Is NASA a US "Defence Agency"?

On Tue, 20 Nov 2007 09:35:47 -0800 (PST), Eric Chomko
wrote:

.... JFK had the original idea of going to the moon .....

And Johnson (from Texas) followed through on it. But Carter didn't
return us to the Moon, neither did Bill Clinton. Hillary has already
said she will undermine VSE.

..... The Bushs' visions are to give
tax money to Texans .....

If we look at ....

http://www.nasa.gov/mission_pages/co...workforce.html

..... then Bush must have relatives in Ohio, Maryland, Virginia,
Florida, New Mexico, California, Alabama, and Louisiana because
that's where the centers -- in addition to JSC -- involved with
Constellation are located.


.... as their plans lack substantive details ....

Other than everything that's been published to date about Orion, Ares,
the architecture, and so forth, all of which is available to the whole
world via NASA's web site.

.... Convenient excuse for a DOA plan. It is "blame Clinton" all over
again.


Like he never did anything to help that along.

Maybe because Bush isn't really commited to it?.....

IIRC, Dwayne Day did a print article about that a few years ago.
Upshot: President Bush would only speak in support of VSE if asked,
and some in Congress took this as a sign he wouldn't back it. Wrong
conclusion; he said he would vetoe any appropriations bill that did
not include money for it.

So maybe his tack has changed on it. But what I know of that's come
out says he is behind it, even if he doesn't talk about it every day.

..... If you can find a
Texas Democrat running for the presidency, then you might have your
person.


No Texan, but Governor Bill Richardson is from New Mexico, where
Orion's launch abort system will be tested. His campaign web site
doesn't say anything abouot the VSE, though.

Still, if you want to win the argument, just point me at (A) a
Democratic presidential contendor who will continue VSE or (B) a
Republican presidential contendor who will not continue VSE. Either
or both of those names along with a link to the relevant press release
from his/her campaign will undermine my arrgument. No other response
will. This includes any rants about the intent of this paragraph.
You want to win? I've told you how. Just do it.



----== Posted via Newsfeeds.Com - Unlimited-Unrestricted-Secure Usenet News==----
http://www.newsfeeds.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! 120,000+ Newsgroups
----= East and West-Coast Server Farms - Total Privacy via Encryption =----

On Tue, 20 Nov 2007 17:36:13 GMT, h (Rand
Simberg) wrote:

On Tue, 20 Nov 2007 12:16:53 -0500, in a place far, far away, Michael
Gallagher made the phosphor on my monitor glow
in such a way as to indicate that:

No Democrat has been friendly to the idea.

George Miller. Bill Nelson. Nick Lampson. There are others.


Which one of them fought to continue SEI after George H. W. Bush left
office? Which one is running for president now.

Hillary! is the only candidate who has a position on it. It's not
exactly a hot campaign issue.

It's important to me, obviously. And a Democrat who comes out for it
or a Republican who comes out against it in the presidential race
would undermine my argument. So all you gotta do to win is provide
proof of either or both of those individuals. Anything else counts as
"No, I can't do it, but I'll rant anyway."





----== Posted via Newsfeeds.Com - Unlimited-Unrestricted-Secure Usenet News==----
http://www.newsfeeds.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! 120,000+ Newsgroups
----= East and West-Coast Server Farms - Total Privacy via Encryption =----

On Mon, 19 Nov 2007 16:45:56 -0800 (PST), rhw007
wrote:

I think we should elections like Canada with multiple parites and
whoever gets the MOST votes wins....

Actually, it's whichever party gets the most seats in the lower house
of parliament wins. So it's not a driect election either. More about
that below.


......no 'electoral college'.


Good luck ammending the Constitution of the United States, because
that's what you have to do to get rid of the electoral college.

However, a strong third party will take the EC out of the picture and
make us more like Canada because to win the election, a candidate has
to get at least 50% of the electoral college plus one. If there is a
strong third party, then no candidate will be able to get to 50%. And
so, under the constitution, it would fall to Congress to decide the
election, meaning the makeup of Congress would determine who the
president is, so Congressional elections and off year elections would
be more important, just as elections to parliament are in Canada.

So you if you can get a viable third party going, we'll be more
Canadian .... eh?

Just a thought.



----== Posted via Newsfeeds.Com - Unlimited-Unrestricted-Secure Usenet News==----
http://www.newsfeeds.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! 120,000+ Newsgroups
----= East and West-Coast Server Farms - Total Privacy via Encryption =----

On Thu, 22 Nov 2007 12:36:30 -0500, in a place far, far away, Michael
Gallagher made the phosphor on my monitor glow
in such a way as to indicate that:

On Tue, 20 Nov 2007 17:36:13 GMT, h (Rand
Simberg) wrote:

On Tue, 20 Nov 2007 12:16:53 -0500, in a place far, far away, Michael
Gallagher made the phosphor on my monitor glow
in such a way as to indicate that:

No Democrat has been friendly to the idea.

George Miller. Bill Nelson. Nick Lampson. There are others.


Which one of them fought to continue SEI after George H. W. Bush left
office? Which one is running for president now.

