Bush Wants Return to the Moon and Beyond

(foxnews)
WASHINGTON ? President Bush (search) wants to send Americans
back to the moon ? and may leave a permanent presence there ? in
a bold new vision for space exploration, administration officials
said yesterday.

The return to the moon would be for the purpose of technological
advancements in technology, including energy exploration and
testing a military rocket engine.

And a permanent presence likely will include robots and
communication satellites.

But beyond the nuts and bolts, Bush's call for a to return to
space would give Americans something new to hope for - amid a
period of permanent anxiety about terrorism. It would also help
move NASA beyond last February's space shuttle Columbia disaster.

Sources said the president may also give the go-ahead to pursue a
manned trip to Mars - a long range goal.

NASA Administrator Sean O'Keefe (search) told an advisory council
yesterday that 2004 will be a "seminal time" for the agency.

"There's an effort under way that will focus the administration's
view very prominently on options we can consider. We are looking
at some significant changes," O'Keefe said.

Bush could spell out his new plan for space travel on the
100-year anniversary of the Wright Brothers' first flight, Dec.
17, officials said.

The White House refused to comment on Bush's future plans for
NASA, saying the president hasn't yet made a decision about what
he'll announce.

But high-level meetings involving the White House and NASA have
been going on for months.

Sources says Vice President Dick Cheney recently went up to
Capitol Hill to meet with Rep. Sherwood Boehlert (R-N.Y.) and
other key congressmen to discuss space exploration. They
discussed resuming manned trips to the Moon, and even the idea of
establishing a permanent station on the Moon, sources said.

If the president does announce his new space vision on Dec. 17,
it would be 100 years after the Wright Brothers first set an
airplane in flight in Kitty Hawk, N.C., and it would be two days
before the 30th anniversary of the last manned lunar landing.

Two Texas Republican senators recently sent Bush a letter saying
America's space program has been floundering.

"We urge you to elevate the priority of the space program and
develop a bold and coherent national mission for NASA," wrote
Sens. Kay Bailey Hutchison and John Cornyn.

In article ,
BlackWater wrote:

(foxnews)
WASHINGTON ? President Bush (search) wants to send Americans
back to the moon ? and may leave a permanent presence there ? in
a bold new vision for space exploration, administration officials
said yesterday.

What administration officials said this, I wonder? Does it seem strange
to anyone else that so much of Bush's big announcement (if it really
does happen) has been leaked ahead of time? Rather takes the excitement
out of his speech, doesn't it?

The return to the moon would be for the purpose of technological
advancements in technology, including energy exploration and
testing a military rocket engine.

Well, these are at least the most sensible reasons for a government
lunar program that I've ever heard. Much better than mere exploration
or science.

And a permanent presence likely will include robots and
communication satellites.

That'd be good. Especially if those comsats can be used by commercial
missions too.

But beyond the nuts and bolts, Bush's call for a to return to
space would give Americans something new to hope for - amid a
period of permanent anxiety about terrorism. It would also help
move NASA beyond last February's space shuttle Columbia disaster.

But, of course, Bush's tenure is almost over (one hopes, anyway). It'd
be a bit premature to put much hope into this vision based on a speech,
wouldn't it?

Sources said the president may also give the go-ahead to pursue a
manned trip to Mars - a long range goal.

Translation: a pointless gesture (George Sr. did the same thing IIRC).

"There's an effort under way that will focus the administration's
view very prominently on options we can consider. We are looking
at some significant changes," O'Keefe said.

Significant changes would be good.

Bush could spell out his new plan for space travel on the
100-year anniversary of the Wright Brothers' first flight, Dec.
17, officials said.

The White House refused to comment on Bush's future plans for
NASA, saying the president hasn't yet made a decision about what
he'll announce.

Then who are these officials telling us all about what he's going to
say? I obviously don't watch enough "West Wing" -- can someone explain
why the administration is both giving away the speech and denying that
they'll say anything about the speech?

Sources says Vice President Dick Cheney recently went up to
Capitol Hill to meet with Rep. Sherwood Boehlert (R-N.Y.) and
other key congressmen to discuss space exploration. They
discussed resuming manned trips to the Moon, and even the idea of
establishing a permanent station on the Moon, sources said.

I wouldn't see the point of resuming manned trips to the Moon if we're
not going to establish at least a minimal base. (Yes, I know, lunar
geology, but that's just not worth the price tag.)

If the president does announce his new space vision on Dec. 17,
it would be 100 years after the Wright Brothers first set an
airplane in flight in Kitty Hawk, N.C., and it would be two days
before the 30th anniversary of the last manned lunar landing.

How many years would it be after George Sr.'s big announcements that
ultimately led to nothing but ISS?

Two Texas Republican senators recently sent Bush a letter saying
America's space program has been floundering.

....I'm trying to think of some more eloquent way to express "well, duh."

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

In article , Joe
Strout wrote:

Bush could spell out his new plan for space travel on the
100-year anniversary of the Wright Brothers' first flight, Dec.
17, officials said.

The White House refused to comment on Bush's future plans for
NASA, saying the president hasn't yet made a decision about what
he'll announce.

Then who are these officials telling us all about what he's going to
say? I obviously don't watch enough "West Wing" -- can someone explain
why the administration is both giving away the speech and denying that
they'll say anything about the speech?

Imagine, for a moment, that you are President Strout. Imagine, also,
that you stand to make a speech to the nation on a Historic Date; a
perfect springboard for floating something.

Except, um, you don't want to do it if people are going to say "jeez,
that Strout, head in the clouds, he's lost it - Simberg's getting *my*
vote come November".

So, you have someone mention it to the papers. The papers run comment
articles. There's a brief flurry of debate. If it seems to stink, you
put out Solid Denials, don't know *where* he got it from, bit of a
misunderstanding... and quietly make sure you propose a Grand Plan to
boost, uh, food-price supports for single mothers, or something.

One is an anonymous guy on the phone; one is the press office. Both the
administration, but saying different things...

If the president does announce his new space vision on Dec. 17,
it would be 100 years after the Wright Brothers first set an
airplane in flight in Kitty Hawk, N.C., and it would be two days
before the 30th anniversary of the last manned lunar landing.

How many years would it be after George Sr.'s big announcements that
ultimately led to nothing but ISS?

And, even then, did it lead to that? SSF was meandering along, and it
was under Clinton it became ISS...

Bush41 proposed a Grand Plan, which ultimately became nothing. How much
did it impact SSF-ISS? I confess I really don't know...

--
-Andrew Gray

On Thu, 04 Dec 2003 16:23:30 -0600, Joe Strout wrote:

How many years would it be after George Sr.'s big announcements that
ultimately led to nothing but ISS?

Bush 41's announcement had little to do with ISS. Space Station
Freedom was already five years into development when Bush announced
the Space Exploration Initiative on July 20, 1989 at the National Air
And Space Museum. NASA Administrator Truly sealed SEI's fate with a
"everything on NASA's wishlist" proposal an an outrageous pricetag
that made it dead on arrival at Capitol Hill.

Space Station Freedom was Reagan's baby. Clinton cancelled it and
resurrected it as ISS.

Brian

Does it seem strange
to anyone else that so much of Bush's big announcement (if it really
does happen) has been leaked ahead of time?

No, this is what's called a trial balloon.

Rather takes the excitement
out of his speech, doesn't it?

How do you know he's not also going to announce a 100 year interstellar mission
and a nuclear fusion initiative?

But, of course, Bush's tenure is almost over (one hopes, anyway).

What are the chances that a Demacrat will continue the program? Zero! The
Demacrats have done ziltch in space sine Apollo. Ted Kennedy seems rather
embarrassed at his brother's record. The Democratic Party has moved on to
something else and left his brother behind. ted Kennedy has gotten with the new
Democratic program, and to believe that his brother was once a cold warrior
with visions of America's expansion into space? Well that doesn't jive with
Ted's vision of a declining America. Ted would like to get the USA back on
track towards decline and decay if he can manage it. The Republicans just
aren't listening.

Tom

TKalbfus ) wrote:
: Does it seem strange
: to anyone else that so much of Bush's big announcement (if it really
: does happen) has been leaked ahead of time?

: No, this is what's called a trial balloon.

: Rather takes the excitement
: out of his speech, doesn't it?

: How do you know he's not also going to announce a 100 year interstellar mission
: and a nuclear fusion initiative?

Would that be the nucular or nuclear fusion? With Bush it is hard to tell.

: But, of course, Bush's tenure is almost over (one hopes, anyway).

: What are the chances that a Demacrat will continue the program? Zero! The

What program? Bush hasn't even made the speech that was supposed to be
leaked. How can he afford to do the things the leak claims he's to do? No
funds for it. Also, don't you kind it funny that the timing of all this
when it is? Could he be trying to get votes at the 100 year anniversary of
the Wright Bros flight? The timing smacks of politiking for votes to me.

If he's re-elected I'm sure any number of pressing issues will place all
this lofty return to the moon and manned Mars mission back on the back
burner yet again.

: Demacrats have done ziltch in space sine Apollo. Ted Kennedy seems rather
: embarrassed at his brother's record. The Democratic Party has moved on to
: something else and left his brother behind. ted Kennedy has gotten with the new
: Democratic program, and to believe that his brother was once a cold warrior
: with visions of America's expansion into space? Well that doesn't jive with
: Ted's vision of a declining America. Ted would like to get the USA back on
: track towards decline and decay if he can manage it. The Republicans just
: aren't listening.

There have been two shuttle disasters and both of them during the time a
Republican was in office. You want to talk about decline of NASA?

Eric

: Tom

"BlackWater" wrote in message
...
(foxnews)
WASHINGTON ? President Bush (search) wants to send Americans
back to the moon ? and may leave a permanent presence there ? in
a bold new vision for space exploration, administration officials
said yesterday.

If he/they can do it without touching NASA's current annual budget, bring it
on. If not, we have enough irons in the fire without looking for more.
---
Dave Boll
http://www.daveboll.com/

"BlackWater" wrote in message
...
(foxnews)
WASHINGTON ? President Bush (search) wants to send Americans
back to the moon ? and may leave a permanent presence there ? in
a bold new vision for space exploration, administration officials
said yesterday.

I have once again proven right!!

"BlackWater" wrote in message
...
(foxnews)
WASHINGTON ? President Bush (search) wants to send Americans
back to the moon ? and may leave a permanent presence there ? in
a bold new vision for space exploration, administration officials
said yesterday.

The return to the moon would be for the purpose of technological
advancements in technology, including energy exploration and
testing a military rocket engine.


How about this quote:

" They say China could use a space base to test new rockets or other
technology that may prove threatening to the United States at some later
date. "

Totally absurd IMHO. But as long as we're going back to the moon, who cares.

On Fri, 5 Dec 2003 10:30:26 +0100, "Dr. O" dr.o@xxxxx wrote:


"BlackWater" wrote in message
.. .
(foxnews)
WASHINGTON ? President Bush (search) wants to send Americans
back to the moon ? and may leave a permanent presence there ? in
a bold new vision for space exploration, administration officials
said yesterday.

The return to the moon would be for the purpose of technological
advancements in technology, including energy exploration and
testing a military rocket engine.


How about this quote:

" They say China could use a space base to test new rockets or other
technology that may prove threatening to the United States at some later
date. "

Totally absurd IMHO. But as long as we're going back to the moon, who cares.

Maybe their going to look for Hoaglands glass towers to stop China
finding them first, absurd maybe, but why take the risk of alien
secrets going to communist China. ;-)



Christopher
+++++++++++++++++++++++++
"Kites rise highest against
the wind - not with it."
Winston Churchill