Obama to cancel NASA


log in

Advanced search

Message boards : Politics : Obama to cancel NASA

1 · 2 · 3 · 4 . . . 5 · Next
Author Message
Nautilus
Avatar
Send message
Joined: 19 Jun 06
Posts: 44
Credit: 889,174
RAC: 0
Turkey
Message 1165988 - Posted: 28 Oct 2011, 14:14:20 UTC

Word has leaked out that in its new budget, the Obama administration intends to terminate NASA’s planetary exploration program. The Mars Science Lab Curiosity, being readied on the pad, will be launched, as will the nearly completed small MAVEN orbiter scheduled for 2013, but that will be it. No further missions to anywhere are planned.


http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2011/oct/26/obama-readies-to-blast-nasa/
____________

Profile DEAD
Avatar
Send message
Joined: 16 Jun 02
Posts: 2166
Credit: 3,659,144
RAC: 3,208
United States
Message 1165992 - Posted: 28 Oct 2011, 14:32:31 UTC - in response to Message 1165988.

Political Moves by The DEM/Libs and Oblahblahblah to Scare Up Support/Votes for their Socialist/Union Liberal Agendas.

Once The Scare gets them a few of their Vote Getting Programs, The Scare will End and NASA will Survive, albeit without some of its Pork.

Have a Cuppa Tea

Dull
____________


Profile Bob DeWoody
Avatar
Send message
Joined: 9 May 10
Posts: 1369
Credit: 547,606
RAC: 213
United States
Message 1165994 - Posted: 28 Oct 2011, 14:57:50 UTC

I've been saying since the day Obama announced the "plan" to visit an asteroid that it was just a smoke screen to mask his intention to scrap US participation in manned space flight. So it's no surprise to me, if true, that NASA is heading for the chopping block. Funding NASA does not buy many votes whereas a new fat welfare program will. It is so short sighted to claim that the money spent on the space program is a waste. Like I have said before, the money does not get shot into space and lost. The vast majority of the money goes to pay highly intelligent and talented people to do jobs and they in turn spend that money to buy houses, cars, clothes, food and all the other things that keep the economy going. Too much welfare money goes into the pockets of the people providing services to those at the recieving end.
____________
Bob DeWoody

My motto: Never do today what you can put off until tomorrow as it may not be required.

Profile ignorance is no excuse
Avatar
Send message
Joined: 4 Oct 00
Posts: 9529
Credit: 44,433,274
RAC: 0
Korea, North
Message 1166002 - Posted: 28 Oct 2011, 15:21:00 UTC - in response to Message 1165994.

Probes are easier and require much less space than sending people to planets. I'd rather see near time use of NASA's budget spent on probes to planets/asteroids than trying to get someone there.
____________
In a rich man's house there is no place to spit but his face.
Diogenes Of Sinope

End terrorism by building a school

Profile Sarge
Volunteer tester
Avatar
Send message
Joined: 25 Aug 99
Posts: 9201
Credit: 1,359,787
RAC: 1,580
United States
Message 1166049 - Posted: 28 Oct 2011, 19:44:43 UTC - in response to Message 1165994.

I've been saying since the day Obama announced the "plan" to visit an asteroid that it was just a smoke screen to mask his intention to scrap US participation in manned space flight. So it's no surprise to me, if true, that NASA is heading for the chopping block. Funding NASA does not buy many votes whereas a new fat welfare program will. It is so short sighted to claim that the money spent on the space program is a waste. Like I have said before, the money does not get shot into space and lost. The vast majority of the money goes to pay highly intelligent and talented people to do jobs and they in turn spend that money to buy houses, cars, clothes, food and all the other things that keep the economy going. Too much welfare money goes into the pockets of the people providing services to those at the recieving end.

