Avoiding Politics As Much As Possible, But Here's A Cheap Shot OnObama's Space Policy

So, NASA funding is going up by about $1 billion per year, and it is
told to aim for Mars?

Next (futrure) headline: Also, NASA budget getting an extra $1 million
added per year and is told to spend it on sending humans to nearby
stars.

Next future headline after that:

"Obama Increasing NASA Budget, Not Charging Taxpayers and Raising
NASA's Aim."

Excerpt from story (FNN - Future News Network) -

"In a move expected to send chills down the spines of space
enthusiasts everywhere, today President Obama announced that he has
established another lofty goal for NASA. Not only that, but to pay for
it, the President is increasing NASA's annual budget and not charging
taxpayers for the increase!...."

"Obama said that he is increasing NASA's budget by an extra 5 cents
per year. He stated that this budget supplement will come from his own
pocket - literally!..."

"Obama stated that with this unexpected extra increase, NASA should
now begin making plans for human INTERGALACTIC exploration..."


****************

OK, cheap shot aside, but if you want to go to Mars, you do not
increase NASA's budget by $6 Billion over the next five years. You
increase NASA' budget to AT LEAST 4% of the total federal budget,
which it had when NASA put man on the moon.

On Mar 10, 11:38�pm, giveitawhirl2008
wrote:
So, NASA funding is going up by about $1 billion per year, and it is
told to aim for Mars?

Next (futrure) headline: Also, NASA budget getting an extra $1 million
added per year and is told to spend it on sending humans to nearby
stars.

Next future headline after that:

"Obama Increasing NASA Budget, Not Charging Taxpayers and Raising
NASA's Aim."

Excerpt from story (FNN - Future News Network) -

"In a move expected to send chills down the spines of space
enthusiasts everywhere, today President Obama announced that he has
established another lofty goal for NASA. Not only that, but to pay for
it, the President is increasing NASA's annual budget and not charging
taxpayers for the increase!...."

"Obama said that he is increasing NASA's budget by an extra 5 cents
per year. He stated that this budget supplement will come from his own
pocket - literally!..."

"Obama stated that with this unexpected extra increase, NASA should
now begin making plans for human INTERGALACTIC exploration..."

****************

OK, cheap shot aside, but if you want to go to Mars, you do not
increase NASA's budget by $6 Billion over the next five years. You
increase NASA' budget to AT LEAST 4% of the total federal budget,
which it had when NASA put man on the moon.

Moon mars was NEVER viable at the levels funded by bush, it was just
electonering to get bush re elected.

Worse griffin / nasa choose a TERRIBLE manned replacement, as pork
payoff to existing contractors

If nasa had choose existing expendables we would be flying by
now.......

On Mar 10, 11:54*pm, " wrote:
On Mar 10, 11:38 pm, giveitawhirl2008
wrote:





So, NASA funding is going up by about $1 billion per year, and it is
told to aim for Mars?

Next (futrure) headline: Also, NASA budget getting an extra $1 million
added per year and is told to spend it on sending humans to nearby
stars.

Next future headline after that:

"Obama Increasing NASA Budget, Not Charging Taxpayers and Raising
NASA's Aim."

Excerpt from story (FNN - Future News Network) -

"In a move expected to send chills down the spines of space
enthusiasts everywhere, today President Obama announced that he has
established another lofty goal for NASA. Not only that, but to pay for
it, the President is increasing NASA's annual budget and not charging
taxpayers for the increase!...."

"Obama said that he is increasing NASA's budget by an extra 5 cents
per year. He stated that this budget supplement will come from his own
pocket - literally!..."

"Obama stated that with this unexpected extra increase, NASA should
now begin making plans for human INTERGALACTIC exploration..."

****************

OK, cheap shot aside, but if you want to go to Mars, you do not
increase NASA's budget by $6 Billion over the next five years. You
increase NASA' budget to AT LEAST 4% of the total federal budget,
which it had when NASA put man on the moon.

Moon mars was NEVER viable at the levels funded by bush, it was just
electonering *to get bush re elected.

