Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Gingrich Space Plan Promises the Moon, Literally: Lunar Base by 2020
Space.com ^ | 25 January 2012 Time: 07:07 PM ET | Mike Wall

Posted on 01/26/2012 7:36:33 AM PST by The_Victor

The United States will have a permanent manned colony on the moon by 2020 if Newt Gingrich is in charge, the Republican presidential hopeful announced today (Jan. 25).

Gingrich laid out this goal during a speech in the city of Cocoa, on Florida's Space Coast. He also said that near-Earth space would be bustling with commercial activity by 2020, and that America would possess a next-generation propulsion system by then, allowing the nation to get astronauts to Mars quickly and efficiently.

"By the end of my second term, we will have the first permanent base on the moon, and it will be American," Gingrich said.

The former Speaker of the House made no apologies for the boldness of his amibitions, which depend primarily on the emergence of a vibrant commercial spaceflight industry. He said the U.S. space program needs a kick in the pants like the one President John F. Kennedy gave it in 1961, when he promised to put a man on the moon by the end of the decade.

(Excerpt) Read more at space.com ...


TOPICS: Front Page News; Government; News/Current Events; Politics/Elections; US: Florida
KEYWORDS: bhonasa; biggovtconservative; catastrophism; fl2012; livingdocument; nasa; newt2012; space
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 141-160161-180181-200 ... 221-226 next last
To: ILS21R
made you look like an azzhat in front of all your lib troll friends.

In your dreams liberal.

161 posted on 01/26/2012 10:26:15 AM PST by from occupied ga (your own government is your most dangerous enemy)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 154 | View Replies]

To: from occupied ga
I think there is value in exploring the solar system, even though we already know the other planets are currently uninhabitable for humans and there's probably not much material we would want from them. Eventually we could develop the capability to travel and explore outside our solar system where we may eventually find another planet to inhabit or exploit (for economic purposes).

Granted, this won't happen in our lifetimes and probably won't for many more generations to come. But if we are ever to get to that point, we have to start taking baby steps. It took hundreds of years for the Europeans to start pushing ships across the ocean to North America but once that happened, things started to develop much more rapidly.

162 posted on 01/26/2012 10:27:51 AM PST by SamAdams76 (I am 9 days away from outliving Marty Feldman)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 147 | View Replies]

To: SamAdams76
we have to start taking baby steps.

Let's take a baby step toward respecting the Constitutional limitations on federal power.

163 posted on 01/26/2012 10:29:38 AM PST by JustSayNoToNannies (A free society's default policy: it's none of government's business.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 162 | View Replies]

To: JustSayNoToNannies

>Therefore the federal government does not have that power; read the Tenth Amendment.

Read Article II Section 2 Clause 2. The Louisiana Purchase was also a treaty.

>The military is authorized by the Constitution. Have you ever read it?

Sorry, due to the vacuousness of your statement, I assumed you meant refraining from all spending.


164 posted on 01/26/2012 10:29:38 AM PST by struggle (http://killthegovernment.wordpress.com/)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 151 | View Replies]

To: SamAdams76

“...we have to start taking baby steps...”
The first step is paying for it. Will you vote for raising taxes? Or do think we should borrow more money that future generations will be paying the interest on?


165 posted on 01/26/2012 10:31:21 AM PST by running_dog_lackey
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 162 | View Replies]

To: struggle
Therefore the federal government does not have that power; read the Tenth Amendment.

Read Article II Section 2 Clause 2. The Louisiana Purchase was also a treaty.

Who would we be making a treaty with as part of colonizing the moon?

I guess destroying entrepreneurial spirit is conservative.

You think refraining from spending taxpayer money is “destroying entrepreneurial spirit”? Have the decency to not call yourself a conservative.

Fine, let’s fire everyone in the military. Smart.

The military is authorized by the Constitution. Have you ever read it?

Sorry, due to the vacuousness of your statement, I assumed you meant refraining from all spending.

What's vacuous is your identification of not spending taxpayer dollars on a moon base as "destroying entrepreneurial spirit."

