h (Rand Simberg) wrote in message . ..
Oh, cool. More "Bash NASA" drivel that really serves no purpose.

It serves no purpose to point out that there's a problem?

It is not constructive criticism, it is merely destructive.

All you've recently done is say how bad NASA is. And an biased view.

Biased? Yes. You pointed to the NASA problems on planetary
exploration, yet fail to mention that *everyone* and their dog has had
problems with their Mars probes. But you make it seem that NASA in
particular is having a problem there, when the oposite is generally
true.

If you continue blathering (and I meant that not against you, but the
article) you are going to marginilize your opinion and dilute what you
are trying to say.

Does NASA have problems? Hell, yes.

Is this the way to fix it? No, not really.

How about a solution, rather than bitch about the problem?

Go back and read my Fox columns for the past couple years...

I did not notice anything that attempted to be a rational discussion
on fixing NASA in there, but I was turned off by the rehtoric in very
short order and didn't finish the article.

And of importance, all you are doing is feeding to the public is that
NASA can't do anything correct, they are totally innefectual which is
actually *making* NASA more innefectual. NASA may have problems, but
that is not accurate to the level implied.

Journalism is a potent device for social change, used incuatiously (or
deliberately) it can cause as many problems as it creates solutions.

Arthur Hansen