Worse griffin / nasa choose a TERRIBLE manned replacement, as pork
payoff to existing contractors

If nasa had choose existing expendables we would be flying by
now.......- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

Existing expendables would have (or still could?) get us to, at least,
the Moon? If NASA ever hears about this....

On Mar 10, 11:54*pm, " wrote:

Moon mars was NEVER viable at the levels funded by bush, it was just
electonering *to get bush re elected.

Worse griffin / nasa choose a TERRIBLE manned replacement, as pork
payoff to existing contractors

If nasa had choose existing expendables we would be flying by
now.





Stop drinking and take an English course.

On Wed, 10 Mar 2010 20:38:22 -0800 (PST), giveitawhirl2008
wrote:
So, NASA funding is going up by about $1 billion per year, and it is
told to aim for Mars?
Next (futrure) headline: Also, NASA budget getting an extra $1 million
added per year and is told to spend it on sending humans to nearby
stars.
Next future headline after that:
"Obama Increasing NASA Budget, Not Charging Taxpayers and Raising
NASA's Aim."
Excerpt from story (FNN - Future News Network) -
"In a move expected to send chills down the spines of space
enthusiasts everywhere, today President Obama announced that he has
established another lofty goal for NASA. Not only that, but to pay for
it, the President is increasing NASA's annual budget and not charging
taxpayers for the increase!...."
"Obama said that he is increasing NASA's budget by an extra 5 cents
per year. He stated that this budget supplement will come from his own
pocket - literally!..."
"Obama stated that with this unexpected extra increase, NASA should
now begin making plans for human INTERGALACTIC exploration..."
****************
OK, cheap shot aside, but if you want to go to Mars, you do not
increase NASA's budget by $6 Billion over the next five years. You
increase NASA' budget to AT LEAST 4% of the total federal budget,
which it had when NASA put man on the moon.

Give NASA 10%.

Tell NASA we want space-based solar power.

Tell NASA we want a permanent colony on the Moon.

Tell NASA we want Americans planting an American flag on Mars.

Then shut the **** up and let 'em go do it!

The White House DID NOT put a man on the Moon.

The Senate DID NOT put a man on the Moon.

The House DID NOT put a man on the Moon.

NASA put a man on the Moon.

Patriot Games wrote:

Give NASA 10%.

Sure, you paying?



Tell NASA we want space-based solar power.


Tell private industry that. Or the TVA.

Tell NASA we want a permanent colony on the Moon.


Why? I mean besides the coolness factor.

Tell NASA we want Americans planting an American flag on Mars.


If we plant it, will it grow?

Then shut the **** up and let 'em go do it!

The White House DID NOT put a man on the Moon.

The Senate DID NOT put a man on the Moon.

The House DID NOT put a man on the Moon.

NASA put a man on the Moon.



--
Greg Moore
Ask me about lily, an RPI based CMC.

On Thu, 11 Mar 2010 15:54:56 -0500, "Greg D. Moore \(Strider\)"
wrote:
Patriot Games wrote:
Give NASA 10%.
Sure, you paying?

I been paying. Still paying...

Tell NASA we want space-based solar power.
Tell private industry that. Or the TVA.

It doesn't work that way. Private industry needs a PROFIT reason to
do anything. Today they sell electricity. Tomorrow they sell
electricity. You want them to quadruple their costs to sell the same
thing they aleady for less? That's just dumb...

Plus, (think about it), if private industry does it who owns it?
Private industry.... If Uncle Sam gets it started (and we can deport
all the Socialist DemocRATs) then We_The_People own it...

Tell NASA we want a permanent colony on the Moon.
Why? I mean besides the coolness factor.

(Which is a HUGE factor...)

We need more room. Room to plant vast expanses of crops.

We need the experience. There's clearly something in the human
personality that makes us need to go, to explore, to discover. (Except
for DemocRATs... They seem to only want to go to someone else's house,
explore their pockets and discover other people's money.)

Oh, and then there's that next Ice Age.... It would be nice if a
bunch of us were somewhere else when that happens...

