A Space & astronomy forum. SpaceBanter.com

Go Back   Home » SpaceBanter.com forum » Astronomy and Astrophysics » Astronomy Misc
Site Map Home Authors List Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read Web Partners

...White House "Rump Group" created the Vision...who were they???



 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old January 14th 07, 01:49 AM posted to sci.space.policy,sci.astro,sci.space.history
kT
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 5,032
Default ...White House "Rump Group" created the Vision...who were they???

Jonathan wrote:
We all know President Bush announced his Vision for
Space Exploration in early 2004. My question is who
came up with the idea? What was the pre-history of the
Vision that intends to guide our national space policy for
the next forty years or more?

All I have found so far follows...

"Surprisingly, much of the early work on the new policy was
made by a group of anonymous junior White House staffers
who, by the book's account, had a genuine interest in space
exploration and sought to create a new vision that would
reinvigorate the space agency. This "Splinter Group" spent
months meeting informally, reviewing white papers and
proposals, before inviting more senior advisers and, eventually,
NASA officials into the discussion. This led to the creation
of two "Rump Groups" that narrowed down proposals for a new
exploration plan, keeping in mind fiscal limitations that ruled out
any plan that required significant additional funding for NASA.
The result of these deliberations, spread out over most of
2003, was a plan the President approved on December 19
and announced to the world at NASA Headquarters
on January 14."
http://www.thespacereview.com/article/198/1


I would like to know who the ..."anonymous junior staffers"
of the 'Splinter Group' were. Who were the Nasa officials?
Who were the members of the 'Rump Group'?


The Sphincter Group.

They couldn't sew it up, apparently.

--
The Tsiolkovsky Group : http://www.lifeform.org

My Planetary BLOB : http://cosmic.lifeform.org

Get A Free Orbiter Space Flight Simulator :

http://orbit.medphys.ucl.ac.uk/orbit.html
  #2  
Old January 14th 07, 02:23 AM posted to sci.space.policy,sci.astro,sci.space.history
Rand Simberg[_1_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 8,311
Default ...White House "Rump Group" created the Vision...who were they???

On Mon, 15 Jan 2007 19:28:41 -0500, in a place far, far away,
"Jonathan" made the phosphor on my monitor glow
in such a way as to indicate that:


We all know President Bush announced his Vision for
Space Exploration in early 2004. My question is who
came up with the idea? What was the pre-history of the
Vision that intends to guide our national space policy for
the next forty years or more?

All I have found so far follows...

"Surprisingly, much of the early work on the new policy was
made by a group of anonymous junior White House staffers
who, by the book's account, had a genuine interest in space
exploration and sought to create a new vision that would
reinvigorate the space agency. This "Splinter Group" spent
months meeting informally, reviewing white papers and
proposals, before inviting more senior advisers and, eventually,
NASA officials into the discussion. This led to the creation
of two "Rump Groups" that narrowed down proposals for a new
exploration plan, keeping in mind fiscal limitations that ruled out
any plan that required significant additional funding for NASA.
The result of these deliberations, spread out over most of
2003, was a plan the President approved on December 19
and announced to the world at NASA Headquarters
on January 14."
http://www.thespacereview.com/article/198/1


I would like to know who the ..."anonymous junior staffers"
of the 'Splinter Group' were. Who were the Nasa officials?
Who were the members of the 'Rump Group'?

Who put this idea into the head of our President?

I think we have a right to know, at the very least
we should know so we can gauge their competence
and independence of such entities as Lockheed etc.


There is nothing in the VSE that intrinsically benefits Lockheed.
You're a conspiratorial idiot.
  #3  
Old January 14th 07, 04:13 AM posted to sci.space.policy,sci.astro,sci.space.history
Jonathan
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 428
Default ...Meet the Chairman of the "Vision" Implementation Commission

And y'all think this is about going to the moon.


Executive Order: President's Commission on Implementation of
United States Space Exploration Policy

Sec. 3. Mission. (a) The mission of the Commission shall be to
provide recommendations to the President, in accordance with
this order, on implementation of the vision outlined in the
President's policy statement entitled "A Renewed Spirit of Discovery"
and the Presidents Budget Submission for Fiscal Year 2005
(collectively, "Policy").

