How will history view ...

rk wrote:

Ten or twenty years from now, how do you think history will view Sean O'Keefe
as NASA Administrator?



Who?

--
"The only thing that galls me about someone burning the American flag is how unoriginal it is. I mean if you're going to pull the Freedom-of-speech card, don't be a hack, come up with something interesting. Fashion Old Glory into a wisecracking puppet and blister the system with a scathing ventriloquism act, or better yet, drape the flag over your head and desecrate it with a large caliber bullet hole." Dennis Miller

On Sat, 03 Sep 2005 18:02:30 -0500, rk
wrote:

Ten or twenty years from now, how do you think history will view Sean O'Keefe
as NASA Administrator?

....Who?

OM

--

"Try Andre Dead Duck Canadian Champagne! | http://www.io.com/~o_m
Rated the lamest of the cheapest deported | Sergeant-At-Arms
brands by the Condemned in Killfile Hell!" | Human O-Ring Society

O'Keefe will always be remembered for the stout heart and steady hand
he displayed after the Columbia accident. His handling of the tragedy
will be remembered as his finest moment.
He made two major errors. One was not firing the responsible managers
after that accident. The other was canceling the Space Launch
Initiative, the broad launch technology development program. There is
no replacement for effort to develop the technology base for a variety
of more advanced vehicles, the biggest impediment to space exploration.


Matt Bille
ALL POSTS ARE SOLELY THE PERSONAL OPINION OF THE AUTHOR

On 4 Sep 2005 07:15:55 -0700, "Matt" wrote:

One was not firing the responsible managers after that accident.

....Which has one wondering: Had he outright fired Linda Ham, how loud
would the feminazis protested that she was being singled out for being
a woman?

The other was canceling the Space Launch
Initiative, the broad launch technology development program. There is
no replacement for effort to develop the technology base for a variety
of more advanced vehicles, the biggest impediment to space exploration.

....Keep in mind also that O'Keefe was brought in as a hatchet man.
This was what Dubya hired him for, which essentially means he did his
job in this regard.

OM

--

"Try Andre Dead Duck Canadian Champagne! | http://www.io.com/~o_m
Rated the lamest of the cheapest deported | Sergeant-At-Arms
brands by the Condemned in Killfile Hell!" | Human O-Ring Society

He will be remembered as a "yes" man, political appointee, to what should be
a non-partisan civilian agency.

"R.Glueck" wrote in message
...
He will be remembered as a "yes" man, political appointee, to what should
be
a non-partisan civilian agency.

Remember, Dan Goldin was appointed by a Republican, and left alone by a
Democrat.

That means either that:

1. Clinton had deep respect for the job Dan Goldin was doing, or

2. Clinton had so little respect for NASA that he would have been
embarrassed to have appointed anyone.

True enough, Scott, but the question was not about Dan Goldin.

"R.Glueck" wrote in message
...
True enough, Scott, but the question was not about Dan Goldin.

Yes, and you also said it was non-partisan, and Dan Goldin supports that
statement.

On Sun, 4 Sep 2005 17:33:15 -0400, "Scott Hedrick" wrote:

Remember, Dan Goldin was appointed by a Republican, and left alone by a
Democrat.

That means either that:

1. Clinton had deep respect for the job Dan Goldin was doing, or

2. Clinton had so little respect for NASA that he would have been
embarrassed to have appointed anyone.

Pretty shallow analysis. Perhaps he just thought Goldin was doing a
good enough job that he didn't need to be replaced. "Deep respect" for
Goldin or "so little respect" for NASA are unlikely extremes. Then again,
you seem to dwell in the world of unlikely extremes.

This was about O'Keefe, not Goldin, anyway...

Enjoy chopping this up to suit your purposes.

Dale

"Dale" wrote in message
...
Pretty shallow analysis.

I wouldn't expect any more from you as of late.