Barack Obama Continues to Disdain Space Exploration

On Thu, 3 Apr 2008 12:04:41 -0700 (PDT), in a place far, far away,
Eric Chomko made the phosphor on my monitor
glow in such a way as to indicate that:


So Clinton put it out of its misery?

But it ran afoul of a Democrat-controlled
Congress that couldn't get past the sticker shock, and Clinton killed it.

It was dead years before Clinton formally removed it from the policy.

Why don't you correct the NASA historian then?

Because I have better things to do with my time, and what he wrote
wasn't factually incorrect, simply incomplete (it was stated as a
"summary," if you'd actually bothered to read it).

Perhaps events led up to what Clinton did to SEI in 1996. But, the
fact remains that it was Clinton and in 1996 despite what you say.

Perhaps SEI was dead on arrival?

No, NASA killed it, long before 1996.

On Apr 3, 3:14*pm, (Rand Simberg) wrote:
On Thu, 3 Apr 2008 12:04:41 -0700 (PDT), in a place far, far away,
Eric Chomko made the phosphor on my monitor
glow in such a way as to indicate that:

So Clinton put it out of its misery?

But it ran afoul of a Democrat-controlled
Congress that couldn't get past the sticker shock, and Clinton killed it.

It was dead years before Clinton formally removed it from the policy.

Why don't you correct the NASA historian then?

Because I have better things to do with my time, and what he wrote
wasn't factually incorrect, simply incomplete (it was stated as a
"summary," if you'd actually bothered to read it).

Why don't you provide a link that spells out the details rather than a
summary?


Perhaps events led up to what Clinton did to SEI in 1996. But, the
fact remains that it was Clinton and in 1996 despite what you say.

Perhaps SEI was dead on arrival?

No, NASA killed it, long before 1996.

Provide a citation for that if you can.

On Wed, 2 Apr 2008 10:33:21 -0700 (PDT), Eric Chomko
wrote:

Read this and decide if Clinton was right or wrong. http://history.nasa.gov/seisummary.htm


Whether we agree on whether he was right or wrong, the fact is Clinton
did it and we agree on that. That's my point: You are complaining a
cancelled program has shown no results. But by definition, a program
can't show results if it's been cancelled. Knocking down straw men
may burn callories, but has little other value IMHO.

Hold it! Congress was controlled by Republicans in 1996! Reread the
link above. You don't recall "Contract on, err with America"? Newt,
Dick Armey, the Clinton lynch-mob of Hyde, Burton and others? All
elected or became committee heads after the 1994 election.


Yes. But I remember the Democrats controlled Congress in 1989 when
Bush Sr. proposed SEI. IRRC, Ted Kennedy and other leading Democrats
held a press conference right after his proposal if not that day
saying "no free launch." Who do you think controlled Congress when
"NASA was repeatedly rebuffed in its efforts to gain Congressional
support for the plan"? Until 1994, Democrats. And IIRC, as soon as
he was inaugurated in 1993, Clinton terminated the National Space
Council. That was the end of SEI. I was reading AVIATION WEEK
faithfully at public and college libraries in those days, so I am
pretty sure of the details. If you want to blame
eeeeeeevvvvviiiiiiiilllllllllllll Republicans for all the world's
ills, be my guest, but at least have your facts straight.

All of which is beside the point. Once again: Clinton cancelled SEI,
so of course, it has shown no results. QED. Partisanship has nothing
to do with it.


It tells you whether they had true commitment or not. They are both
from Texas and have commitment to the state and JSC, not NASA.

Clinton was not from Texas and he continued both Station and Shuttle,
which meant giving money to JSC and Texas. He also continued
planetary exploration even though he is not from JPL's home state of
California. So maybe the president's state of origin has nothing to
do with 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 Apr 6, 11:16*am, Michael Gallagher wrote:
On Wed, 2 Apr 2008 10:33:21 -0700 (PDT), Eric Chomko

wrote:
Read this and decide if Clinton was right or wrong.http://history.nasa.gov/seisummary.htm

Whether we agree on whether he was right or wrong, the fact is Clinton
did it and we agree on that. *That's my point: *You are complaining a
cancelled program has shown no results. *But by definition, a program
can't show results if it's been cancelled. *Knocking down straw men
may burn callories, but has little other value IMHO.

You miss the point. SEI was DOA. Why can't you just admit that? There
is no strawman.


Hold it! Congress was controlled by Republicans in 1996! Reread the
link above. You don't recall "Contract on, err with America"? Newt,
Dick Armey, the Clinton lynch-mob of Hyde, Burton and others? All
elected or became committee heads after the 1994 election.

