Candidates on Space

The following from:

"http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/news/archive/2004/02/26/politics1352EST0651.DTL"

"The Associated Press chooses an issue three times a week and asks the
presidential candidates a question about it.

SPACE: Do you support the plan to return astronauts to the moon by
2020 in preparation for manned missions to Mars?

Democrats:

Sen. John Edwards: "I am a strong supporter of our space program. It
reflects the best of the American spirit of optimism, discovery and
progress. A manned mission to Mars is in the American tradition of
setting ambitious goals for exploring space, but we must be able to
pay for the program."

Sen. John Kerry: "Our civilian space program represents a great
opportunity for scientific research. Sending a person to Mars is a
great mission worthy of a great nation like America. Given the Bush
budget deficit, it is imperative that we balance funding for a manned
mission to Mars against critical domestic needs as well, such as
education and health care."

Rep. Dennis Kucinich: "An International Space Station in Earth orbit
is a far more practical launch platform than a base on the moon. So,
if we as a nation decide to send manned missions to Mars, I would not
support construction of a lunar base. In regard to space exploration,
we are faced with an unprecedented national deficit and a war without
end, both of which will force this nation to abandon many hopes,
dreams and aspirations, including space exploration, if allowed to
continue."

Al Sharpton: No response.

Republican:

President Bush: No response."

- Ed Kyle

In article ,
(ed kyle) wrote:

Sen. John Edwards: "I am a strong supporter of our space program. It
reflects the best of the American spirit of optimism, discovery and
progress. A manned mission to Mars is in the American tradition of
setting ambitious goals for exploring space, but we must be able to
pay for the program."

Sen. John Kerry: "Our civilian space program represents a great
opportunity for scientific research. Sending a person to Mars is a
great mission worthy of a great nation like America. Given the Bush
budget deficit, it is imperative that we balance funding for a manned
mission to Mars against critical domestic needs as well, such as
education and health care."

I find this encouraging. It seems that both Edwards & Kerry are
supportive of the lunar base idea (though I'm not crazy about Kerry's
casting it as a scientific research program). Of course they have to
mention balancing the budgets etc., but these guys are not idiots --
they can do the math and understand that scrapping NASA entirely
wouldn't make much difference to the national budget. I think those
ending sound bites are just to placate the more liberal democrats who
think the space program is taking food out of orphaned children's mouths
or whatnot.

From my reading of the tea leaves, the most likely ticket is Kerry with
Edwards as VP, so it's the opinion of these two that will shape the
administration. Glad to see they're pretty much in agreement.
(Kucinich sounds much more negative, but fortunately I don't think he
matters.)

I'll be voting against Bush regardless, but I'll feel much happier about
it if the person I'm voting for seems likely to provide continued
support for the new space initiative.

,------------------------------------------------------------------.
| Joseph J. Strout Check out the Mac Web Directory: |
| http://www.macwebdir.com |
`------------------------------------------------------------------'

Joe Strout wrote:
In article ,
(ed kyle) wrote:

Sen. John Edwards: "I am a strong supporter of our space program. It
reflects the best of the American spirit of optimism, discovery and
progress. A manned mission to Mars is in the American tradition of
setting ambitious goals for exploring space, but we must be able to
pay for the program."

Sen. John Kerry: "Our civilian space program represents a great
opportunity for scientific research. Sending a person to Mars is a
great mission worthy of a great nation like America. Given the Bush
budget deficit, it is imperative that we balance funding for a manned
mission to Mars against critical domestic needs as well, such as
education and health care."

I find this encouraging. It seems that both Edwards & Kerry are
supportive of the lunar base idea (though I'm not crazy about Kerry's
casting it as a scientific research program). Of course they have to

Who is casting it otherwise?


,------------------------------------------------------------------.
| Joseph J. Strout Check out the Mac Web Directory: |
| http://www.macwebdir.com |
`------------------------------------------------------------------'

--
Sander

+++ Out of cheese error +++

"Joe Strout" wrote in message
...
In article ,
(ed kyle) wrote:

Sen. John Edwards: "I am a strong supporter of our space program. It
reflects the best of the American spirit of optimism, discovery and
progress. A manned mission to Mars is in the American tradition of
setting ambitious goals for exploring space, but we must be able to
pay for the program."

Sen. John Kerry: "Our civilian space program represents a great
opportunity for scientific research. Sending a person to Mars is a
great mission worthy of a great nation like America. Given the Bush
budget deficit, it is imperative that we balance funding for a manned
mission to Mars against critical domestic needs as well, such as
education and health care."

I find this encouraging. It seems that both Edwards & Kerry are
supportive of the lunar base idea (though I'm not crazy about Kerry's
casting it as a scientific research program). Of course they have to
mention balancing the budgets etc., but these guys are not idiots --
they can do the math and understand that scrapping NASA entirely
wouldn't make much difference to the national budget. I think those
ending sound bites are just to placate the more liberal democrats who
think the space program is taking food out of orphaned children's mouths
or whatnot.

From my reading of the tea leaves, the most likely ticket is Kerry with
Edwards as VP, so it's the opinion of these two that will shape the
administration. Glad to see they're pretty much in agreement.
(Kucinich sounds much more negative, but fortunately I don't think he
matters.)

I'll be voting against Bush regardless, but I'll feel much happier about
it if the person I'm voting for seems likely to provide continued
support for the new space initiative.

