The New NASA Mission Has Been Grossly Mischaracterized.

Joe Strout wrote:

In article ,
quibbler wrote:

No, that is quite the case. You're just in the early stages of denial
and haven't faced budget realities. The fact is that Bush has demanded a
wasteful realignment of NASA resources toward a manned mission which will
be ruinously expensive.

The realignment of NASA resources is the best thing to happen to NASA in
30 years. Not wasteful, but highly useful. Allowing NASA to drift
about with the lack of focus it's had for the last few decades, now THAT
would be wasteful.

If this document actually had focus... You'd have a point. But it
doesn't. It's a scattershot listing of all the space goals NASA and
the advocacy community have been salivating about for years, weakened
and fuzzed up to make a feel-good mission statement.

D.
--
The STS-107 Columbia Loss FAQ can be found
at the following URLs:

Text-Only Version:
http://www.io.com/~o_m/columbia_loss_faq.html

Enhanced HTML Version:
http://www.io.com/~o_m/columbia_loss_faq_x.html

Corrections, comments, and additions should be
e-mailed to , as well as posted to
sci.space.history and sci.space.shuttle for
discussion.