Bush to announce new missions to moon

On 19 Jan 2004 03:14:48 GMT, in a place far, far away, "Jorge R.
Frank" made the phosphor on my monitor glow in
such a way as to indicate that:


I give Carter credit for allowing the shuttle to go forward, which it
did.

Whoop-te-do.

I wonder if Eric also gives Carter credit for trimming the fleet size
from seven to four...

No, I'll leave the oversimplifications to you. If subtlety is too much for
you,

It invariably is. Even blunt facts generally just bounce off.

"Pat Flannery" wrote in message
...


Neil Gerace wrote:

There will be no progress towards _The Cure_ if he keeps listening to
_Madness_ and _UK Squeeze_ either.


True; for him....or the other 10,000 Maniacs.


I think the problem is he's been getting The Big Chill while sleeping and
this has affected his REM.


Pat

On Thu, 22 Jan 2004 17:04:08 +0000 (UTC), in a place far, far away,
(Eric Chomko) made the phosphor on my monitor
glow in such a way as to indicate that:


: 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?

The Cold War was already over when that decision was made--it had no
effect on that.

: : and Carter *not* cancelling a Republican space
: : initiative (STS) when he had the chance. That's pretty pathetic, if
: : you ask me. On the other hand, I can certainly understand why you'd
: : *want* to change the subject... :-)
:
: Did W mention his space plan last night in the SOU at all?!?!

: No, but he had introduced it in a standalone speech only six days before,
: and gave the topic a lot more time in that speech than he possibly could
: have given it at the SOU. Since NASA hasn't fleshed out any details of the
: program beyond what was given in the first speech, any mention in the SOU
: would have been superfluous.

Would it now? I kind of think his lack of mentioning space makes the
speech six days earlier more the suspect.

Yes, but then you kind of "think" (to be generous with the word) that
everything he does is "suspect." No rational person would think so.

On Fri, 23 Jan 2004 16:45:30 -0500, in a place far, far away, "Scott
Hedrick" made the phosphor on my monitor glow in
such a way as to indicate that:

: "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.

75.

Rand Simberg wrote:

On Thu, 22 Jan 2004 17:04:08 +0000 (UTC), in a place far, far away,
(Eric Chomko) made the phosphor on my monitor
glow in such a way as to indicate that:



: 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?


The Cold War was already over when that decision was made--it had no
effect on that.



Bush is the one who originally brought the Russians in as
subcontractors. Clinton elevated their status to partner status. But,
there was a significant involvement prior to Clinton. IIRC, the
rationale was they did not want Russia to be too tempted by helping
other countries develop ballistic missile capabilities.

On Sat, 24 Jan 2004 05:48:22 +0000 (UTC), in a place far, far away,
(Eric Chomko) made the phosphor on my monitor
glow in such a way as to indicate that:

: 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?

Well, the shuttle didn't fall apart while he was president.

Eric, do you really believe that presidents have any influence over
whether or not launch accidents occur? Do you believe that he makes
the rain fall and the crops grow too?

"Rand Simberg" wrote in message
...
On Fri, 23 Jan 2004 16:45:30 -0500, in a place far, far away, "Scott
Hedrick" made the phosphor on my monitor glow in
such a way as to indicate that:

: "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.

75.

34 is probably the velocity the 2x4 reaches in a given distance in a 75+
mile
per hour wind.

"Rand Simberg" wrote in message
...
On Fri, 23 Jan 2004 16:45:30 -0500, in a place far, far away, "Scott
Hedrick" made the phosphor on my monitor glow in
such a way as to indicate that:

: "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.

75.

Which is, as I said, greater than 34 miles per hour. If the idea was for
protection from hurricanes, it makes no sense not to demand windows that
could handle a 2x4 at 75 miles per hour. Why 34? Why not 33 or 35? What
tests were done to justify 34? The current Florida building code went from a
trade paperback to 5 3 ring binders at least 2" thick in the span of a few
years. There are even special rules for pouring concrete for farmer's
markets- but the rules aren't in the concrete rules, they are in the pest
management rules, and aren't cross-indexed. Am I supposed to feel safer now?
The small rulebook wasn't properly followed- why should I believe that a
bigger one will be? What was needed was *proper inspection*, *more
inspectors* and *craftsmen*.

Rand Simberg wrote:


Eric, do you really believe that presidents have any influence over
whether or not launch accidents occur? Do you believe that he makes
the rain fall and the crops grow too?


No, but a president can make the stock market fall and deficit
grow...I've seen 'em do that.

Pat

On Sat, 24 Jan 2004 20:24:59 -0600, in a place far, far away, Pat
Flannery made the phosphor on my monitor glow in
such a way as to indicate that:

Eric, do you really believe that presidents have any influence over
whether or not launch accidents occur? Do you believe that he makes
the rain fall and the crops grow too?


No, but a president can make the stock market fall and deficit
grow...I've seen 'em do that.

They need the help of Congress--they can't do it by themselves.