,------------------------------------------------------------------.
| Joseph J. Strout Check out the Mac Web Directory: |
| http://www.macwebdir.com |
`------------------------------------------------------------------'

Joe, I'm not sure that a sound reading of this suggests that at all. Looks
like Kerry is going to scrap the space program in favor of social programs
in the typical liberal fashion.

On Fri, 27 Feb 2004 08:30:39 -0600, in a place far, far away, Joe
Strout made the phosphor on my monitor glow in such a
way as to indicate that:

In article ,
(ed kyle) wrote:

Sen. John Edwards: "I am a strong supporter of our space program. It
reflects the best of the American spirit of optimism, discovery and
progress. A manned mission to Mars is in the American tradition of
setting ambitious goals for exploring space, but we must be able to
pay for the program."

Sen. John Kerry: "Our civilian space program represents a great
opportunity for scientific research. Sending a person to Mars is a
great mission worthy of a great nation like America. Given the Bush
budget deficit, it is imperative that we balance funding for a manned
mission to Mars against critical domestic needs as well, such as
education and health care."

I find this encouraging.

Only because you don't recognize weaseling. Neither of them are
taking a position.

h (Rand Simberg) wrote in message . ..

Sen. John Kerry: "Our civilian space program represents a great
opportunity for scientific research. Sending a person to Mars is a
great mission worthy of a great nation like America. Given the Bush
budget deficit, it is imperative that we balance funding for a manned
mission to Mars against critical domestic needs as well, such as
education and health care."

I find this encouraging.

Only because you don't recognize weaseling. Neither of them are
taking a position.

True enough, because Kerry is also quoted to have said, just a
few weeks ago:

"What we need to do as we enter this dawn of the 21st century, is not talk
about going to the Moon or even to Mars. We need to go to the Moon right
here on Earth by creating the jobs, building the high value-added jobs of
the future, making clear that no young American in uniform ever ought to be
held hostage to America's dependence on oil in the Middle East ..."

Hard to pin these guys down, isn't it?

- Ed Kyle

In article ,
ed kyle wrote:
Hard to pin these guys down, isn't it?

Bear in mind that *any* statement about space from "these guys" -- and I
include one G. Bush in that collective noun -- right now means little.
Space is too minor an issue for most voters to get upset about a reversal
in space policy after the election... which means that any statement made
now will be optimized for attracting votes, and doesn't necessarily bear
any relation to what the candidate would do after being elected.

Some hint as to a candidate's feelings might be had by looking at their
*earlier* record of statements and votes on the subject. Even that is an
uncertain guide at best, though, because space is a relatively minor issue
where other considerations might override the President's personal views.
--
MOST launched 30 June; science observations running | Henry Spencer
since Oct; first surprises seen; papers pending. |

On Fri, 27 Feb 2004 08:30:39 -0600, Joe Strout wrote:

I find this encouraging ....

Good for you.

..... they can do the math and understand that scrapping NASA entirely
wouldn't make much difference to the national budget ....

When did facts and logic have anything to do with politics? Did the
veterans' groups and housing associations who lobbied so hard to kill
Space Station Freedom 12 years ago think it wouldn't make much
difference to the budget?

If a hypothetical Kerry administration supports Moon/Mars, more power
to them. But right now I don't have any reason to believe he would
any more than the last Democrat in the White House did, especially
that in public statements after Bush's announcement, Kerry joined the
Legion of the Unsupportive. If he were to change his views in office,
great, but I'll believe it when I see it.





----== Posted via Newsfeed.Com - Unlimited-Uncensored-Secure Usenet News==----
http://www.newsfeed.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! 100,000 Newsgroups
---= 19 East/West-Coast Specialized Servers - Total Privacy via Encryption =---

Michael Gallagher wrote:

On Fri, 27 Feb 2004 08:30:39 -0600, Joe Strout wrote:


I find this encouraging ....


Good for you.


..... they can do the math and understand that scrapping NASA entirely
wouldn't make much difference to the national budget ....


When did facts and logic have anything to do with politics? Did the
veterans' groups and housing associations who lobbied so hard to kill
Space Station Freedom 12 years ago think it wouldn't make much
difference to the budget?


It made a difference to their budget. Money released from NASA
would roll over to them.

If a hypothetical Kerry administration supports Moon/Mars, more power
to them. But right now I don't have any reason to believe he would
any more than the last Democrat in the White House did, especially
that in public statements after Bush's announcement, Kerry joined the
Legion of the Unsupportive. If he were to change his views in office,
great, but I'll believe it when I see it.



I don't really seeing any President "supporting" a lunar base
in any meaningful sense. You're looking at 2012 before it even
gets into major money and it's entirely dependant on someone addressing
the deficit before then and that looks to be a lot less likely than
anything else happening in the world. Even Bush put no real money
into his plan. He just rearranged current funding by gutting some
programs, and settled on a drop-dead date for Shuttle and any problems
related to gaps in manned spaceflight coverage is his successor's
problem.

In article ,
Michael Gallagher wrote:
...But right now I don't have any reason to believe he would
any more than the last Democrat in the White House did, especially
that in public statements after Bush's announcement, Kerry joined the
Legion of the Unsupportive.

As did Bush, please note -- unless I've missed something, he hasn't said a
word about it since. It's been suggested that he was hoping for a
stronger and more positive public response, and when he didn't get it, the
issue went very much on the back burner... which bodes ill for political
support of exploration if he *is* re-elected.
--
MOST launched 30 June; science observations running | Henry Spencer
since Oct; first surprises seen; papers pending. |