(b) The Commission shall examine and make recommendations
to the President regarding:

(i) A science research agenda to be conducted on the Moon and
other destinations as well as human and robotic science
activities that advance our capacity to achieve the Policy;

(ii) The exploration of technologies, demonstrations, and
strategies, including the use of lunar and other in situ
natural resources, that could be used for sustainable human and
robotic exploration;

(iii) Criteria that could be used to select future
destinations for human exploration;
http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/relea...0040130-7.html



President's Commission on Implementation of United States
Space Exploration Policy

Chairman

Edward C. Aldridge Jr.

has served in many top U.S. Defense Department and defense
industry jobs, including as the 16th Air Force secretary
from June 1986 until 1988.

From 1988 to 1992, he was president of the Electronic Systems
Company division of McDonnell Douglas, and later became
CEO of The Aerospace Corporation.

Aldridge was confirmed as the Pentagon's top weapons buyer ***
on May 8, 2001. As the Under Secretary of Defense for Acquisition,
Technology, and Logistics, he had responsibility for acquisition,
research and development, logistics, advanced technology,
international programs, environmental security, nuclear,
chemical, and biological programs, and the industrial base.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Preside...oration_Policy




Guys just face it, the Defense Dept, and especially the
defense contractors, own Nasa, they own our space
policy and they are lining their pockets while
stealing our future.


s


  #4  
Old January 14th 07, 04:36 AM posted to sci.space.policy,sci.astro,sci.space.history
kT
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 5,032
Default ...Meet the Chairman of the "Vision" Implementation Commission

Jonathan wrote:
And y'all think this is about going to the moon.


Executive Order: President's Commission on Implementation of
United States Space Exploration Policy

Sec. 3. Mission. (a) The mission of the Commission shall be to
provide recommendations to the President, in accordance with
this order, on implementation of the vision outlined in the
President's policy statement entitled "A Renewed Spirit of Discovery"
and the Presidents Budget Submission for Fiscal Year 2005
(collectively, "Policy").

(b) The Commission shall examine and make recommendations
to the President regarding:

(i) A science research agenda to be conducted on the Moon and
other destinations as well as human and robotic science
activities that advance our capacity to achieve the Policy;

(ii) The exploration of technologies, demonstrations, and
strategies, including the use of lunar and other in situ
natural resources, that could be used for sustainable human and
robotic exploration;

(iii) Criteria that could be used to select future
destinations for human exploration;
http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/relea...0040130-7.html



President's Commission on Implementation of United States
Space Exploration Policy

Chairman

Edward C. Aldridge Jr.

has served in many top U.S. Defense Department and defense
industry jobs, including as the 16th Air Force secretary
from June 1986 until 1988.

From 1988 to 1992, he was president of the Electronic Systems
Company division of McDonnell Douglas, and later became
CEO of The Aerospace Corporation.

Aldridge was confirmed as the Pentagon's top weapons buyer ***
on May 8, 2001. As the Under Secretary of Defense for Acquisition,
Technology, and Logistics, he had responsibility for acquisition,
research and development, logistics, advanced technology,
international programs, environmental security, nuclear,
chemical, and biological programs, and the industrial base.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Preside...oration_Policy




Guys just face it, the Defense Dept, and especially the
defense contractors, own Nasa, they own our space
policy and they are lining their pockets while
stealing our future.


I tend to agree with your well researched assessment.

I've never been much of a conspiracy theorist, but it appears to me NASA
simply does not want to facilitate the shift of manned space flight to
the private sector, nor do they appear to desire any civilian
colonization of space.

Just the throwaway design of the Ares demonstrates that, where you have
high energy core stages which cannot make it to orbit to be reused,
because they are carrying these tremendously heavy interplanetary
missions. Just switching to EELV TSTO or stage and a half will result in
the delivery of many core stages, upper stages and engines to LEO, where
any manner of craft and hotel resorts may be cobbled together by design.

NASA wants to explore with the big rockets, others want to sell seats.

NASA just needs to concentrate on the big rockets and Earth.

All that exploration stuff will come on its own time.

--
The Tsiolkovsky Group : http://www.lifeform.org

My Planetary BLOB : http://cosmic.lifeform.org

Get A Free Orbiter Space Flight Simulator :

http://orbit.medphys.ucl.ac.uk/orbit.html
  #5  
Old January 14th 07, 05:13 AM posted to sci.space.policy,sci.astro,sci.space.history
Jonathan
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 428
Default ...White House "Rump Group" created the Vision...who were they???


