Pres. Kerry's NASA

Asumming he gets elected President. I’m Canadian, but I follow American
politics (more interesting, except here in Quebec), and I believe George
Bush will be re-elected. This is all starting to remind of Walter
Mondale in 1984 when he ran against Ronald Reagan and I believe one of
his main themes was to get rid of the space program and put all money
that goes into NASA into social programs. Guess who won? When you have
the Ted Kennedy’s in the Democratic Party campaigning for Kerry, who are
more interested in pouring money into social programs and reliving the
good old days of the past when there was no space program, instead of
advancing into the future, guess who is going to win? George Bush will
win.

Paul

ed kyle wrote:

What will President Kerry do with NASA? My guess is that
he will want to dump the Bush Moon/Mars plans ASAP, but
will he be able to stop CEV and the end of Shuttle?

- Ed Kyle

Jon Berndt wrote:
"Rand Simberg" wrote in message

Sander Vesik

But you are making an assumption that Moon+Mars was in fact
anything more than a disguised campaign speech.

To think otherwise is laughable. Where is the big constituency for
going to the moon and Mars whose votes Bush is seeking?

Good grief. I can't believe the broad misperception of this, nor the
baseless cynicism that is being propagated. **Read section 9.3 of the CAIB
report (Vol. 1)**. Yes, things are done in an election year for political
reasons. Yes, the new space vision was announced at the beginning of an
election year. Is everything the president does this year an election year
gimmick? No, of course not. He's the president, he has to keep working.
Business goes on. So, how do you tell the difference? (Does this really need
to be spelled out?)

You tell the difference by looking at what is annonced and how.

CEV - renamed OSP with a timeline. All the rest is at best fluff.

--
Sander

+++ Out of cheese error +++

Rand Simberg wrote:

On Tue, 10 Feb 2004 12:09:45 -0800, in a place far, far away, Michael
Walsh made the phosphor on my monitor glow in
such a way as to indicate that:

Did you really expect Kerry to come out in support of a Bush
initiative?

Is it required for him to automatically oppose anything that Bush
comes up with? It is impossible to conceive that even a blind
squirrel can come up with the occasional acorn?

Pretty much so during an election year. The comment I read indicated
that Kerry did not directly attack the Bush space program but contrasted
it with the Bush domestic plan.

I will note that I am talking about tactical strategy during an election
campaign.

Mike Walsh

Eric Chomko wrote:

Jorge R. Frank ) wrote:
: Michael Walsh wrote in
: :

: Did you really expect Kerry to come out in support of a Bush
: initiative?

: I expected him to evaluate the proposal on its own merits/demerits.

: In 1993, when Clinton cancelled SSF, replaced it with ISS, and invited the
: Russians in, Republicans continued to support it in greater percentages
: than Democrats, even though Clinton had definitely put his own stamp on the
: project. Indeed, at least the first couple of years, Clinton completely
: depended on Republican votes to save the program.

Right, you mean until they turned on him and tried to get him thrown out
of office for lying about a BJ.

Eric

: --
: JRF

That doesn't apply. I point out that Clinton lied very effectively about his
extra-marital affairs until he finally got pinned down by an investigation
that was really looking for something else.

The lies that resulted in him being impeached were told in the hearing
about the woman who accused him of exposing himself in Arkansas.

Clinton out-maneuvered the Republicans by tacking away from the
Democratic liberals toward the center.

Mike Walsh

"Jon Berndt"

"Rand Simberg" wrote in message

To think otherwise is laughable. Where is the big constituency for
going to the moon and Mars whose votes Bush is seeking?

Good grief. I can't believe the broad misperception of this, nor the

Oops. Looks like I misunderstood Rand. Sorry!

Jon

On Wed, 11 Feb 2004 21:57:00 -0600, in a place far, far away, "Jon
Berndt" made the phosphor on my monitor glow
in such a way as to indicate that:

"Jon Berndt"

"Rand Simberg" wrote in message

To think otherwise is laughable. Where is the big constituency for
going to the moon and Mars whose votes Bush is seeking?

Good grief. I can't believe the broad misperception of this, nor the

Oops. Looks like I misunderstood Rand. Sorry!