Hillary! is the only candidate who has a position on it. It's not
exactly a hot campaign issue.

It's important to me, obviously.

You're extremely unusual in that regard.

And a Democrat who comes out for it
or a Republican who comes out against it in the presidential race
would undermine my argument. So all you gotta do to win is provide
proof of either or both of those individuals. Anything else counts as
"No, I can't do it, but I'll rant anyway."

I'm not "ranting." I simply pointed out that, contrary to your
statement, some Democrats have been "friendly to the idea."

On Thu, 22 Nov 2007 20:32:03 GMT, h (Rand
Simberg) wrote:

I simply pointed out that, contrary to your
statement, some Democrats have been "friendly to the idea."


True, but others have not. And that includes one of the Democrats
running for president. And AFAIK, none of the Dems you named are
running for president. So you see the problem.




----== Posted via Newsfeeds.Com - Unlimited-Unrestricted-Secure Usenet News==----
http://www.newsfeeds.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! 120,000+ Newsgroups
----= East and West-Coast Server Farms - Total Privacy via Encryption =----

On Nov 22, 12:35 pm, Michael Gallagher wrote:
On Mon, 19 Nov 2007 10:56:00 -0800 (PST), Eric Chomko

wrote:
On Nov 18, 1:30 pm, Michael Gallagher wrote:

So you can't blame "Clinton" for squashing that attempt....because
Daddy George NEVER made an HONEST attempt to set the plan into motion.

Wrong.

The only mission we had to the moon in decades was Clementine and it
had nothing to do with Bush's plan.

Half right. We also had Lunar Prospector a few years after
Clemintine. It didn't have anything to do with SEI either (SEI was
dead and buried by 1996). But it was a Moon mission. In fact, now
that I think of it, Lunar Prospector was desinged as a lunar mission
from the get-go. In contrast, Clemintine was a BMDO mission that used
the Moon to test some of their technologies.

If Bush Sr.'s lunar plan was worth anything his son would have
resurrected it. Not be came up with his own farce, err, vision.

Let's see .... SEI: Base on the Moon; missions to Mars. VSE: Base on
the Moon; Missions to Mars. George W. may not have resurrected
specific ideas, but he seems to have got the same goals in mind.

And you think VSE will succeed where SEI failed? Why?


.... And for you to act like the Bushes of have done anything related to
action WRT to returning to the moon means that your partisan blindness
is still unchecked.

Fact: Both President Bushes (R) proposed it.

Fact: NASA is designing the hardware for it, which has been debated
vigorously in this forum.

Fact: Bill Clinton (D) did not propose doing it.

Fact: Hillary (D) has already said that if elected she will shut down
the VSE.

What's the partisan part?

JFK propsed Apollo and we did it, Thus far no lunar proposal by the
Republicans have resulted in anything.


Maybe they will. Maybe we will. Maybe there will be a multinational
effort. Maybe I'll sleep with a supermodel tonight. Who knows?

Now you're dreaming.

About the suppermodel? Oh, yeah. All alone again! :_(

How many supermodels are conservative Republicans?

On Mon, 26 Nov 2007 08:37:31 -0800 (PST), in a place far, far away,
Eric Chomko made the phosphor on my monitor
glow in such a way as to indicate that:

How many supermodels are conservative Republicans?

http://www.kathyireland.com/
http://forthardknox.com/2007/10/12/c...ay-kim-alexis/
http://www.lycos.com/info/bo-derek--...nt-george.html
http://forthardknox.com/2007/10/11/c...janine-turner/

On Nov 22, 12:36 pm, Michael Gallagher wrote:
On Tue, 20 Nov 2007 09:35:47 -0800 (PST), Eric Chomko

wrote:
.... JFK had the original idea of going to the moon .....

And Johnson (from Texas) followed through on it. But Carter didn't
return us to the Moon, neither did Bill Clinton. Hillary has already
said she will undermine VSE.

Bush has undemined VSE by commiting to much money to Iraq and not
enough to NASA.

Clinton merely stated that Bush's vision has allowed the Earth
Observing Satellites to fall into disarray( true).


..... The Bushs' visions are to give
tax money to Texans .....

If we look at ....

http://www.nasa.gov/mission_pages/co...nstellation_wo...

.... then Bush must have relatives in Ohio, Maryland, Virginia,
Florida, New Mexico, California, Alabama, and Louisiana because
that's where the centers -- in addition to JSC -- involved with
Constellation are located.

Why don't you provide the percentage of $$$ to each state for the
program. How much does JSC get as compared to all other NASA
facilities?


.... as their plans lack substantive details ....

Other than everything that's been published to date about Orion, Ares,
the architecture, and so forth, all of which is available to the whole
world via NASA's web site.

.... Convenient excuse for a DOA plan. It is "blame Clinton" all over
again.

Like he never did anything to help that along.

Bush was lucky Clinton left him with a balanced budget. The way Bush
spends money you'd think he were a Democrat.


Maybe because Bush isn't really commited to it?.....