"Rand Simberg" wrote in message


There is nothing in the VSE that intrinsically benefits Lockheed.
You're a conspiratorial idiot.



You're kidding right? No company, except for maybe
Halliburton, has benefited from the war more
than Lockheed. A 'project' that seems to suffer
from the same difficulties in justification as
the Vision. Funny about that, it seems they
decide first, then come up with reasons ...later.

Now Lockheed takes over as the prime contractor
for the Vision. And even gets the much sought after
immigration security contract. When Bush was
governor of Texas, he even tried to get Lockheed to
take over the Welfare dept, of all things.


Lockheed Wins Contract to Build NASA's New Spaceship

By Renae Merle
Washington Post Staff Writer
Friday, September 1, 2006; Page A01

Lockheed Martin Corp. won a multibillion-dollar contract yesterday
to build a vehicle to replace NASA's space shuttles, put a
human on the moon for the first time since 1972 and be the
precursor to a manned spaceship to Mars.

It was a somewhat unexpected win for Lockheed, the Pentagon's
largest contractor. The other competitor, Northrop Grumman, was
considered the front-runner because along with its subcontractor,
Boeing Co., it has been involved with all of the country's manned
space programs. Lockheed also has had a long history with
NASA, though not entirely positive, and not predominantly
with manned vehicles.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn...083101067.html




And more and more

Lockheed Team Ousts Sikorsky
for $6.1B Marine One Contract
Navy Official: 'No Political Influences" in Award
http://www.siteselection.com/ssinsid...t/sf050214.htm


Federal contracts up 86% under Bush; Halliburton rises 600%
Published: Monday June 19, 2006
Top contractor Lockheed got contracts larger than
budget of Congress, Dept. of Interior
http://www.rawstory.com/news/2006/Re...nder_0619.html


Close Friend Of Bush At Center Of Coast Guard Contract Fiasco

Donald "Boysie" Bollinger, Chairman of the Board and Chief
Executive Officer of Bollinger Shipyards, "has been a friend of
George W. Bush for a quarter century." CQ Today reported in
2004 that "Bollinger has known Bush since 1980? and has
twice served as Bush's Louisiana campaign chair. In 2004,
Bollinger became a Bush "Super Ranger" after "bringing
in more than $300,000? for the campaign.

Bollinger Shipyards is part of an emerging scandal over the
costly Coast Guard fleet-building program. Four years ago, the
Coast Guard - "in an astonishing abdication of responsibility"
- handed off the $17 billion program to Lockheed Martin and
Northrop Grumman "to plan, supervise and deliver the new
vessels and helicopters." (The program is now "foundering" as
the estimated cost of the program has ballooned to $24 billion.
Continuing problems have "delayed the arrival of any
new ships or aircraft.")
Bollinger Shipyards is a business partner of the two military
contracting giants
http://thinkprogress.org/2006/12/15/bollinger-bush/

Making Money on Terrorism
William D. Hartung

In fiscal year 2002, the Big Three received a total of more
than $42 billion in Pentagon contracts, of which Lockheed Martin
got $17 billion,
http://www.thenation.com/doc/20040223/hartung




It's called corruption.



  #6  
Old January 14th 07, 05:40 AM posted to sci.space.policy,sci.astro,sci.space.history
Rand Simberg[_1_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 8,311
Default ...White House "Rump Group" created the Vision...who were they???

On Sat, 13 Jan 2007 23:13:02 -0500, in a place far, far away,
"Jonathan" made the phosphor on my monitor glow
in such a way as to indicate that:


"Rand Simberg" wrote in message


There is nothing in the VSE that intrinsically benefits Lockheed.
You're a conspiratorial idiot.



You're kidding right? No company, except for maybe
Halliburton, has benefited from the war more
than Lockheed.


You're kidding, right? The VSE has nothing to do with the war.

A 'project' that seems to suffer
from the same difficulties in justification as
the Vision. Funny about that, it seems they
decide first, then come up with reasons ...later.

Now Lockheed takes over as the prime contractor
for the Vision.


irrelevant new stories about Lockheed snipped

I guess you don't know what the word "intrinsically" means. Go invest
in a dictionary. Or learn how to look stuff up on line.
  #7  
Old January 14th 07, 03:05 PM posted to sci.space.policy,sci.astro,sci.space.history
Jonathan
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 428
Default ...White House "Rump Group" created the Vision...who were they???


