NASA on the ropes

The recent controversy surrounding the NASA budget is symptomatic of the current White House disarray.

Without any explanation or vision, the White House simply cut all the manned space programs.  They cut the shuttle, the constellation project, Orion, etc.  And, their plan is to do...what exactly?

In a recent Senate hearing Charlie Bolden, NASA's capable administrator  tried to put a good face on it.  Yes, there are many good things in the budget and we plan to get to Mars someday, etc., long on rhetoric and short on details.

Now there is a movement to try and keep the shuttle flying a couple more years at the cost of 2.5 billion a year to save 23,000 jobs.  that's about $108,000 per job.  The alternative to keep the constellation program in the testing phase also spends 2.5 billion but only saves 6,000 jobs.

If it's just about jobs, then we keep the shuttle flying, if it's about making the US technologically superior then we cut the shuttle and run with constellation.  Here's the rub, we have to spend the 2.5 billion to shut down constellation, so why not keep it alive along with the 6,000 jobs?

It seems that the White House has its collective heads up their arseholes when it comes to space.  They have no plan, no vision and no idea how to get there.  Sounds like health care.

Obama is at fault, he's the guy at the top, but his sidekick Rahm is just as responsible.  Obama's not going to quit, but maybe it's time for Rahm to go, because it seems the inmates are running the asylum.

If you want to watch the hearing, here it is:

http://www.youtube.com/watc h?v=esCGYkVhhnY

< Orahma = The Freddy Kruger of Progressive Dreams. | The 70 Billion Dollar Man >

Poll

Should the shuttle program be cancelled?
Yes, it's a white elephant. 20%
Not sure, reducing the deficit is more important. 20%
No, we can't depend on the Russians solely. 60%

Votes: 5
Results | Other Polls
 Display:
The decision to hold on manual space exploration is probably the best decision.   We get 10 times more bang for the buck with robotics in terms of pure scientific discovery.   Keeping people alive and supplying them in places as far away as the moon and Mars is phenomenally expensive and difficult.  I have no doubt we'll one day send someone to Mars to properly search for signs of microbial life there but that can wait until the financial crisis is over.   In the meantime, NASA has explored far more of the solar system with robots and learned far more about the other planets than they could have if they tried to send manned missions.   A single manned mission to Mars would probably cost as much or more than all the robots combined.

by bfaul on 03/11/2010 09:16:23 AM EST

This is insane, NASA is one source of innovations that is what made America the technology envy of the world.

There are many items developed for the space program that changed our society, created new markets, and provided new opportunities.

Cutting NASA is a another corporate sell out.

 

by wowisdabomb on 03/11/2010 09:29:45 AM EST

This action, along with the recent decision by the corporate-ass-sucking Supremes, is solid evidence that the USA has entered its final decline.

by RedPossum on 03/11/2010 09:41:52 AM EST

[ Parent ]
Hear, hear. I silently thank NASA every time I Velcro myself to a wall, eat dehydrated ice cream at the mall and use my zero-gravity toilet. And so should everyone.

Furthermore, it goes without saying that cutting NASA would end our capacity to compete in the space race, which most jingoistic xenophobes would agree is crucial to American hegemony. I don't want to hear any of those naysayers crying and whining when the entire surface of the Moon is bristling with Chinese interplanetary warheads.

by OneHitKill on 03/11/2010 09:52:06 AM EST

[ Parent ]
 Display: