Bush to announce new missions to moon

Brian Thorn ) wrote:
: On Tue, 20 Jan 2004 20:11:03 +0000 (UTC),
: (Eric Chomko) wrote:

: As it continues to this day. Not only does Houston build a new stadium
: (formerly Enron Field) for baseball, it aquires a new football team
: (Houston Texans)

: The most boring name in professional sports, in my opinion.

Not the point. The point is that Houston gets what it wants because it
buys it. And that would include permits.

: in short order after the Oilers moved to Tennessee. Now,
: Houston is sponsoring the Super Bowl and Washington DC can't even get a
: baseball team after 30 years!

: Oh, quit whining. It isn't like the nearest MLB team is 400 miles
: away, as it was for Floridians prior to 1992. :-)

Whining? No, telling it like it is. And the Floridians have Spring
Training every year and that should be enough for them.

Eric

: Brian

Jorge R. Frank ) wrote:
: (Eric Chomko) wrote in
: :

: Jorge R. Frank ) wrote:
: : (Eric Chomko) wrote in
: : :
:
: : Jorge R. Frank ) wrote:
: :
: : : We've
: : : been going round and round with this and all you have is Clinton's
: : : half- baked shuttle replacement (X-33), his turning the space
: : : station program into foreign aid (ISS),
: :
: : Christ, do you see working with the Russians in space as a
: : liability?
:
: : No, the additional redundancy provided by the Russians has made the
: : station more survivable. But that has nothing to do with the reasons
: : why Clinton brought them in (ISS cost reduction, foreign aid to
: : Russia, provide an incentive for Russia not to sell nuclear tech to
: : Iran), all of which failed.
:
: Better to have them with us in space rather than at odds in a cold
: war, no?

: Those aren't the only two choices.

What other choices?

Eric


: --
: JRF

: Reply-to address spam-proofed - to reply by E-mail,
: check "Organization" (I am not assimilated) and
: think one step ahead of IBM.

"Eric Chomko" wrote in message
...
He's not self made like Clinton.

How many private sector jobs has former President Clinton had prior to
becoming President?

I guess asbestos being carcinogenic is a liberal building code
restriction, right?

It's also irrelevant to the discussion. After all, at the time asbestos was
installed, it was chosen *because* it was considered safer than the
alternates- and its use was also mandated in building codes.

: "Rich" and "riff-raff" are relative terms in this case. For example, in
: Florida now a window must be able to withstand being hit by a 2x4
travelling
: at 34 miles per hour. This has added at least $1000 to the average home,

Do you think hurricanes and insurance companies had anything to do with
it?

Hurricane force is greater than 34 miles per hour. Why was that number
chosen, and who chose it? If safety was the issue, why not demand that the
window be able to withstand more than 34 miles per hour, and mandate that
this be done retroactively? Why is it assumed that the public is too stupid
to be able to made decisions on their own? If a person want to live in a
tar-paper shack, why shouldn't they be permitted to do so?

I thought all those Cubans in Miami were conservative Republicans?

Why is the ethnic background of the people of Miami relevant to the
discussion?

Now,
are you claiming that they importing some of Castro's boys to do the work
down there?

Please provide a verifiable reference to the specific post where I said
that. A quote will not be sufficient. I've said nothing whatsoever about the
race, education, religion, or nationality of any of the workers. This is
clearly a red herring on your part. The race card is often played by the
party who has no facts to back their claims.

Agreed. But the fallacy here is to equate personal responsibility with
necessarily being conservative Republican

Yes, it *is* a fallacy, and it's one you are making. *I* haven't said
anything to that effect.

as I demonstrated

So far, you haven't *demonstrated* anything. You've *claimed* many things
but have not provided any verifiable references.

So at best what you have is a case where liberal judges came in and
allowed lousy conservative workers a way to get away with shoddy work.

Where were judges involved at all? I've said nothing at all about any
judicial process, at least where the change in building codes are involved.
Your personal agenda seems to be making you see things that aren't there.
For one thing, you are assuming that I am a Republican, whereas past posts
have made it very clear that not only am I not a member of any political
party, I would prefer to completely eliminate political parties.

: There's nothing unique about this process- after all, it's not really
: different that what happened with Challenger.

The descision to launch in below freezing temps meant nothing?