Yes. *But I remember the Democrats controlled Congress in 1989 when
Bush Sr. proposed SEI. *IRRC, Ted Kennedy and other leading Democrats
held a press conference right after his proposal if not that day
saying "no free launch." *Who do you think controlled Congress when
"NASA was repeatedly rebuffed in its efforts to gain Congressional
support for the plan"? *Until 1994, Democrats. *And IIRC, as soon as
he was inaugurated in 1993, Clinton terminated the National Space
Council.

It was headed by Dan Quayle and he was a joke. Do you think any
program headed by Dan Quayle should have had a legacy? Especially one
associated with science and engineering?! Please...

I sure as hell know Republican hacks like to attribute Dan Quayle
quotes to Al Gore, despite the fact that Clinton and Gore wanted
nothing to do with Bush and Quayle's National Space Council. So,
killing the NSC as under Bush/Quayle was not only prudent (to steal a
word Bush Sr. likes) it was a necessary!

*That was the end of SEI.

I think SEI was dead on 7/21/89.

*I was reading AVIATION WEEK
faithfully at public and college libraries in those days, so I am
pretty sure of the details. *If you want to blame
eeeeeeevvvvviiiiiiiilllllllllllll Republicans for all the world's
ills, be my guest, but at least have your facts straight. *

Only when they attribute Quayle quotes to Gore. You are aware of your
fellow GOPers who do that, right?


All of which is beside the point. *Once again: *Clinton cancelled SEI,
so of course, it has shown no results. QED. *Partisanship has nothing
to do with it.

Other than your addition of it to the argument.


It tells you whether they had true commitment or not. They are both
from Texas and have commitment to the state and JSC, not NASA.

Clinton was not from Texas and he continued both Station and Shuttle,
which meant giving money to JSC and Texas. *\

As well as GSFC in MD, GSC in OH, JPL in CA, etc. Clinton did not
favor one center over others like Republicans, especially the ones
from Texas, like to do.

He also continued
planetary exploration even though he is not from JPL's home state of
California. *So maybe the president's state of origin has nothing to
do with it.

Or, maybe it does.

On Mon, 7 Apr 2008 11:16:38 -0700 (PDT), Eric Chomko
wrote:

You miss the point. SEI was DOA. Why can't you just admit that?....

Because I'm not talking about that issue at all! YOU'RE missing MY
point.

Let's go back. Several iterations of this thread ago, you said
something about how SEI had not shown results. Correct?

Well, we agree that Bill Clinton cancelled it sometime in the '90s --
you say '96 and I say '93, but the fact remains it was done. Right?
Whether it was right or wrong it was done. Ok? With me?

Now, SINCE cancellation, whenever it happened, it makes sense it
produced nothing because .... it was cancelled. Whatever they wanted
to do doesn't matter. If the program was cancelled, then nothing came
of it.

Prior to cancellation, there were studies done in the 1989-1992 time
frame; I'm not aware of any done as part of SEI from 1993 to 1996, but
that would make sense if work had stopped on it. But SEI was
envisioned as a thirty year long program --say from 1989 ton 2019. I
looked through my copy of AMERICA AT THE THRESHOLD, and none of their
architectures have an unmanned precursor to either the Moon or Mars
prior to 1998; the earliest manned missions to the Moon would have
been around 2003 or 2004, assuming everything they proposed had been
funded, which, of course, it never was. BY WHICH PARTY DOESN'T
MATTER.

So SEI was cancelled between two and five years before anything would
have been launched under the most optimistic plans, and nothing has
been done since. I think this demonstrates why it showed no results:
Cancellation. The value of the program and/or hypothetical nefarious
motives by the administration proposing it are irellevant to this
point. If it had continued we would be 2/3 of the way through it and
would be arguing about how well which administration had done on it,
but that is not what happened. It was cancelled, therefore, no
results. QED.


..... Only when they attribute Quayle quotes to Gore. You are aware of your
fellow GOPers who do that, right?


I am a Democrat -- not a liberal Democrat but still a Democrat -- so I
do not have any "fellow GOPers." So no, I wouldn't know what they
say.



----== 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 Apr 14, 10:49*am, Michael Gallagher wrote:
On Mon, 7 Apr 2008 11:16:38 -0700 (PDT), Eric Chomko

wrote:
You miss the point. SEI was DOA. Why can't you just admit that?....

Because I'm not talking about that issue at all! *YOU'RE missing MY
point.

Let's go back. *Several iterations of this thread ago, you said
something about how SEI had not shown results. *Correct? *

Yes and that is why I doubt W's VSE will be any better.


