I was a Newt fan until this comment. I still may end up voting for him, but he deserves to get absolutely hammered over this, if only for the sake of intellectual honesty.
Gingrich didn't just articulate a "vision" of the U.S. returning to space. He made a very specific promise of a moon colony in 8 years, and its that promise
of a moon colony, not a general vision of returning to space, for which he is being hammered. People claiming this is attacking him for a general desire to return to space are ignoring the very specific, concrete proposal (not just a "vision") that he made.
Many of those defending him say that it is going to be paid for by private enterprise, not the government. But if this is going to be paid for by private enterprise, Gingrich cannot possibly know that it is actually going to happen within 8 years. It is entirely possible (I'd say overwhelmingly likely) that private enterprise will not see the profit in footing a bill of this magnitude in the hopes that it will, somehow, generate enough profits to pay for itself. Certainly, promising that private enterprise will do this within 8 years is simply reckless or disingenuous at best.
The only way Gingrich can actually come through with that promise is to spend federal money (like Reagan did with the shuttle program) to makes sure that it does happen. Hundreds of billions in federal money. But we're being told that isn't his plan at all -- that the money to finance this enormous venture is going to be coughed up lickety-split by private companies just begging to spend a few hundred billion over the next few years on what would amount to a huge gamble for their shareholders. Now perhaps that is possible, but for Newt to say that is going to happen is either disingenuous, or nutbaggery.
Knock it off with posting statements that make sense!
I think the promise is the thing that actually made it good. Anybody can mouth off about a vague desire to do something, but committing to really doing it is what gets people excited and also what gets investors and the money flowing. And it’s not state money we’re talking about.
Reagan had to build the shuttle program from scratch but NASA is already sitting there, has bases, is established, and, unless you want it to devote itself to the “mission” Bambi proclaimed for it (”outreach to Muslims”), it should be used and not left just sucking up government dollars. Taking it out of the construction business would save money all by itself, and Gingrich actually plans to reduce its budget, not increase it.
You seem to be confused between two differing methods of accomplishing goals:
1.) The Government Method, in which a command bureaucracy is given a set of goals, requests 25 times as much as is rationally necessary on acheiving stated goals, fails to accomplish stated goals while vastly expanding the amount of bureaucrats, then asks for more money the next time budgetng comes around to complete the work started on the original stated goals. Repeat ad nauseaum.
2.) The Prize Method. State a dollar amount prize for the completion of a particular stated goal. Allow private companies to compete. Pay said amount when stated goal is completed.
If, say, your stated goal was an operational Moon Base (complete with launch systems, transfer craft, landing craft and sustainable environmental controls at the Moon Base), and the prize were, say $20 billion, you just got yourself a monster bargain compared to the NASA bureaucratic method of space acheivement, which, for example, has pissed away more than $20 billion on the Ares Heavy Lifter and hasn’t even developed a prototype, only drawings.
Newt was positing a totally different methodology for spaceflight. One that invigorates the private sector and opens up space for everyone. Try to break out of the tunnel vision created by the NASA bureaucrats, that space travel is only possible through the auspices of the government bureaucracy at gargantuan cost. It isn’t.