Note how once again you change the subject- I am clearly referring to a
decision *process* and you try to bring up a specific decision without
showing how that decision is relevant to the discussion at hand. Another
sign of a troll.

So, what you are saying is that Bush's interest rate cut

*I* have said *nothing whatsoever* about any interest rate cuts- and, of
course, once again you fail to explain what Bush has to do with it. So far
as housing is concerned, *private lenders* set their rates. Typically they
use the Federal Reserve Prime Rate as a *guide*, though not always, and the
Prime Rate is set by the Federal Reserve Board- note that Alan Greenspan is
*not* a Dubya appointee.

helped existing
homeowners and those that could afford homes that were renting, but was
useless to those that are homeless or that can not afford to buy? Is that
it?!

*Once again*, you change the subject.

: The use of converted shipping containers would help solve both the
: affordable housing problem *and* the buildup of empty shipping
containers.

Where were these shipping containers supposed to go?

Why, whereever the "affordible housing" is supposed to go, of course.

: It's a plausible, practical and fairly inexpensive solution to a real
: problem, but it won't happen because it isn't politically correct.

What is politically incorrect about it?

Why, living in a converted shipping crate offends the dignity of the
homeless.

: More
: homeless and more creative ways for them to make their own homes?

Why doesn't some enterprising person buy them cheap and simply use them
for temp structures?

*Because it violates the building codes*. Pay attention!

: Which says nothing whatsoever about the substantial costs incurred as a
: direct result of depending on this "partner".

I understand that they were late with the hab portion of ISS, but it is
there now, right?

*Because they were late*, expenses went up on the rest of the construction.
You can't just stick stuff in a warehouse for free until the station is
ready for it. It has to be maintained, and the useful life of the parts
starts when it's made, not when it's installed. There are other costs
involved as well when the whole schedule is slipped because a partner didn't
deliver on time.

As I have said before, what makes you think 9-11 would have even happened
under a Gore presidency?

For one thing, *EVIDENCE* shows that the Somalis had access to Osama bin
Ladin and *offered* Clinton the chance to nab him. bin Laden was already
known to be a terrorist. Clinton declined. There is no evidence whatsoever
to believe that things would have been different under Gore.

But
it DID happen under W. Personal responsibility is a real bitch sometimes.

"I did not have sex with that woman."
"It depends on the definition of 'is'."

Just ask JFK. Oops, quite dead, right wing coup and all

For which you have still failed to provide any evidence. You have also
failed to show how it's even relevant to the discussion at hand- another
troll tactic.

: Remember this- the *Democrats* haven't ever done anything for you.

I never claimed that they did.

Then why support them?

But what the Repubilcans are doing now I
think we can do without.

The Republicans have also never done anything to you.

"Eric Chomko" wrote in message
...
Scott Hedrick ) wrote:

: "Eric Chomko" wrote in message
: ...
: Better to have them with us in space rather than at odds in a cold
war,
: no?

: Better to have them not involved with us in space at all than to become
: dependent on them for critical path elements that they can't deliver.

Well as stated before, RIGHT NOW they are the only ones that can get us to
and from ISS.

Gee- if we hadn't ****ed away so much money supporting our "partners"
because Clinton insisted on it, we might have been able to spend more money
on shuttle maintenance. After all *Clinton* produced 8 budgets, why didn't
he provide more money?

: Make "them" = US and "us" = Europe and it still holds.

I don't follow you here...

The Europeans have gotten hosed by the US because of US unilaterally
changing the deal. The deal with the Russians also had to be repeatedly
changed because the Russians couldn't deliver according to the agreement.
Partnerships suck.

Right, so he spent more than half the time talking about terrorism.

Since terrorism is, right now *far more important* to the nation than space
exploration, rightfully so.

Time
to scare the old folks into voting for him.

As opposed to buying them with Social Security benefits- created by a
Democrat. Or Medicare or Medicaid- created by a Democrat.

Sure it is a Republican issue. The government is suppose to do more with
less money.

Why is *that*, specifically, a Republican issue? Especially considering the
tremendous increase in government spending as a direct result of Democratic
policies, as described above?

And that is fine as long as economy does well given a tax cut.

The evidence shows that it has improved considerably since the tax cuts
began under Bush.

What that does is put a burden on each state. THEY will have to raise
taxes.

Just like the Democrats did when they created Social Security, Medicare and
Medicaid.

"Eric Chomko" wrote in message
...
Scott Hedrick ) wrote:

: "Eric Chomko" wrote in message
: ...
: Ford was on the Warren Commission and swears by the outcome. uh-huh...

: Unless and until *you personally* are able to provide real evidence to
the
: contrary, then there's no reason not to accept it. Anecdotes and "what
ifs"
: do not constitute evidence.

The evidence is in the Warren Commission Hearings. Much of what is there
points to a conspiracy.

Then you shouldn't have a problem providing specific references.

I guess you applaud Dean going on Letterman and creating his top 5 list,
then?

It was a top 10 list, and frankly, yes, it *did* boost him in my opinion.
His listing New Mexico during his rant boosted him with me as well. I didn't
have a problem with his excitement, it just seemed misplaced concerning his
standing in Iowa. Ain't nuttin' wrong with havin' a little fun. The
late-show crap will calm down soon enough.

Scott Hedrick wrote:

"Eric Chomko" wrote in message
...

: Better to have them with us in space rather than at odds in a cold
: war, no?

: Those aren't the only two choices.

What other choices?


Both parties in space doing their own things without a cold war, of course,
which is what we had from 1991 until Clinton made a deal (which, except for
the alterations requiring Russian participation in ISS, was mostly a good
thing). Note that I am not saying having Russian cooperation on ISS is bad-
*requiring it* and *depending on it* are bad. Depending on it cost money and
time.


Not as much a delay and expense as relying on the Shuttle though.
Neither side met it's technical requirements.

"Eric Chomko" wrote in message
...
: Better to have them with us in space rather than at odds in a cold
: war, no?

: Those aren't the only two choices.

What other choices?

Both parties in space doing their own things without a cold war, of course,
which is what we had from 1991 until Clinton made a deal (which, except for
the alterations requiring Russian participation in ISS, was mostly a good
thing). Note that I am not saying having Russian cooperation on ISS is bad-
*requiring it* and *depending on it* are bad. Depending on it cost money and
time.

(Eric Chomko) wrote in
:

Jorge R. Frank ) wrote:
: (Eric Chomko) wrote in
: :

: Jorge R. Frank ) wrote:
: : (Eric Chomko) wrote in
: : :
:
: : Jorge R. Frank ) wrote:
: :
: : : We've
: : : been going round and round with this and all you have is Clinton's
: : : half- baked shuttle replacement (X-33), his turning the space
: : : station program into foreign aid (ISS),
: :
: : Christ, do you see working with the Russians in space as a
: : liability?
:
: : No, the additional redundancy provided by the Russians has made the
: : station more survivable. But that has nothing to do with the reasons
: : why Clinton brought them in (ISS cost reduction, foreign aid to
: : Russia, provide an incentive for Russia not to sell nuclear tech to
: : Iran), all of which failed.
:
: Better to have them with us in space rather than at odds in a cold
: war, no?

: Those aren't the only two choices.

What other choices?

There is a whole continuum of choices between "joined at the hip" and "cold
war". The inability to see that is a sign of a simple binary mind.

--
JRF

Reply-to address spam-proofed - to reply by E-mail,
check "Organization" (I am not assimilated) and
think one step ahead of IBM.

"Charles Buckley" wrote in message
...
Not as much a delay and expense as relying on the Shuttle though.
Neither side met it's technical requirements.

Word to NASA: now that you have decades of experience in both budgeting and
executing projects, *make realistic budgets, even if it means being told
no*.

Word to Congress: if you are given a realistic budget (realistic defined as
enough to do the project, not an imaginary fairy tail designed to get the
project passed) and you approve the project, pony up the money in one year
and *leave it the hell alone*. When the budget has been approved, for better
or for worse, DO NOT fiddle with it! No forced redesigning because of budget
cuts, but no more money either.

On or about Fri, 23 Jan 2004 19:51:33 +0000 (UTC), Eric Chomko
made the sensational claim that:
Whining? No, telling it like it is. And the Floridians have Spring
Training every year and that should be enough for them.

On behalf of Florida, BITE ME.
--
This is a siggy | To E-mail, do note | Just because something
It's properly formatted | who you mean to reply-to | is possible, doesn't
No person, none, care | and it will reach me | mean it can happen