166 posted on 01/26/2012 10:35:37 AM PST by JustSayNoToNannies (A free society's default policy: it's none of government's business.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 164 | View Replies]

To: from occupied ga

>>>Nothing is stopping you and your like minded citizens from forming a corporation WITH YOUR OWN MONEY and exploring space to your heart’s content. My problem is not with space exploration per se, but with the people who think that they shoudl rob their fellow taxpayers to do it. Bad enough to be robbed to support some a$$hole welfare recipient who made a lifetime of bad choices, but then supporting a bunch of engineers and PhDs who could actually earn a living seems even more excessive.

The problem is that countries pay others to do exploration, and then the companies follow - as it has always been. Who paid Columbus? Who paid Lewis and Clark? Who made the space station? After foothold has been established, then comes the companies.

>>Lewis and Clark were paid by TAXPAYER DOLLARS.

>So what? You think the space program is in any way analogous to L&C? Ha ha.

Very much so. I’m sure Lewis and Clark’s discovery of Yellowstone was analogous to Armstrong’s first step on the moon - it was all a discovery and a foothold for people to later follow.

>>Undoubtedly. In fact it has happened before, and appears to happen on average ever couple of hundred million years, but look there is still life on the planet, and who is to say that the vast wealth required to explore space would not be better survive a disaster right here. There are much more likely catastrophes than a meteor strike. (like a second 0 term)

I am in total agreement about the second Obama term. However, a devastating meteor strike, a spread of modified bird flu, or any other disaster necessitates another family at other places to carry on.


167 posted on 01/26/2012 10:38:13 AM PST by struggle (http://killthegovernment.wordpress.com/)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 158 | View Replies]

To: running_dog_lackey

What I think we should do is eliminate government transfer payments such as welfare and food stamps and use that money for space exploration. A mission to Mars is much worthier than supplying Doritos and malt liquor to layabouts.


168 posted on 01/26/2012 10:40:08 AM PST by SamAdams76 (I am 9 days away from outliving Marty Feldman)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 165 | View Replies]

To: SamAdams76
What I think we should do is eliminate government transfer payments such as welfare and food stamps and use that money for space exploration.

What I think we should do is eliminate government transfer payments such as welfare and food stamps and use that money for leaving in the wallets of the people who earned it.

You may have heard of this - it's called conservatism.

169 posted on 01/26/2012 10:43:29 AM PST by JustSayNoToNannies (A free society's default policy: it's none of government's business.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 168 | View Replies]

To: JustSayNoToNannies

>>Who would we be making a treaty with as part of colonizing the moon?

So back to my original point which was INVESTING in new territory. The Louisiana Purchase was that investment. I’m glad you agree with my analysis of the Constitution.

>>What’s vacuous is your identification of not spending taxpayer dollars on a moon base as “destroying entrepreneurial spirit.”

In another post, I stated that even Lewis and Clark were paid for by taxpayer dollars. The people and companies followed. The government frequently pays people to put their lives on the line, whether explorers or the military. Space is a frontier, just like the frontier that was the American West only 200 years ago.


170 posted on 01/26/2012 10:43:59 AM PST by struggle (http://killthegovernment.wordpress.com/)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 166 | View Replies]

To: All; DungeonMaster

A moon base? What a colossal waste of taxpayer money. And, Mars? Seriously?

When it comes to big government spending, some so-called “conservatives” wet their pants with glee whenever anyone suggests throwing taxpayer dollars into space, especially manned space exploration. There’s no valid reason for it.

Let the private sector do it. The armchair Captain Kirks among us are free to finance their own pipe dreams and hobbies.

(By the way, unless you honestly believe “Go forth and multiply” was intended to extend beyond Earth, spare me the strawman arguments, mm-kay? This planet is more than adequate to support all of humankind.)


171 posted on 01/26/2012 10:45:51 AM PST by newgeezer (It is [the people's] right and duty to be at all times armed. --Thomas Jefferson)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: struggle
So back to my original point which was INVESTING in new territory.

The only Constitutional basis you've offered for that is treaty-making - which doesn't apply to space.

172 posted on 01/26/2012 10:46:18 AM PST by JustSayNoToNannies (A free society's default policy: it's none of government's business.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 170 | View Replies]

To: JustSayNoToNannies
It guess the concept of precedent is over your head I could have posted many other examples but I thought the federal government building the US railway system to open the west was a very good one.
173 posted on 01/26/2012 10:50:40 AM PST by jpsb
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 157 | View Replies]

To: SamAdams76

“What I think we should do is eliminate government transfer payments such as welfare and food stamps and use that money for space exploration. A mission to Mars is much worthier than supplying Doritos and malt liquor to layabouts.”

see post #169
I’d rather pay off my mortgage than pay interest on more debt.


