Posted on 02/09/2005 3:58:16 PM PST by Magnum44
Instead of Burt Rutan, they should contract that freighter that does the Kessel Run so fast...
Finally.
But I can hear the liberals decrying this now. "How many babies can those billions save?"
What we are talking about is buying services," Readdy noted. "We are looking for innovative solutions." According to Readdy, NASA will issue its request for proposals to provide low-cost freighter service by this summer.
THIS is big ! Finally opening a new sector for American
business ingenuity.
But I can hear the liberals decrying this now. "How many babies can those billions save?"
Actually the liberals would be saying,"Think how many proto-fetus's we could abort with that kind of money."
Think about it, it was the government air mail contracts
that opened up aviation to the pioneers of flight.
This is what has been sorely needed.
Absolutely, and it is a perfect venue to seed new companies to commercialize the manned space program.
I had the pleasure of working on a shuttle experiment for Bill Ready in the early 90's. He came to the Astronaut Corp from the Navy, and it is great to see he continues the Naval Tradition of leadership at NASA.
That's what they're thinking. I wish we could get them on tape.
Their thoughts made public would kill the liberal movement as surely than as an abortion.
In ten parsecs......
Bush is no friend of NASA. This is a terrible budget for NASA, as it has been since Bush entered office.
In REAL terms, inflation adjusted, NASA funding has been on a downhill slide for years, as social welfare soars to the heavens.
Where is the funding for Mars?????
It is wise of them to defer JIMO. I hope they do it eventually, however, because it would be a impresive acomplishment. I actually heard rumuor that they were thinking o some sort of Venus mission for an early demonstrator. Anyone heard anything about this?
Mr negative chiming in? I think you need to check your figures. In the last 10 years the NASA budget has gone from $12B to almost $17B.
We need a good synopsis. The budget doc is 400 pdf pages, which is beyond the power of my dialup.
So you prefer corporate and civil service welfare instead? As NASA has been showing such great strides of late, why should it get any more funding than other federal programs with their own constituents lobbying for more pork?
NASA has gotten much more than it's fair share of the budget during the Bush Administration and likely will continue to get budget increases when other worthy agencies get their belts tightened, whether they and their constituents like it or not.
If NASA can't do it's job with the billions allocated to it, maybe it should rethink how it spends those billions and do some innovative thinking for a change.
I think you need to check your education background.
I said in REAL terms, inflation adjusted . . .
The NASA budget has been CUT steadily over the last decade. Raw dollars means nothing. It is inflation adjusted dollars that tells you whether the budget has gone up or down.
The undisputable FACT is the NASA budget has been cut steadily and has been LAST on the totem pole of funding if ranked by Agency % increase of budget over the last 10 years.
Your statement is false. Your statement has no basis in FACT.
See post #18.
Yet another insult. It doesn't take you long.
The undisputable FACT is the NASA budget has been cut steadily and has been LAST on the totem pole of funding if ranked by Agency % increase of budget over the last 10 years.
Look over the last 4 years. Clinton cut to fund midnight basketball. This admin has been generous to NASA. And given the more urgent needs of the last few years, I'd say that's pretty good. No ones gets everything they want. Stop being a cry baby.
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.