Oh, then there's those wacky Muslims and the WMDs... You know that's
gonna suck....

And then you have a Space Aliens. All the NASA and College Big Heads
keep telling us that space is full of intelligent life! Maybe they're
right? And the Space Aliens sure aren't tripping all over each to
come visit us so we gotta get Out There...

Did I mention Green Jobs? (Socialist DemocRATs get little boners
whenever you say that...) Almost all of the above, especially if we
truly learn to live and work in space building space-based solar
power, is Green!

Did I mention Jobs? Yeah buddy! Jobs, lots of 'em. And for
Americans, not any filthy foreigners either! We can even keep the
Canadian moochers out too!

It's about WE doing something for US... Just US. Paid for by US.

How many spinoffs came from Apollo? Hundreds? Thousands?

See, its like this. When you were born you were born in the Fetal
Position. Nope, not really. They just say that to be nice. You were
actually born ass-up so you'd be prepared to pay taxes FOREVER.

WE will be paying for US no matter what.

WE can keep buying cheese for negros in the cities OR WE can do
something smarter. (But YOU will still pay...)

But it's not about you paying, it's about what you get for it.

What do we get paying Arabs for our oil? DIE AMERICA DIE!

Sweet, eh?

What do we get paying Chinks to make everything? Pssst, want another
low-rate loan Joe! Mind if I buy one of your States, Joe?

We can do better... (And they can go **** themselves...)

We CAN turn this around. WE can sell to THEM.

But it's gonna take what we haven't had in America since JFK said "Go
there, do that, because we're Americans, because we're THAT cool!"

I don't just mean a President with the Right Stuff either.

Sure, we need that, and the young black guy ain't got it.

But we also need Americans to stand up, find a pair, and live up to
our Destiny.

Tell NASA we want Americans planting an American flag on Mars.
If we plant it, will it grow?

HA! If we build it they will come...

Then shut the **** up and let 'em go do it!
The White House DID NOT put a man on the Moon.
The Senate DID NOT put a man on the Moon.
The House DID NOT put a man on the Moon.
NASA put a man on the Moon.

Yeah!

And it appears the bottom has yet to be found.
Which explains the recent NASA increases.
And as far as the Mars talk is concerned, that's a nice
(morale boosting) way of saying ...Forget about
the Moon.


"Greg D. Moore (Strider)" wrote in message
m...
Patriot Games wrote:

Give NASA 10%.

Sure, you paying?



If NASA had a wildly popular goal, that 10% would be easy.
To quote a NASA webpage .....practice what they preach?

"With public sentiment, nothing can fail; without it nothing can succeed."

- A. Lincoln
http://www.hq.nasa.gov/office/hqlibr...rs/opinion.htm




Tell NASA we want space-based solar power.


Tell private industry that. Or the TVA.


Some of those govt loan guarantees just might do the
trick with Space Solar Power.

Space Energy Inc
http://www.spaceenergy.com/s/Default.htm





Tell NASA we want a permanent colony on the Moon.


Why? I mean besides the coolness factor.

Tell NASA we want Americans planting an American flag on Mars.


Long before then, another half dozen or so rovers will have combed every
interesting inch of Mars, and flooded us with pics and charts and graphs
of every kind.

How much support will a huge program have just to put people on Mars
when the public has long ago learned everything it wants to know?




If we plant it, will it grow?

Then shut the **** up and let 'em go do it!

The White House DID NOT put a man on the Moon.

The Senate DID NOT put a man on the Moon.

The House DID NOT put a man on the Moon.

NASA put a man on the Moon.


Kennedy put a man on the Moon. By taking on the most
pressing global threat, The Cold War, and creating a NASA
goal designed as a solution to that threat.

If you want to repeat Apollo, simply define the greatest impending
global problems, and design a NASA goal which could be the
solution. Keeping in mind that the longer the time span involved, the
less chance of success.

Solar power satellites could be flying in five to ten years
and ....within....existing budgets. Mars and asteroids are
too distant.

