|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#1
|
|||
|
|||
President Ron Paul might let the Space Shuttle flying beyond 2010. :-)
Joseph Nebus wrote:
(Derek Lyons) writes: Craig Fink wrote: Private Enterprise, first thing I'd do after purchasing Enterprise on E-Bay would be to move the LOX, LH2 lines inside the Orbiter. And when (are where) will you get the billions to finish Enterprise (it's virtually a mockup and always has been), and build out all the required infrastructure? Why, Private Enterprise, of course. He just *said*. There'll be profits flowing like tap water and free lollipops at the price the market will bear for all the good little libertarian spammers too. I think your talking about all the other candidates who like to hand out free stuff. Ron Paul is all about Freedom, Liberty, the Constitution. Returning to the Rule of Law, instead of the Rule of Man. He may want to eliminate all the un-constitutional Federal agencies and programs. But, he also understand it's taken fifty+ years to get to where we are. That yanking the rug out isn't good for the country. Transitioning NASA from a Communist Economic model to a Capitalist or "Free Market" Economy could actually be good for manned space flight. How would that be done? Well, Russia seems to be gaining momentum in manned space flight. They privatized their space program, they accept paying customers to ride on their vehicle, prices are actually going up. How do we transition? Russia is poised to be a true powerhouse in space by the time our Communist leaning space program get back to the Moon. Cracks are beginning to appear in the Main Stream Media's wall of silence about Ron Paul are beginning to appear... http://youtube.com/watch?v=I8PwoV4_Ds0 Carlson Tucker was actually allowed to give a rather good report on Ron Paul, without all the media buzz words, dark horse, cannot win, zero chance, Ross Perot, Ralph Nader, Howard Dean, ... Ron Paul Who? If you really want a nation that follows the Constitution, want your own Representative or Senator to actually read the Constitution and understand it. To make changes to it by Amending it, instead of amending the dictionary, now is your opportunity. Vote now, skip lunch, it'll be good for your health. Vote with your lunch money, it'll be good for the nation. Join the Ron Paul rEVOLution, and feel good about your choices in the next election. https://www.ronpaul2008.com/donate/ Privatize the Space Station! :-) -- Craig Fink Courtesy E-Mail Welcome @ |
#2
|
|||
|
|||
President Ron Paul might let the Space Shuttle flying beyond 2010. :-)
Not quite true, Representative Ron Paul has a space policy statement too.
It's twenty years old and Ron Paul had only served in Congress for 10 years. The relevant part of the 1988 statement being "... and the rest of NASA should be sold to private operators." This is when he was the Libertarian candidate for President. So, if his views haven't changed too much in 20 years as a Republican, the Space Shuttle could very well fly beyond 2010. And the Space Station beyond 2015, most likely with a Space Hotel attached. -- Craig Fink Courtesy E-Mail Welcome @ -- http://www.islandone.org/Politics/LP.space-dom.html SPACE - DOMESTIC POLICY Ron Paul Presidential Campaign Position Paper (1988) Time after time NASA has developed capabilities at great expense then discarded them: a space station larger than the Soviet MIR, a heavy lift vehicle competitive with the new Soviet Energia, a nuclear engine twice as efficient as the space shuttle main engine and a well tested Earth-Moon transport. The fate of the Saturn V heavy lift launch vehicle is one of the saddest examples of this folly. Production was intentionally halted and portions of its tooling were "lost". This bridge burning ensured support for the next aerospace welfare program: the space shuttle. Now we have a grounded government shuttle that can lift a third as much as the Saturn V for the same cost per pound. That's progress, government style. Even worse, this failed state monopoly is now wrecking businesses to avoid well deserved embarrassment. American companies desperately need to get their satellites into space. They have been blocked from using the cheapest, most reliable launcher in the world which unfortunately happens to be the Soviet Proton. NASA has cost our nation a full twenty years in space development, twenty years that has seen the Soviet Union surpass us to an extent that may well be irreparable. It is inconceivable that a private firm could have committed such follies and survived. NASA deserves no better. Our only hope now lies in the power of free individuals risking their own resources for their own dreams. We must recognize the government led space program is dead and the corpse must be buried as soon as possible. Any defense functions should be put under the military, and the rest of NASA should be sold to private operators. The receipts would be applied to the national debt. Then, all government roadblocks to commercial development of space must be removed. It is not the business of the defense department of a free society to veto business decisions of remote sensing or launch companies. The interests of liberty would be well served by a bevy of mediasats that will put any future Iran-Contra affair under the full glare of live television coverage. Maybe, besides competition, that's what our government is afraid of. There is really only one proper role for the military in space or on Earth: the protection of America. Otherwise, the new frontier of Space should be opened to all. Space pioneers will generate knowledge and wealth that will improve the lot of all people on earth. We should not let government get in their way. Matt wrote: Ron Paul has about as much chance of being elected President as Jerry Brown - and Jerry's not even a legal resident of the planet Earth. Seriously, I prefer to spend time on candidates who are not asterisks in the polls. Paul is running to get a platform for his message, and good for him. The only serious candidate who's even put out a space policy so far is Senator Clinton, and she was careful to promise something for everyone and not talk budget numbers. I don't know what Hillary's space policy is, do you have a link. She sure has been giving away a lot of stuff lately, stuff that doesn't belong to her. If she were Bill Gates, yeah sure, go ahead and give every child born in the US $5000.00. She's not Bill Gates, so she must be a modern day Robin Hood, except she wants to work for the Government, to be Queen Hillary. I guess that would make her equivalent to "John of England", not Robin Hood... http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_of_England ....King John's reign has been traditionally characterised as one of the most disastrous in English history... She most definitely believes in the Nanny State, that the Government should take care of you from cradle to grave. That's not what freedom and liberty is all about. |
#3
|
|||
|
|||
President Ron Paul might let the Space Shuttle flying beyond 2010. :-)
Craig Fink wrote:
I'd pay more attention to someone who's more than 3% in the polls, anyway. Besides, private industry is interested in projects where there's money to be made, not in science missions. And you think a university (Cal Tech-JPL, or Johns Hopkins-which controls New Horizons) is going to be able to afford launch fees, not to mention everything else, to send a probe to Mars, Jupiter, or any other solar system destination? I think not. Like it or not (and I do), NASA's the way we're going back to the moon and on to mars. Stay here on Earth and get out of the way with the rest of the Luddites. |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
President Ron Paul might let the Space Shuttle flying beyond 2010. :-) | Craig Fink | Space Shuttle | 25 | October 24th 07 12:27 PM |
President Ron Paul might let the Space Shuttle flying beyond 2010. :-) | Craig Fink | Space Station | 1 | October 12th 07 11:57 AM |
18 Shuttle flights between now and 2010 | Ray | Space Shuttle | 16 | October 14th 05 08:30 PM |