Click the pic Thank you, JoeProBono
This Little Cutie Will Soon Be
Ready For His Bottle of Tabasco!
Become a monthly donor
And keep the FReepathon Dragons away
Sponsors will contribute $10
For each new monthly sign-up
Posted on 02/07/2012 5:37:14 AM PST by Cincinatus' Wife
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.
My example was a real proposal by a presidential candidate.
I fully believe it, stop teasing, who is it?
Knock it off with posting statements that make sense!
In line with your free lunch example: there was the Democrats claim that adding a new entitlement with Obama-care-public plan would provide cheaper insurance costs for us compared to no free health care, because Americans would get sick less.
I would just point them to medicare spending curves the past 40 years, it appears that seniors still get sick and cost more and more and more with that ‘free health care’.
I had a liberal co-worker argue with me that we could save EVEN MORE money by expanding Obama-care to illegals so they stop getting sick too.
Maybe a cancer cure will be found on that moon colony :)
I’ve been finished with that little twerp ever since he went gung-ho for Giuliani in 08.
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.
Even IF all the records and blueprints were lost/gathering dust in grandpa’s attic (as the article implies) it would be a simple matter of reverse engineering of the TWO existing Saturn V systems.
Remember in 1976 Soviet pilot Viktor Belenko defected to Japan with a brand new MiG25 fighter/interceptor, and it was reverse engineered and sent back to Moscow (in boxes mind you) in just a couple of weeks. Granted the Saturn V is a much larger item, but it’s no more sophisticated than a state of the art fighter jet designed 15 years later!
To claim there is nobody that knows the whole system is a red herring as well, since no single person knew the whole system in the first place.
Using modern tools and techniques, an upgraded Saturn V could likely be on a launchpad within a couple of years after starting a re-development program, since the hard work of determining whether it can fly has already been done. It’s just a matter of putting it back together, with modern materials and technology.
Then again, does the determination and zeal for discovery still exist? If not, we’re all just wasting our breath and time discussing what-ifs.
The guy is thrown out of office five years old, losing by over 16 points, and people here including Michelle Malkim think that HES THAT BEST candidate out there.
Sarah Palin sits on the sidelines. I’ve turned my TV off. I’m getting virtually all my news from FR.
And even on this forum we now learn that Santorum might win two primaries today?
I can’t believe that the God that looks over our country and its people will sit back and let this happen. I am reminded to how I felt when Reagan lost to Ford and when the establishment backed Bush Sr.
Romney would make a better VP than a president. Newt is the man of the times.
RIGHT NOW THE ONLY WAY I SEE THINGS TILTING FOR NEWT SHORT OF SANTORUM DROPPING OUT IS SOME INCIDENT, SUCH AS AN IRANIAN CONFLICT THAT GOES ASTRAY WITH AMERICAN HOSTAGES, PRISONERS DEATHS ETC.
Something happened for Reagan, it must happen now for Newt.
It was a completely false issue. I was amazed that it got so much traction, and frankly, I think both Perry and Gingrich were blindside by it because it was so irrational.
LOL! Eddie Haskell is exactly what I think of when I see Santorum...smarmy, deceitful and, deep down inside, contemptuous.
In short, Newt was right on the money again.
But he didn't commit to doing it. The best that can be said is that he committed other people to doing it with their own money. Now again, if he really is "committed" to doing it, then he must be willing to spend hundreds of billions in tax dollars. But supposedly, he's not.
A grandstanding "vision" from a politician is not going to induce private investors to spend hundreds of billions of their own money on a project. Newt's trying to have his cake and eat it too -- making a "promise" for political gain, but claiming that it won't cost taxpayers anything. Those two positions are irreconciliable.
Maybe we should start updating him on Santorum's REAL record & facts about his voting record.
It was 67 days they took to investigate the MiG 25 before returning it to the Soviets in boxes. My mistake.
Romney and Sanitorium are pathetic fools.
They prove it more and more each time they open their mouths.
.
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.
I’m actually the one that wrote about Levin...
“Too bad he supports Santorum”.
That poster was quoting me.
Anyway, I heard Levin say he knows Santorum has an imperfectly conservative voting record.
He swears that despite knowing that, he is certain that Santorum is a true conservative.
He just “missed the mark” on some votes, and still deserves our support.
My hope is that Levin’s pal Jeffry Lord, who supports Newt, can influence him to look at Newt differently.
Of course I meant modern technology... not the invention of radio (which is well over 100 years old) or 'Tang'. Cut me some slack. Newt has called for major changes in the space program to address the issues you bring up. You can argue the details, but it is essential we remain a nation of visionaries.
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.