I thought there was nothing government could do that private industry couldn't do better. GO, AnSARI! WOO!!!

zoom314
Avatar
Send message
Joined: 30 Nov 03
Posts: 45813
Credit: 36,432,113
RAC: 6,530
Message 1166087 - Posted: 28 Oct 2011, 23:29:36 UTC - in response to Message 1165994.
Last modified: 28 Oct 2011, 23:31:08 UTC

I've been saying since the day Obama announced the "plan" to visit an asteroid that it was just a smoke screen to mask his intention to scrap US participation in manned space flight. So it's no surprise to me, if true, that NASA is heading for the chopping block. Funding NASA does not buy many votes whereas a new fat welfare program will. It is so short sighted to claim that the money spent on the space program is a waste. Like I have said before, the money does not get shot into space and lost. The vast majority of the money goes to pay highly intelligent and talented people to do jobs and they in turn spend that money to buy houses, cars, clothes, food and all the other things that keep the economy going. Too much welfare money goes into the pockets of the people providing services to those at the receiving end.

Welfare is a broad term, Thankfully I just get SSI, otherwise I'd be out in the cold and most likely, quite dead. But I digress, It's too bad NASA may be having a funding problem, but then I like NASA, stupidly Rep McKeon(R-CA formerly of the 25th District) wants to increase Defense Funding to $716 Billion.
____________

BarryAZ
Send message
Joined: 1 Apr 01
Posts: 2580
Credit: 11,914,537
RAC: 3,918
United States
Message 1166090 - Posted: 28 Oct 2011, 23:43:41 UTC - in response to Message 1165994.

But Bob, the concept of 'government investment' is clearly lost on the TeaPublicans, so why should the Democrats waste efforts here. Perhaps if the TeaPublicans agreed to fund space exploration with new tax revenues (perhaps on those corporations which have gained so much in the past), then the argument might be different.

With all the cry about deficits and balancing the budget by elimination of Medicaid, reducing Medicare, reducing Social Security, eliminating Education support and the like, does it cause much surprise that space exploration would take a zero line hit?


I've been saying since the day Obama announced the "plan" to visit an asteroid that it was just a smoke screen to mask his intention to scrap US participation in manned space flight. So it's no surprise to me, if true, that NASA is heading for the chopping block. Funding NASA does not buy many votes whereas a new fat welfare program will. It is so short sighted to claim that the money spent on the space program is a waste. Like I have said before, the money does not get shot into space and lost. The vast majority of the money goes to pay highly intelligent and talented people to do jobs and they in turn spend that money to buy houses, cars, clothes, food and all the other things that keep the economy going. Too much welfare money goes into the pockets of the people providing services to those at the recieving end.


____________

BarryAZ
Send message
Joined: 1 Apr 01
Posts: 2580
Credit: 11,914,537
RAC: 3,918
United States
Message 1166091 - Posted: 28 Oct 2011, 23:45:24 UTC - in response to Message 1165992.

You know Dull, your absolute misrepresentation of Obama as having Socialist Agenda does seem like you have really drunk Becktaid or Rushpills. I took you for less stupid than that.

Political Moves by The DEM/Libs and Oblahblahblah to Scare Up Support/Votes for their Socialist/Union Liberal Agendas.

Once The Scare gets them a few of their Vote Getting Programs, The Scare will End and NASA will Survive, albeit without some of its Pork.

Have a Cuppa Tea

Dull


____________

BarryAZ
Send message
Joined: 1 Apr 01
Posts: 2580
Credit: 11,914,537
RAC: 3,918
United States
Message 1166100 - Posted: 29 Oct 2011, 0:08:24 UTC

I would expect to see an outcry here. But really when the dominant party in Congress is about making government inconsequential along with singing the praises of private enterprise, how can you expect to see any other result.

If the only technological investment considered worthy of additional government funding is that which makes for more efficient (or at least more expensive) tools of death and destruction, how can you rationally expect a willingness to fund exploration.

When education is a four letter word to elected representatives, how can you expect science to get funding?

