White House: The new moon mission is canceled

posted at 6:46 pm on January 29, 2010 by Allahpundit

Are conservatives really upset about this? I would have thought it’d be grudgingly approved as an unfortunate yet necessary sacrifice to fiscal responsibility, but the Village Voice cobbled together an entire article a few days ago from angry reactions of righty bloggers to news that the mission was on the chopping block. On the one hand, we’re knocking The One for his laughably puny spending freeze, and on the other, we’re knocking him for not shoveling billions towards NASA for yet another hoparound on the big rock in the sky? I don’t get it.

“Constellation is dead,” the source told AFP on condition of anonymity, referring to a program that envisioned returning to the moon by 2020 and using Earth’s nearest neighbour as a base for manned expeditions to Mars…

Reports added that the US space agency will work on finding a commercial solution to ferrying US astronauts to the International Space Station after the scheduled end of NASA’s shuttle program in September 2010.

Astronauts will be able to hitch rides aboard Russian Soyuz spacecraft, but the United States will need a commercial alternative if Congress approves White House plans to scrap development of a successor to the shuttle program.

Fiscal responsibility and privatization? What’s not to like? We’re going to have to poll this one. Just remember: Our current debt ceiling is $14.3 trillion.



Related Posts:

Breaking on Hot Air

Blowback

Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.

Trackbacks/Pings

Trackback URL

Comments

Comment pages: 1 2 3 5

And to think they already wasted all that money.

Ian on January 29, 2010 at 6:47 PM

Manned space flight is a vanity project for the foreseeable future. All the science can be done by remote now, and it will only tilt farther in that direction as computers are improved.

Count to 10 on January 29, 2010 at 6:48 PM

Ha. I voted for option 1, but option 3 is hilarious.

BadgerHawk on January 29, 2010 at 6:48 PM

Take whatever money is needed out of the Porkulus, NOW, and fund the moon mission.

neurosculptor on January 29, 2010 at 6:49 PM

Though it would admittedly be nice to have a really big rocket to put, say, eight meter telescopes in orbit.

Count to 10 on January 29, 2010 at 6:49 PM

Full Disclosure now.

Static on January 29, 2010 at 6:49 PM

I am having trouble with this one. On one hand I’m all for fiscal responisbility and if we can’t afford it, cut it. One the other hand Obama is growing the size of government astronomically and they are going to need the moon for government office space.
It just seems like such a farce.

ORconservative on January 29, 2010 at 6:49 PM

Glad the anti-science Prezident is out of office.

misterpeasea on January 29, 2010 at 6:50 PM

On the one hand, we’re knocking The One for his laughably puny spending freeze, and on the other, we’re knocking him for not shoveling billions towards NASA for yet another hoparound on the big rock in the sky? I don’t get it.

Because we’re cutting the wrong programs. Instead of eliminating our return to the moon while China and India work on getting there, how about not passing cap-and-trade or cutting out green technology crap?

amerpundit on January 29, 2010 at 6:50 PM

Wow, for the first time I agree with Barry O.

Never been a fan of the space program. Too many issues down here to solve first.

BVM on January 29, 2010 at 6:50 PM

Count to 10 on January 29, 2010 at 6:48 PM

Space is the big race and the most important one there is. The first one out there (colonizing) wins, and wins big. This is more important than colonizing the New World was.

neurosculptor on January 29, 2010 at 6:50 PM

Are conservatives really upset about this?

no. After trying to bomb the moon… and no video and very few pics, I don’t trust NASA to do a weather map. Oh, wait!

upinak on January 29, 2010 at 6:50 PM

Reports added that the US space agency will work on finding a commercial solution to ferrying US astronauts to the International Space Station after the scheduled end of NASA’s shuttle program in September 2010.

May I suggest
Southwest Airlines
And they don’t charge for checked bags too

macncheez on January 29, 2010 at 6:51 PM

“I blame Obama.” The issue is not that he’s cutting this program. The issue is that he’s cutting this program, while flushing trillions down the toilet on programs of far more dubious value.

joe_doufu on January 29, 2010 at 6:51 PM

I’d rather we drill for our own oil, become energy independent, pay down the debt…

… then we can fly to the moon.