174 posted on 01/26/2012 10:54:54 AM PST by running_dog_lackey
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 168 | View Replies]

To: The_Victor

It is a nice idea, but how are we going to pay for it?

We have no money.


175 posted on 01/26/2012 10:55:41 AM PST by moviefan8
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: struggle
Very much so. I’m sure Lewis and Clark’s discovery of Yellowstone was analogous to Armstrong’s first step on the moon - it was all a discovery and a foothold for people to later follow

On this we will NEVER be in agreement. I keep coming back to the inflation adjusted cost of returning anything from the moon, and of course the fact that the moon consists of unremarkable (from a resource viewpoint)rocks and dirt. You can get rocks and dirt without paying $4.5 million an ounce for it.

that countries pay others to do exploration, and then the

SO let the Chinese screw up their economy to do it, and then follow them. They're currently more capitalistic than we are, so I'm sure they would not be adverse to foreign investment if there were anything worth investing in to be found there.

Meteor strike

If the dinosaurs had technology, then they probably would have survived without leaving the planet. There have been volcanically induced "summerless" years in the past, and humanity survived.

176 posted on 01/26/2012 10:58:13 AM PST by from occupied ga (your own government is your most dangerous enemy)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 167 | View Replies]

To: jpsb
the concept of precedent is applicable to the judiciary, not to executive/legislative expenditures of taxpayer money.
177 posted on 01/26/2012 11:00:11 AM PST by JustSayNoToNannies (A free society's default policy: it's none of government's business.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 173 | View Replies]

To: TEXOKIE

“The Ansari X Prize was a space competition in which the X Prize Foundation offered a US$10,000,000 prize for the first non-government organization to launch a reusable manned spacecraft into space twice within two weeks. It was modeled after early 20th-century aviation prizes, and aimed to spur development of low-cost spaceflight.

Created in May 1996 and initially called just the “X Prize”, it was renamed the “Ansari X Prize” on May 6, 2004 following a multi-million dollar donation from entrepreneurs Anousheh Ansari and Amir Ansari.

The prize was won on October 4, 2004, the 47th anniversary of the Sputnik 1 launch, by the Tier One project designed by Burt Rutan and financed by Microsoft co-founder Paul Allen, using the experimental spaceplane SpaceShipOne. $10 million was awarded to the winner, but more than $100 million was invested in new technologies in pursuit of the prize.

Several other X Prizes have since been announced by the X Prize Foundation, promoting further development in space exploration and other technological fields.”

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ansari_X_Prize

IIRC, the X-Prize Foundation bought an insurance policy from Lloyds against the prize being won. The premium was $1 million, the payout was $10 million. I doubt that Lloyds would issue another policy like that!

See also:

http://www.stratolaunch.com/


178 posted on 01/26/2012 11:00:20 AM PST by BwanaNdege (Man has often lost his way, but modern man has lost his address - Gilbert K. Chesterton)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 22 | View Replies]

To: newgeezer
A moon base? What a colossal waste of taxpayer money. And, Mars? Seriously? When it comes to big government spending, some so-called “conservatives” wet their pants with glee whenever anyone suggests throwing taxpayer dollars into space, especially manned space exploration. There’s no valid reason for it.

100% agreement from me. What I don't get is how someone can think they're a conservative when they call for the government to tax and spend on their pet project. They're no different in action than the black democrats calling for "reparations for slavery." They both fervently believe that their pet project is worth robbing their fellow citizens to support. A true conservative believes that the role of government is to defend freedom, not transfer wealth.

179 posted on 01/26/2012 11:04:00 AM PST by from occupied ga (your own government is your most dangerous enemy)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 171 | View Replies]

To: Romulus

Mars isn’t 0 G, it has gravity at 38% of Earth’s, in fact. We don’t know one way or another how humans handle partial gravity.


180 posted on 01/26/2012 11:08:40 AM PST by RockinRight (If you're waiting to drink until you find pure water, you're going to die of dehydration.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 23 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 141-160161-180181-200 ... 221-226 next last

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson