There now, I know that feels better since your true agenda is out there. And I would not insult you about that agenda, disagree maybe, but as I stated, there are two camps on the matter. Sorry you don't think they can coexist.
I also wouldn't argue with you about the Clinton/Glenn payoff ride.
But your earlier comment remains inaccurate and inappropriate. You certainly can't say Dan Golden favored the manned program over unmanned. He complained about it immensely, and he was never an astronaut either.
I want what is done to matter...bring me home some bacon instead of dreams
And better meds, advances in metallurgy, or other sciences don't matter? The development of better fuel cells, solar cell and battery technology, navigation aids, electronics in general, and the jobs and industries that develop out of those don't matter? Just what 'bacon' would make you happy?
I'll repeat it, just in case. Never intended to be cryptic, sorry about that.
Rides were the aim of Nasa because test pilots and their adoring handlers set the agenda. Listen to every astronaut talk about exploration and he only wants to tell you of his dreams of flying. Enough, already. These dreams are not the problem of the taxpayer.
Bacon... for starters, enough of this perennial angst. Three times is plenty. Now the whole program will slow as we investigate all the reasons why it happened, when we could have been sending lots of useful unmanned failures into space.
It's time not to worry about building a better spacecraft. The Russians have decided that question for us.
Let's build a better astronaut.