When support for research for less polluting ways to power all our toys is decried as socialism, how can you expect space toys to get money.

Get a grip folks, if the government is chastised for helping poor folks get health care, surely it should be lambasted for helping far wealthier people shoot rockets into space.
____________

Profile betreger
Avatar
Send message
Joined: 29 Jun 99
Posts: 2137
Credit: 4,439,884
RAC: 7,956
United States
Message 1166104 - Posted: 29 Oct 2011, 0:18:29 UTC - in response to Message 1166100.

Amen.
____________

Profile ignorance is no excuse
Avatar
Send message
Joined: 4 Oct 00
Posts: 9529
Credit: 44,433,274
RAC: 0
Korea, North
Message 1166109 - Posted: 29 Oct 2011, 0:37:04 UTC - in response to Message 1166104.

I( tried to find other articles about massive cuts to the current NASA budget. Sadly, there only seems to be articles from at least 8 months ago and the current on on display. The articles I've read all point to the agency being given no additional dollars but still maintaining a fairly large budget.
____________
In a rich man's house there is no place to spit but his face.
Diogenes Of Sinope

End terrorism by building a school

zoom314
Avatar
Send message
Joined: 30 Nov 03
Posts: 45813
Credit: 36,432,113
RAC: 6,530
Message 1166111 - Posted: 29 Oct 2011, 0:43:48 UTC - in response to Message 1166104.

Amen.

Seconded.
____________

Profile DEAD
Avatar
Send message
Joined: 16 Jun 02
Posts: 2166
Credit: 3,659,144
RAC: 3,208
United States
Message 1166141 - Posted: 29 Oct 2011, 3:02:44 UTC

does seem like you have really drunk Becktaid or Rushpills. I took you for less stupid than that.

When The MSNBC Wonks quit using Terms of Derision for The Repugs/TeaPots, then I might decide not to use them for The DEM/Libs and Potus.

Beck and Rush. The only time I hear anything they say is when The News plays a clip of Their Antics.

tools of death and destruction, how can you rationally expect a willingness to fund exploration.

What do you expect? There are still people alive who lived through WWI and WWII and its after effects. Since DEM/Libs are constantly saying what Psychos GOP/Ters are, then maybe, just maybe there are Psychos still out there who can be The Next...World Destroyer. And only a Strong Defense can Stop Them.

When support for research for less polluting ways to power all our toys is decried as socialism

Can't change Socio-Economics overnight. Green and Clean will one day be here. Until then, Breathe Deep The Gathering Gloom.

Political Moves by The DEM/Libs and Oblahblahblah to Scare Up Support/Votes for their Socialist/Union Liberal Agendas.

Stating a Political Fact. Both Parties do it.

Dull


____________


BarryAZ
Send message
Joined: 1 Apr 01
Posts: 2580
Credit: 11,914,537
RAC: 3,918
United States
Message 1166169 - Posted: 29 Oct 2011, 5:10:16 UTC - in response to Message 1166109.

And not being particularly cost effective about it -- take a look at the long delayed and way over cost new space telescope project.

Look, I was virtually weaned on Heinlein in the 50's. I've been a participant in the SETI project since long before BOINC (over 10 1/2 years). I would love to see space exploration -- I'd love to see it cost effective and not run on for years and years to do limited things. Then again, I'd also love to see health care as available for the poor. So I figure, give the 1% something to fund and build.

I( tried to find other articles about massive cuts to the current NASA budget. Sadly, there only seems to be articles from at least 8 months ago and the current on on display. The articles I've read all point to the agency being given no additional dollars but still maintaining a fairly large budget.


____________

BarryAZ
Send message
Joined: 1 Apr 01
Posts: 2580
Credit: 11,914,537
RAC: 3,918
United States
Message 1166170 - Posted: 29 Oct 2011, 5:11:58 UTC - in response to Message 1166141.