Well, we agree that Bill Clinton cancelled it sometime in the '90s --
you say '96 and I say '93, but the fact remains it was done. *Right?

This following link indicates quite clearly that it was in 1996.
http://history.nasa.gov/seisummary.htm

Whether it was right or wrong it was done. *Ok? *With me? *

But if it were WRONG, then putting it out of its misery is the RIGHT
thing to do!


Now, SINCE cancellation, whenever it happened, it makes sense it
produced nothing because .... it was cancelled. *Whatever they wanted
to do doesn't matter. *If the program was cancelled, then nothing came
of it. *

Because it was a bad plan. Like father like son! What part of this
don't you get?!?!


Prior to cancellation, there were studies done in the 1989-1992 time
frame; I'm not aware of any done as part of SEI from 1993 to 1996, but
that would make sense if work had stopped on it. *But SEI was
envisioned as a thirty year long program --say from 1989 ton 2019. *I
looked through my copy of AMERICA AT THE THRESHOLD, and none of their
architectures have an unmanned precursor to either the Moon or Mars
prior to 1998; the earliest manned missions to the Moon would have
been around 2003 or 2004, assuming everything they proposed had been
funded, which, of course, it never was. *BY WHICH PARTY DOESN'T
MATTER.

So SEI was cancelled between two and five years before anything would
have been launched under the most optimistic plans, and nothing has
been done since. *I think this demonstrates why it showed no results:
Cancellation.

No! THAT is your take! It was cancelled because no one felt that Bush
Sr.'s commitment to it was worth a crap. He tried a bold JFK-like
commitement and it fell on its face. Commitments make themselves.
JFK's commitment was valid because we went to the moon even after he
was dead.

*The value of the program and/or hypothetical nefarious
motives by the administration proposing it are irellevant to this
point.

No! They are the point!. Bush's SEI was bad because it was never
implemented!

*If it had continued we would be 2/3 of the way through it and
would be arguing about how well which administration had done on it,
but that is not what happened. *It was cancelled, therefore, no
results. *QED.

NO, again! We could have thrown more money down a hole for a longer
period of time and had Bush Jr. cancel it for being a lousy plan.

The Bushes want war not space exploration. Making long-term goals
about space and having a war during your term of duty is a case in
point. Their commitments were for war and the fact that both had wars
proves my point.


..... *Only when they attribute Quayle quotes to Gore. You are aware of your
fellow GOPers who do that, right?

I am a Democrat -- not a liberal Democrat but still a Democrat -- so I
do not have any "fellow GOPers." *So no, I wouldn't know what they
say.


I amazed at how you defend the GOP as you do.

On Tue, 15 Apr 2008 08:07:52 -0700 (PDT), Eric Chomko
wrote:

.... Bush's SEI was bad because it was never
implemented!


And we have gone in circles because cancellation prevents
implentation.

I'm getting off the merry-go-round. Have fun.



----== 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 Apr 18, 12:16*pm, Michael Gallagher wrote:
On Tue, 15 Apr 2008 08:07:52 -0700 (PDT), Eric Chomko

wrote:
.... Bush's SEI was bad because it was never
implemented!

And we have gone in circles because cancellation prevents
implentation.

I'm getting off the merry-go-round. *Have fun.


My last post on it as well.

You cannot assumed that had SEI gone forward that we'd have anything
worthwhile from it any
more that we have made progress with W's VSE. As it stands right now,
it is very clear
that the next administration will actually shape VSE if it is really
going to happen.

On Fri, 18 Apr 2008 13:09:47 -0700 (PDT), Eric Chomko
wrote:

You cannot assumed that had SEI gone forward that we'd have anything
worthwhile from it ....

True .... but then by the same token, no one can say NOTHING would
have come of it, either. We simply don't know. Nor can anyone accuse
the Bushes of doing VSE and SEI simply to get money for Texas without
backing that up with hard evidence to that effect, such as they
actually told someone that and the quote is verifiable. A Wikepedia
graphic of NASA grants doesn't count.


...... any
more that we have made progress with W's VSE ....

???? And what did you expect after four years? Orion isn't supposed
to have a manned flight until 2015. So what was supposed to have
happened by '08? If anything?

..... As it stands right now,
it is very clear
that the next administration will actually shape VSE if it is really
going to happen.

EXACTLY!



----== 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 =----

This is from a conservative site, and therefore has a certain angle on
it from the start.

http://www.americanthinker.com/2008/..._for_nasa.html

If any of it is true, I can't imagine why any space enthusiast or
space-industry worker would want Obama as president.