IIRC, Dwayne Day did a print article about that a few years ago.
Upshot: President Bush would only speak in support of VSE if asked,
and some in Congress took this as a sign he wouldn't back it. Wrong
conclusion; he said he would vetoe any appropriations bill that did
not include money for it.

Great, JSC gets money for VSE whether it produces results or not.


So maybe his tack has changed on it. But what I know of that's come
out says he is behind it, even if he doesn't talk about it every day.

He's behind getting tax dollars to contractors based out of JSC.
Nothing about whether JSC actually produces anything, just that he'll
veto anything stating that they don't get their funds.

..... If you can find a
Texas Democrat running for the presidency, then you might have your
person.

No Texan, but Governor Bill Richardson is from New Mexico, where
Orion's launch abort system will be tested. His campaign web site
doesn't say anything abouot the VSE, though.

What is the NM space budget compared to TX?

Still, if you want to win the argument, just point me at (A) a
Democratic presidential contendor who will continue VSE or (B) a
Republican presidential contendor who will not continue VSE. Either
or both of those names along with a link to the relevant press release
from his/her campaign will undermine my arrgument. No other response
will. This includes any rants about the intent of this paragraph.
You want to win? I've told you how. Just do it.

Your choices are not the only ones, they never are! You need to look
at how much of the NASA budget goes to manned spaceflight and how much
of that goes to both TX and FLA. You need to realize that VSE is a
works project and not an engineering or science project.

On Mon, 26 Nov 2007 08:56:45 -0800 (PST), Eric Chomko
wrote:

Bush has undemined VSE by commiting to much money to Iraq and not
enough to NASA.


NASA has got maybe 1% of the Federal budget since the 1960s. If the
war in Iraq ended tomorrow, most likely congressional Democrats would
want to redirect the money to social programs, not NASA.

Why don't you provide the percentage of $$$ to each state for the
program. How much does JSC get as compared to all other NASA
facilities?


I don't have those figures. Do you? Although the centers that build
the hardware are probably going to guess nice chunks of change.

He's behind getting tax dollars to contractors based out of JSC.
Nothing about whether JSC actually produces anything, just that he'll
veto anything stating that they don't get their funds.


Yet if VSE is axed, it won't get a chance to produce results, will it?


What is the NM space budget compared to TX?


I don't know, but NM is where they will conduct tests on the Orion's
launch abort system. So I guess more than $13.80.

Still, if you want to win the argument, just point me at (A) a
Democratic presidential contendor who will continue VSE or (B) a
Republican presidential contendor who will not continue VSE. Either
or both of those names along with a link to the relevant press release
from his/her campaign will undermine my arrgument. No other response
will. This includes any rants about the intent of this paragraph.
You want to win? I've told you how. Just do it.

Your choices are not the only ones, they never are! ....

Tough; they're the only options I will accept as refuting my argument.
If you can't rise to that challenge, then you've got nothing.

..... You need to realize that VSE is a
works project and not an engineering or science project.


You mean I "need" to agree with you? No, I don't. There are a lot of
things I "need" to do in my day. Knuckling under to somone on Usenet
is not one of them.



----== Posted via Newsfeeds.Com - Unlimited-Unrestricted-Secure Usenet News==----
http://www.newsfeeds.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! 120,000+ Newsgroups
----= East and West-Coast Server Farms - Total Privacy via Encryption =----

On Mon, 26 Nov 2007 08:37:31 -0800 (PST), Eric Chomko
wrote:

JFK propsed Apollo and we did it, Thus far no lunar proposal by the
Republicans have resulted in anything.


The only reason "we did it" after Kennedy died was his successors,
Johnson and Nixon, followed through on what had been started. But
wait, JSC was built in Johnson's home state of Texas and named after
him! Could that be the "real" reason he backed it? Although that
didn't save NASA from having its budget cut in the '60s and '70s.

Apollo wasn't as universally approved of as the rose-colored glasses
of hindsight would have us believe. The mid-'60s saw a book called
"Moondoggle" tha took a very critical tone of it. Another book on
satellites from the same period ridiculed the ideas of astronauts
doing anything productive on the Moon; the author depicted the first
Moonwalker as talking about how great it was to be there but doing
little else. That they would take along cameras, insturments, and be
trained by geologists in what to look for never crossed his mind.

Now, SEI was terminated/doomed/whatever about 15 years ago, so of
course, it has produced nothing. Cancelled programs rarely do. And
even then, it was supposed to be spread over 30 years, so, no, it
wouldn't have launched anything by 1992 anyway. VSE is still in its
formitive stages; whether anything comes of it depends on what Bush's
successors decide. But let's just say it continues. Orion will not
have it's first manned flight for eight years, and not go to the Moon
for a few years after that, so it's understandable nothing has flown
NOW. You might as well say Apollo flopped becaus they didn't land on
the Moon in 1962. But knocking down straw men is a good way to burn
off holiay callories, so please, continue. (I prefer the heavy bag
myself; you don't always have to pick it up every time.)



----== Posted via Newsfeeds.Com - Unlimited-Unrestricted-Secure Usenet News==----
http://www.newsfeeds.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! 120,000+ Newsgroups
----= East and West-Coast Server Farms - Total Privacy via Encryption =----