Certainly forgivable, given the double or triple negatives. I
misunderstood myself.

(ed kyle) wrote in message . com...
What will President Kerry do with NASA? My guess is that
he will want to dump the Bush Moon/Mars plans ASAP, but
will he be able to stop CEV and the end of Shuttle?

Well. I would assume that he'd put the money that would
go to the CEV and Moon/Mars stuff into buying warp drives
from the Vulcans. Then from there he would build up a
colony on Alpha Centuri and maybe Tau Ceti. The real
challenge will be what to do about the Klingon threat.
Bush has yet to even address it, so I hope Kerry has a
good plan for when he's President.


(Since we're talking about President Kerry I'm assuming
we're deep into fantasy land.)

Sander Vesik wrote in message ...


CEV - renamed OSP with a timeline. All the rest is at best fluff.

primary attribution error.

CEV == OSP of late 2003 =\= OSP of 2002

It's far more accurate to say that NASA changed its policy on OSP
early last year, when it halted certain lines of work and started
making noises about modularity and the ability to serve *more* than
just LEO. The offical death knell for the "P" in OSP was the
(permanent?) delay of X-37. Bush just made it open public policy by
changing the name.

All the rest is at best fluff?

Wouldn't Europeans like to think so. (stupid cowboy Americans!. . . oh
no, the Russians are crossing the Narva!)

Tom Merkle

Michael Walsh ) wrote:


: Eric Chomko wrote:

: Jorge R. Frank ) wrote:
: : Michael Walsh wrote in
: : :
:
: : Did you really expect Kerry to come out in support of a Bush
: : initiative?
:
: : I expected him to evaluate the proposal on its own merits/demerits.
:
: : In 1993, when Clinton cancelled SSF, replaced it with ISS, and invited the
: : Russians in, Republicans continued to support it in greater percentages
: : than Democrats, even though Clinton had definitely put his own stamp on the
: : project. Indeed, at least the first couple of years, Clinton completely
: : depended on Republican votes to save the program.
:
: Right, you mean until they turned on him and tried to get him thrown out
: of office for lying about a BJ.
:

: That doesn't apply. I point out that Clinton lied very effectively about his
: extra-marital affairs until he finally got pinned down by an investigation
: that was really looking for something else.

Yes, they were looking into Whitewater and then they got Monicagate. Talk
about things NOT applying!

: The lies that resulted in him being impeached were told in the hearing
: about the woman who accused him of exposing himself in Arkansas.

Wait, Clinton admitted to lying only when the stained blue dress was
threatened to be used against him. That lie had to do with Monica
Lewinsky. Paula Jones has never been vindicated.

: Clinton out-maneuvered the Republicans by tacking away from the
: Democratic liberals toward the center.

My point was that Clinton the original post was about Clinton's dependence
on Republican votes, until Monicagate.

Now, that I think of that I question it as well.

NASA is spread out over several states, one of them Maryland. Both
senators then and now are Demorcrats. I challange the original poster to
show where Maryland congressman did NOT vote in favor ISS while Clinton
was president.

Eric

: Mike Walsh

Well, if China's long term plans about landing a Taikonaut on the moon
even appear to be valid , or if the Chinese aggressively decide to pursue
space flight in general for that matter, I would be stunned if the US stood
by and allowed them to do so with no reaction. Sure, George W. said it was a
journey, not a race, but that is because there isn't anyone to race
with....yet.

Now, I have no idea as of yet just how aggressively China will pursue
manned spaceflight, but if China does aggressively push for the moon, then i
believe the US will at the very least match them by going to the Moon as
well or outdo them by pushing for the manned mission to Mars.

Cary Martynuik
"Henry Spencer" wrote in message
...
In article .rogers.com,
carym wrote:
I think China's long term efforts in space will have a serious
effect
on the US government's plans to continue, or discontinue the Bush plan.

To quote one G. Bush: "this is a journey, not a race".

China had nothing to do with it, and that lack of connection will
continue.
The 1960s space race was about the Cold War, not about space.
--
MOST launched 30 June; science observations running | Henry Spencer
since Oct; first surprises seen; papers pending. |