"Rand Simberg" wrote in message
...

Now Lockheed takes over as the prime contractor
for the Vision.


irrelevant new stories about Lockheed snipped

I guess you don't know what the word "intrinsically" means. Go invest
in a dictionary. Or learn how to look stuff up on line.



Yet again I must completely destroy your response.
And it's so easy.

Look at the 10 y chart of Lockheed. It has two clear
turning points. The first one is the ...minute...Bush takes
office...it tripled. The second is the ...minute...Bush
announced the Vision in Feb 04....it doubled.

The market clearly understands the /intrinsic/ value of
Lockheed when associated with Bush and Nasa.

Look at the facts....
http://bigcharts.marke****ch.com/qui...eq=2&ti me=13


And while you're at it, scroll down and look at the news
stories for Lockheed from only...yesterday. I count $1.3 billion
in contracts Lockheed signed....yesterday.

Sheez, I don't even have to look for this stuff, it just
pops up everywhere.

And if you still don't get it, take a look at how the
feeding frenzy works from this Lockheed story
also from .....yesterday.

This is just ..it's...it's...infamous!



US Rep. expects Congress to add extra ships to defense budget

WASHINGTON (Marke****ch) -- U.S. Rep. Gene Taylor, D-Miss.,
said Wednesday that lawmakers will try to add extra ships to
the Navy budget, in addition to whatever the Pentagon requests.

Taylor told Dow Jones Newswires that President George W. Bush
isn't fully focused on military needs as the White House prepares
its 2008 budget proposal. As a result, Congress ought to use earmarks
or other tools to step in, he said.

"We have to find a way to put more ships in the budget
than the President's requesting,"
"Remember, the President's request is more based on dollars
than the needs of the nation"

~ohmygosh ...Bush isn't focused on military needs...but on dollars.....gawd~

http://www.marke****ch.com/news/stor...MT&si d=14274




s









  #8  
Old January 14th 07, 03:58 PM posted to sci.space.policy,sci.astro,sci.space.history
Rand Simberg[_1_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 8,311
Default ...White House "Rump Group" created the Vision...who were they???

On Sun, 14 Jan 2007 09:05:14 -0500, in a place far, far away,
"Jonathan" made the phosphor on my monitor glow
in such a way as to indicate that:


"Rand Simberg" wrote in message
...

Now Lockheed takes over as the prime contractor
for the Vision.


irrelevant new stories about Lockheed snipped

I guess you don't know what the word "intrinsically" means. Go invest
in a dictionary. Or learn how to look stuff up on line.



Yet again I must completely destroy your response.
And it's so easy.


laughing uproariously

Look at the 10 y chart of Lockheed. It has two clear
turning points. The first one is the ...minute...Bush takes
office...it tripled. The second is the ...minute...Bush
announced the Vision in Feb 04....it doubled.


And what happened to other space stocks, like Boeing? There's nothing
unique about Lockheed Martin. And we're still waiting for, you know,
*evidence* for your tinfoil hat theory that the president consulted
with LM before announcing VSE, and that this influenced the
announcement.
  #9  
Old January 14th 07, 06:08 PM posted to sci.space.policy,sci.astro,sci.space.history
Brian Thorn
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 510
Default ...White House "Rump Group" created the Vision...who were they???

On Mon, 15 Jan 2007 19:28:41 -0500, "Jonathan"
wrote:

We all know President Bush announced his Vision for
Space Exploration in early 2004. My question is who
came up with the idea?


What idea? Going back to the Moon and then on the Mars? Gee! Nobody
would EVER have thought of THAT! It must be all them Evil Republicans
and their Military Industrial Complex cronies! :-)

You may remember that back in late 2002, Sean O'Keefe had basically
gotten NASA spending and accounting under control (Bush inherited a
mess when he took office) and there was moderate speculation that a
post-ISS NASA space project was going to have to get started soon,
almost certainly during Bush's first term, since the big spending on
ISS was winding down. Then came the Columbia accident, and later the
CAIB's recommendation that NASA have a clearly-defined goal. Returning
to the Moon is hardly a wildly outrageous idea that could only have
come from Evil Corporate America. Yes, perhaps another attempt to
develop low-cost access to space would have been better, but after the
X-33 and X-34 fiascoes of the Clinton Administration, can you really
fault Bush for taking a different path? Less than a year after
Columbia, Bush announced a return to the moon before 2020 and then on
to Mars at an unspecified later date. His father had also attempted to
launch a new manned lunar program in 1989, so Dubya's announcement was
not a shock.

