Posted on 01/29/2012 9:05:14 AM PST by Rummyfan
Had I been asked to deliver the State of the Union address, it would not have delayed your dinner plans:
"The State of our Union is broke, heading for bankrupt, and total collapse shortly thereafter. Thank you and goodnight! You've been a terrific crowd!"
I gather that Americans prefer something a little more upbeat, so one would not begrudge a speechwriter fluffing it up by holding out at least the possibility of some change of fortune, however remote. Instead, President Obama assured us at great length that nothing is going to change, not now, not never. Indeed the Union's state – its unprecedented world-record brokeness – was not even mentioned.
(Excerpt) Read more at ocregister.com ...
I don’t like the idea of spending billions on a moon base, but in this case it very really may be an important national security issue. China has already made it quite clear they plan to send a man to the moon in the next few years and establish a base on the moon. What happens if the Chinese set up a base, say “sorry folks, we are withdrawing from all those silly space treaties and by the way the entire moon is now Chinese territory.” What could we do about it? Very little it would seem... China would control the ultimate “high ground”.
Newt didn’t say he had “booked it”. He said he wanted to set that as a goal. Take the same family situation. The father sits at the table and says there’s going to be no way the family can get out of the situation they are in as opposed to the father who sits down and begins to make plans and goals with the understanding that things are going to be turned around to the point that goals are reachable.
I would much rather have a leader that has goals that we should strive for. Getting our house in order should be a given when goals are set. Everyone who has ever set goals understands that background support needs to be accomplished first. Anyone who does not have forward thinking plans should not be our leader.
Mitt has none of those goals in fact from what he said in the debate he would have fired Kennedy and we would never have had a space program which gave us multiple products from the research and made the US a proud and successful nation.
America, grounded forever because of welfare mommas.
The last para presents the true bottom line:
“There are times for dreaming big dreams, and there are times to wake up. This country will not be going to the moon, any more than will be the British or French. Because, in decline, the horizons shrivel. The only thing that’s going to be on the moon is the debt ceiling. Before we can make any more giant leaps for mankind, we have to make one small, dull, prosaic, earthbound step here at home – and stop. Stop the massive expansion of microregulatory government, and then reverse it. Obama has vowed to press on. If Romney and Gingrich can’t get serious about it, he’ll get his way.”
This is pro-reality, not anti-Gingrich.
So what Mark Steyn is saying is that the US is irreversible decline, that our best days are behind us, and we should just get used to it. Who’s his candidate again?
So, we’re going to have to just get used to knowing the moon is Chinese territory while we gut our space program.
Gingrich’s plan is to end NASA’s monopoly on space exploration, which is about time, since the Chinese are going to end it irreversibly.
A vibrant country with its best days in the future wouldn`t let 10 + years pass without already having the new “Freedom Tower” completed and functioning over Ground Zero.
A country with a bright future doesn`t surrender large chunks of its southwest territory to illegals and cartels.
A country hopeful about its future doesn`t succumb to the job-killing socialist idea of taxing the rich yet even more.
A country that has a bright future doesn`t allow its culture to be usurped by perverted, anti-traditional “new thinking progressivism” to replace cultural mores and values.
Newt is a futurist and a moon base is a good goal. It is a good thing to have positive, active goals, rather than being completely focused on fighting defense. All my life I’ve heard that the money spent on Nasa would be better spent on “lifting the people up from poverty”. The ~40% of the federal budget spent on social programs is just creating more dependence. Nasa is a very small percentage of the Federal Budget, less than 1% and they have accomplished a lot. There are ways to make a moon base pay such as offering private companies access and defending private property rights on the moon. We are going to crash into a fiscal wall soon, that is true, but it won’t be the end of the world. People will have to learn to live without welfare state. However, unless we plan as a nation on curling up into a ball and whimpering to death, we should be looking to the future.
Another brilliant article by Mark Steyn. It is 99% about Obama and his idiocy, so read it even though there is a teensy bite re Newt and the moon. We must defeat Obama or perish.
Steyn for one is from Canada. The American pioneering spirit he may not be familiar with.
So do you propose we try to change that or just adjust it.
So do you propose we try to change that or just accept it be resigned to our decline.
What a sad and weak people Americans have degenerated into to be against a vision of pioneering space.
Maybe they’ll wake up when there’s a Chinese Communist Party logo emblazoned across the lunar surface.
So what Mark Steyn is saying is that the US is irreversible decline, that our best days are behind us, and we should just get used to it.
A vibrant country with its best days in the future wouldn`t let 10 + years pass without already having the new “Freedom Tower” completed and functioning over Ground Zero.
btrl
Sounds like he’s channeling Carter from 1980.
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.