I could be wrong, but I believe the Rash predated MSNBC and outperforms on the derision meter big time. He just uses shorter words to do it.


When The MSNBC Wonks quit using Terms of Derision for The Repugs/TeaPots, then I might decide not to use them for The DEM/Libs and Potus.




____________

BarryAZ
Send message
Joined: 1 Apr 01
Posts: 2580
Credit: 11,914,537
RAC: 3,918
United States
Message 1166171 - Posted: 29 Oct 2011, 5:13:05 UTC - in response to Message 1166141.

Ah - so your misrepresentations are a demonstration of your native smarts. Fair enough.




Beck and Rush. The only time I hear anything they say is when The News plays a clip of Their Antics.


BarryAZ
Send message
Joined: 1 Apr 01
Posts: 2580
Credit: 11,914,537
RAC: 3,918
United States
Message 1166172 - Posted: 29 Oct 2011, 5:19:19 UTC - in response to Message 1166141.

I get strong defense -- I don't think that's where a lot of the defense money goes -- it goes to -- you got it -- the 1%.

WW I -- there is a body of thought that believes the US got into that war because they were owed so much money by the Brits and the French for munitions, war materials and foodstuffs sold to them in 1915 and 1916 that they needed to make sure the Allies won. Oh, and the folks who really got rich off of the munition sales -- yup. you got it -- the 1%

But if you suck up all that money into the 21st century defense budget -- SOME of it gets pulled from peaceful exploration. It's a choice -- and one made by those non-socialist types quite willfully. The only way the TeaPublicans will fund NASA is if they are told, nod, nod, wink, wink, it is to beat (militarily) the Chinese.


tools of death and destruction, how can you rationally expect a willingness to fund exploration.

What do you expect? There are still people alive who lived through WWI and WWII and its after effects. Since DEM/Libs are constantly saying what Psychos GOP/Ters are, then maybe, just maybe there are Psychos still out there who can be The Next...World Destroyer. And only a Strong Defense can Stop Them.



____________

Profile DEAD
Avatar
Send message
Joined: 16 Jun 02
Posts: 2166
Credit: 3,659,144
RAC: 3,208
United States
Message 1166178 - Posted: 29 Oct 2011, 6:37:03 UTC
Last modified: 29 Oct 2011, 6:37:48 UTC

it goes to -- you got it -- the 1%.

You are wasting your talents. Oblahblahblah needs a new SpeechWriter. That Big Guvment Paycheck will make it possible to Give To The Po 99% so much mo.

1%Dull
____________


BarryAZ
Send message
Joined: 1 Apr 01
Posts: 2580
Credit: 11,914,537
RAC: 3,918
United States
Message 1166180 - Posted: 29 Oct 2011, 7:03:22 UTC - in response to Message 1166178.
Last modified: 29 Oct 2011, 7:06:26 UTC

Why thank you, I'll wait until Michael Moore gives 99& of his 1% <g>

Then again, I AM in the 1% -- look at my stats <smile>


You are wasting your talents. Oblahblahblah needs a new SpeechWriter. That Big Guvment Paycheck will make it possible to Give To The Po 99% so much mo.

1%Dull

____________

Profile Bob DeWoody
Avatar
Send message
Joined: 9 May 10
Posts: 1369
Credit: 547,606
RAC: 213
United States
Message 1166319 - Posted: 29 Oct 2011, 22:52:18 UTC - in response to Message 1166002.

Probes are easier and require much less space than sending people to planets. I'd rather see near time use of NASA's budget spent on probes to planets/asteroids than trying to get someone there.


The whole point of this report is that Obama wants to scrap all space exploration, manned or robotic. I guess he thinks we have learned everything there is to learn about space.
____________
Bob DeWoody

My motto: Never do today what you can put off until tomorrow as it may not be required.

1 · 2 · 3 · 4 . . . 5 · Next

Message boards : Politics : Obama to cancel NASA

Copyright © 2014 University of California