|
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#11
|
|||
|
|||
gingrich wants florida votes
"Brian Thorn" wrote in message ... I haven't heard anything about Rick Santorum's views on space. I was watching a Senate committe hearing years ago where Santorum was the minority chair, and Dianne Feinstein was the majority chair. Sen Feinstein has a pretty sharp tongue, and at one point she lit into Santorum at length about something or other. And as the C-span camera panned back to Santorum after her rebuttal you could see Santorum mouth the words under his breath....****ing bitch. I couldn't believe a US Senator would respond like that. I wish to hell I had my vcr going at the time, I could've ruined that assholes career. Something about Santorum that really gets to me, even more than Gingritch. Those two rank at the top of my all time list of despised politicians. I don't trust either of them even a little bit. Brian |
#12
|
|||
|
|||
gingrich wants florida votes
"Quadibloc" wrote in message news:7d593b70-d0ca-4fb9-ba87- Oh. What if they tried to do the Apollo program that way? Would it have ever happened? What private company would be willing to gamble the cost of the Apollo space program on the chance of getting it back if it was the first to succeed? But Apollo wasn't a business plan. It was a war. It was all about the cold war with the Soviets. Instead, do it the way the Apollo program was done: Which has been my point for ages here. Place Apollo as a goal in abstract terms so we can reproduce it with the current world situation. Apollo was meant to win perhaps the most pressing world problem at the time, the cold war. And to win it with a technological race and a clear deadline. Apollo ..connected directly to some of our greatest fears and needs, while providing the greatest inspirational impact possible in terms of a better future for all. To reproduce Apollo you have to do that for the problems and desires which exist today. How could a space program...today...solve some of the greatest global problems, while also inspiring visions of a better future? It sure aint space tourism or mining asteroids of a forty year long quest to put a few people on Mars. All those NASA goals either return little of consequence, or take so long no one cares. But there is one program which fits VERY WELL all the requirements of an Apollo like goal. With a single program, NASA could.... Solve the long-term global energy problem Solve the climate change problem. Bring prosperity (energy) to every part of the planet. Space Solar Power ...connects...the second largest commercial market that exists to a space policy. While connecting to visions of unlimited energy and prosperty for the future. $10 billion dollar loans are a weekly event in the energy market, and Space Solar Power plants take no longer, and cost no more, to field than a new nuclear plant. SSP as a goal can happen fast enough to keep interest, it can solve enough problems so that almost everyone on the planet could immediately see it's relevance. Space Tourism is a nickel and dime next to the energy market. If you want space activity to explode, you need to have a profit of suitable....scale. Only energy has that gigantic scale. Jonathan s if you want something big done, pay someone who can do it to do it - buying the pieces from those who can supply them, and coordinating putting them together yourself. Maybe innovative suppliers of rockets can do things more cheaply than those who rely on subsidizing space from missile production, but even that doesn't require the X-Prize model. John Savard |
#13
|
|||
|
|||
NASA's Demise: [was gingrich wants florida votes]
Sorry to revive this old thread, but no one has mentioned the 400 pound
gorilla sitting there staring us all in the face. It wasn't what the Newt proposed that I found important. It was the reaction it caused. Esp. the reaction of Romney. If that isn't a clear signal to the demise of NASA and NASA-led HSF I don't know what is. Clearly Romney's priorities are not space. Romney seems perfectly willing to spend money on a federal jobs program, as long as that program doesn't reach the expenses necessary to make it successful. Everyone else went off on Newt much like they did on Jerry Brown (remember Gov. Moon-Beam?) a few decades back. The press and talking heads didn't discuss the merit of the concept. Only that it was totally loony. America's leadership does not posses the mindset to lead in space any longer. Therefore America (or at least its government) doesn't deserve to maintain a lead role in it. It is time to fold NASA. The mission needs to be re-tasked. NASA needs to adopt the role of its NACA predecessor. The strategic shift is so major that a department rename is in order. It cannot lead, or shall I say it will not be allowed to lead, which is saying the same thing. Therefore it must follow. The only other option is dissolution. Dave |
#14
|
|||
|
|||
gingrich (speaks with forked-tongue)
Jonathan wrote:
Replace NASA with incentives to private sector Q: What role should the government play in future space exploration? GINGRICH: I'm a big fan of going into space and I worked to get the shuttle program to survive at one point. But NASA has become a case study in why bureaucracy can't innovate. If you take all the money we've spent at NASA since we landed on the moon and you had applied that money for incentives to the private sector, we would today probably have a permanent station on the moon, and a new generation of lift vehicles. And instead, what we've had is bureaucracy after bureaucracy and failure after failure. We're at the beginning of a whole new cycle of extraordinary opportunities. And, unfortunately, NASA is standing in the way of it, when NASA ought to be getting out of the way and encouraging the private sector. PAWLENTY: I don't think we should eliminate the space program. GINGRICH: I didn't say end the space program. I said you could get into space faster & more effectively, if you decentralized it & got it out of Washington. Source: 2011 GOP primary debate in Manchester NH , Jun 13, 2011 Pawlenty is no longer in the race. His opinion counts for exactly... Zero. Dave |
|
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Gingrich: NASA | johnny@. | Space Shuttle | 7 | June 15th 07 02:31 AM |