Laying the Foundation for Space Solar Power
http://www.nap.edu/openbook.php?record_id=10202&page=1

Space-Based Solar Power As an Opportunity for Strategic Security
http://www.nss.org/settlement/ssp/library/nsso.htm

Space Energy Inc
http://www.spaceenergy.com/s/Default.htm

War Without Oil: A Catalyst For True Transformation

"Complicating the matter is a lack of professional consensus on
the actual expected date of global peak oil production, with
credible organizations such a ExxonMobil predicting that
the non-OPEC Hubbert's Peak will arrive within 5 years
and the U.S. Government claiming the planet's absolute peak
will occur somewhere around 2037"
http://www.au.af.mil/au/awc/awcgate/cst/csat56.pdf








--
Greg Moore
Ask me about lily, an RPI based CMC.

"Fred J. McCall" wrote in message
...
Patriot Games wrote:

:On Thu, 11 Mar 2010 15:54:56 -0500, "Greg D. Moore \(Strider\)"
wrote:
:Patriot Games wrote:
: Give NASA 10%.
:Sure, you paying?
:
:I been paying. Still paying...
:
: Tell NASA we want space-based solar power.
:Tell private industry that. Or the TVA.
:
:It doesn't work that way. Private industry needs a PROFIT reason to
:do anything. Today they sell electricity. Tomorrow they sell
:electricity. You want them to quadruple their costs to sell the same
:thing they aleady for less? That's just dumb...


Space Solar Power has several advantages, for one, the most sought after
energy sources are renewable, and SSP is the only renewable which can
provide direct baseload power to any grid. So it could be sold at peak
rates.
And in particular, the small, cheap and easy to build ground receivers
can go all kinds of places a conventional power plant never will. Rural
areas.
Environmentally sensitive areas. Provide emergency power for natural
disasters and even for warfighting.

SSP would have all kinds of niches all to itself, meaning it doesn't have
to directly compete at first.

Not to mention, once a SSP satellite is shown to be profitable, the 2
trillion
dollar a year energy market could find all the funding it wanted overnight.
Building a single nuclear power plant costs about as much as NASA's
annual budget. The money is in the commercial sector.





:

Yes, that IS just dumb. Given that it's just dumb, WHY DO YOU WANT TO
DO IT?


--
"Some people get lost in thought because it's such unfamiliar
territory."
--G. Behn

On Mar 11, 11:44*am, Patriot Games wrote:
On Wed, 10 Mar 2010 20:38:22 -0800 (PST), giveitawhirl2008



wrote:
So, NASA funding is going up by about $1 billion per year, and it is
told to aim for Mars?
Next (futrure) headline: Also, NASA budget getting an extra $1 million
added per year and is told to spend it on sending humans to nearby
stars.
Next future headline after that:
"Obama Increasing NASA Budget, Not Charging Taxpayers and Raising
NASA's Aim."
Excerpt from story (FNN - Future News Network) -
"In a move expected to send chills down the spines of space
enthusiasts everywhere, today President Obama announced that he has
established another lofty goal for NASA. Not only that, but to pay for
it, the President is increasing NASA's annual budget and not charging
taxpayers for the increase!...."
"Obama said that he is increasing NASA's budget by an extra 5 cents
per year. He stated that this budget supplement will come from his own
pocket - literally!..."
"Obama stated that with this unexpected extra increase, NASA should
now begin making plans for human INTERGALACTIC exploration..."
****************
OK, cheap shot aside, but if you want to go to Mars, you do not
increase NASA's budget by $6 Billion over the next five years. You
increase NASA' budget to AT LEAST 4% of the total federal budget,
which it had when NASA put man on the moon.

Give NASA 10%.

Tell NASA we want space-based solar power.

Tell NASA we want a permanent colony on the Moon.

Tell NASA we want Americans planting an American flag on Mars.

Then shut the **** up and let 'em go do it!

The White House DID NOT put a man on the Moon. *

The Senate DID NOT put a man on the Moon. *

The House DID NOT put a man on the Moon. *

NASA put a man on the Moon. *

Nah...
A man with Vision and Patriotism put a man on the moon; JF Kennedy.