama throwing a bone to the far left and claiming deficit reduction at the same time. The left hates space exploration because they see it as imperialistic.
Columbus hangover, I call it.
Obama is right on this one. A country with trillion dollar deficits should not squander billions more on sending a man to the moon. We did it 40 years ago, what’s the point of doing it again? What did we get from doing it last time?
Essentially everything is the same. I doubt if the program would have survived to the point of establishing a base. After all, a Moon landing wouldn't have occurred until 2020 under the best circumstances. A sign that not even W saw the program as urgent or important.
It's too bad we can't give the money to the aerospace nerds and let them decide. That's the way the unmanned program works and it's very successful, except for the time when Clinton butted in with Better, Faster, Cheaper.
If you want the truth, socialism killed our chances of a continous moon/space program, sucking precious research dollars out and flushing them down nonproductive feel good “welfare” rat holes in order to buy voters to continue the march of socialism in one of the last free countries.
Not so. NASA's manned program costs about the same as what we flush down Puerto Rico every year. And only a fraction of the cost of TARP or the Iraq war. NASA is one of the best bargains the taxpayers get.
No, Obama IS wrong on this one. Big Time.
Hickam is right.
40 years ago we never should have stopped!
And today we need to work towards permanant pioneering of the solar system.
The nations that lead ont he frontier dicate the course of human history.
The legacy of NASA human spaceflight is all around you.
Spinoff technology is huge, it brings breakthroughs that never would have happened or came much sooner then they ever would have.
In your home, your car, the aircraft you travel in, everywhere. It IS worth doing because it keeps ahead of every nation on earth in many ways.
Hickam in a previous article.....
Defending the moon - 2010-02-02 12:06:03 Here is a list of six reasons why the United States should make it a national goal to establish a laboratory on the moon, similar to our Antarctic South Pole Station:
1. National prestige. Many decisions are made in other countries based on how they perceive us . Are we young and dynamic and growing or are we old, lethargic, and dying? If we are considered the latter, we will be attacked in both overt and subtle ways.
2. Growing our economy based on technological and scientific leadership. If we accomplish great engineering and scientific tasks, such as going to the moon and staying there, we will attract the best and brightest minds in the world to not only help us on the moon but to keep us advancing in all technologies. This equals a dynamic, nimble, robust, long-term economy.
3. Teaching our young people how to succeed. Anytime a great technological project is taken on by the United States with clear purpose, resolve, and defined goals, the result is success which inspires all Americans, especially our youth.
4. Energy. Space is awash in energy resources. The moon is a place to take advantage of that.
5. Fighting terrorism. To stop the ideology of terror from taking hold in young minds, we must provide those minds with a grand new perception of the universe. Imagine a young person stepping outside a mud hut and looking up at the moon and knowing there are people there accomplishing great tasks. His heart will soar and he will want to join us, not them.
6. The X Factor. What we don’t know, we don’t know. The moon holds secrets, perhaps to our very survival.
Hope this helps everyone interested in defending our moon program.
Our statements are not in opposition.
Nasa is a bargain! Think what it COULD BE
with real funding.
If the moon program had been continous, we
would be living on the moon today.
Robots continue to have a place in our exploration
but they cannot make the intuitive leap that makes
disperate information connect, only a human can do that.
NASA’a annual budget is only about $18 billion a year.
It’s only about 0.6% of the annual federal budget.
We spend this much every year on aid to countries like North Korea, Pakistan, and Palestine.
Obama’s cuts have nothing to do with money.
Homer has an amazing life story.
At least the money is spent on something worthwhile—the spin-offs have numbered in the 1000s. This beats the hell out of giving the money for the gov’t funded breeding program of dem voters—aka, welfare et al.
I've heard this mantra since the early 70's, but I can only think of two legitimate 'spinoff technologies':v Silicone sealant and Tang.
Can you document your claim?
And then, if you do, let's do a cost-benefit analysis.
Name ten from memory in one minute.
What is the cost of a human life?
People are alive today that would not have been from medical tech derived from NASA human spaceflight.
You may even know someone.
Come on dude, you can google this stuff as easy as me...
http://www.google.com/#hl=en&source=hp&q=NASA+spinoffs&aq=f&aqi=g10&oq=&fp=a048890d3c90c6fc
That is if your really interested in the facts on the matter. Go have a look.
By the way Tang was not invented by NASA, that is urban myth.
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.