Who put this idea into the head of our President?


All the people here who've been complaining for 20 years that all
America does in space is go around in circles endlessly?

I think we have a right to know, at the very least
we should know so we can gauge their competence
and independence of such entities as Lockheed etc.


When Bush 41 announced SEI in 1989, there were half a dozen large
aerospace companies (McDonnell-Douglas, Lockheed, Boeing, Northrop,
Rockwell, and Grumman.) When Bush 41 proposed we go back to the Moon,
there was no "this is just corporate welfare for Lockheed!" criticism.
(SEI was killed by NASA's own stupidity, not Lockheed involvement
necessary.) Now we're really down to only two major aerospace
companies, LockMart and Boeing (which consolidated into giants under
Clinton, Northrop-Grumman being unable to build anything big without
Airbus's politically unpopular help.) So if Dubya & Co. decide to
give NASA a goal again (which the CAIB and others had urged, and a
follow-on to ISS was coming due as ISS spending began to drop off) it
was inevitable that LockMart would benefit, so the conspiracy theories
are flying fast and furious. But, alas for the True Believers, this is
still not a case of corporate welfare for Lockheed and Boeing.

Yes, it is questionable that LockMart won the Orion contract over
Boeing, but there was a 50/50 chance anyway. And it was Boeing that
got caught cheating on the EELV bid and the KC-767 scandal (which
could well have been in the back of NASA management's minds) so it is
far from irrefutable evidence of Lockheed rigging the deal.

Brian
  #10  
Old January 14th 07, 06:21 PM posted to sci.space.policy,sci.astro,sci.space.history
Jonathan
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 428
Default ...White House "Rump Group" created the Vision...who were they???


"Rand Simberg" wrote in message
...
On Sun, 14 Jan 2007 09:05:14 -0500, in a place far, far away,
"Jonathan" made the phosphor on my monitor glow
in such a way as to indicate that:


"Rand Simberg" wrote in message
...

Now Lockheed takes over as the prime contractor
for the Vision.

irrelevant new stories about Lockheed snipped

I guess you don't know what the word "intrinsically" means. Go invest
in a dictionary. Or learn how to look stuff up on line.



Yet again I must completely destroy your response.
And it's so easy.


laughing uproariously

Look at the 10 y chart of Lockheed. It has two clear
turning points. The first one is the ...minute...Bush takes
office...it tripled. The second is the ...minute...Bush
announced the Vision in Feb 04....it doubled.


And what happened to other space stocks, like Boeing? There's nothing
unique about Lockheed Martin.




Really! If you want to know how the war in Iraq really
started. It was set in motion by the Bruce Jackson
the director of strategic planning for Lockheed Martin.
He has publicly bragged that he wrote the republican
platform on foreign policy. And he's one of the
Presidents closest campaign advisors. Short of
a video of the President admitting he's a Lockheed
shill, the evidence couldn't be more obvious.
That is, to an unbiased observer. Of course
maybe you're correct and it's all a big innocent
set of coincidences. Or dumb luck I guess.
Ya, that's it.

In comparison, Nasa is a minor conquest.

Lockheed Stock and Two Smoking Barrells
http://www.playboy.com/magazine/feat...eed/index.html
(the girly pics might just get you to read it)


s


And we're still waiting for, you know,
*evidence* for your tinfoil hat theory that the president consulted
with LM before announcing VSE, and that this influenced the
announcement.


 




Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
...White House "Rump Group" created the Vision...who were they??? kT Policy 73 January 26th 07 11:41 AM
...White House "Rump Group" created the Vision...who were they??? kT History 37 January 26th 07 11:16 AM
Article on supposedly "unprecedented" heights of White House interference at NASA Jim Oberg Policy 69 February 19th 06 03:10 AM
Article on supposedly "unprecedented" heights of White House interference at NASA Jim Oberg History 73 February 19th 06 03:10 AM
Article on supposedly "unprecedented" heights of White House interference at NASA Eric Chomko Space Science Misc 0 February 15th 06 10:21 AM


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 11:22 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004-2024 SpaceBanter.com.
The comments are property of their posters.