Seven Percent Solution on January 29, 2010 at 6:51 PM

Generally I am for exploration, it provides so much diversion, and the science from it helps us all.
But right now, we need to put people back to work, producing.
However, since Obama has no idea how to do that…maybe the space program would create more jobs then his jobs bills have.
I just talked myself into continuing..

right2bright on January 29, 2010 at 6:51 PM

total horseshit choices.

The reality is that investment in things like space exploration DRIVE recoveries in the right ways: education, engineering, invention…etc.

The cost of the original moon mission was re-paid many times over by the returns in those ares!

Obama will simply take the money and RE_DISTRIBUTE it!

Justrand on January 29, 2010 at 6:52 PM

The hilarious part is that the NASA administrator just promised at the AAS conference that Obama would fully fund manned space flight.

Count to 10 on January 29, 2010 at 6:52 PM

I’m not into space expeditures, but I am concerned about the Russians or the Chinese beating us to all those liquid diamonds in Uranus.

RushBaby on January 29, 2010 at 6:52 PM

Wonderful to see that science has indeed “returned” to the White House!

Only science these Commies are interested is social science.

Just think, if these “progressives” had been around 600 years ago, there would have been no Renaissance.

Dr. ZhivBlago on January 29, 2010 at 6:54 PM

Privatize NASA! I’ll pay-per-view the moon landing of the Red Bull Rover being launched from the Proctor and Gamble shuttle to land on a new section of Luna, the Starbucks plateau.

Sgt Steve on January 29, 2010 at 6:55 PM

Waste of money.

deidre on January 29, 2010 at 6:55 PM

Generally I am for exploration, it provides so much diversion, and the science from it helps us all.
But right now, we need to put people back to work, producing.

This isn’t a but. Is it? The science puts people to work. Producing new stuff.

It should definitely be done, public vs. private is the question. Public if we want faster and more expensive, private otherwise.

misterpeasea on January 29, 2010 at 6:55 PM

Space is the big race and the most important one there is. The first one out there (colonizing) wins, and wins big. This is more important than colonizing the New World was.

neurosculptor on January 29, 2010 at 6:50 PM

Not happening.
The new world was colonized not by governments, but by private interests (with government approval).
Quite frankly, the prospects look better that we will colonize them with robots (sentient or otherwise) than that we make getting human bodies out there profitable.

Count to 10 on January 29, 2010 at 6:55 PM

I think this would upset Sinatra.

I voted for we can’t afford it but, I really want to blame Obama. Sad part is we are wasting money elsewhere and the technology that could come from this could be useful.

boomer on January 29, 2010 at 6:56 PM

JFK is rolling over in his grave.

Del Dolemonte on January 29, 2010 at 6:56 PM

I’ve heard people say “If we can put a man on the moon, we can do “(insert socialist policy)”. Well since we can’t put a man on the moon anymore, I guess that point is moot now.

zmdavid on January 29, 2010 at 6:56 PM

lol at “I Blame Obama”…

But the second choice is a bit misnamed. Space exploration is far, far more than some big “adventure”. As we all know, so many great technological innovations come out of the space program…things that make all our lives here on Earth better.

The space program pays for itself in Earthly innovations.

Instead of cutting it, there should be a simple economic feasibility study done, or a major cut in any wasteful NASA spending.

It’s a sad day when we put the space program on hold tho.

JetBoy on January 29, 2010 at 6:56 PM

I need to know how many jobs are lost and where does the saved money go?

Knucklehead on January 29, 2010 at 6:57 PM

Fiscal responsibility is very, very important. But national prestige is very, very important too. We have abandoned the moon and Mars to Russia and China. They are not going to hold back because we have to save money. As bin Laden says people gravitate to the strong horse and there is no stronger horse than going to Mars.

johnsteele on January 29, 2010 at 6:57 PM

I’m not into space expeditures, but I am concerned about the Russians or the Chinese beating us to all those liquid diamonds in Uranus.

RushBaby on January 29, 2010 at 6:52 PM

I’m not: the de Bears will just have everyone involved assassinated if they get close. Besides, diamonds are overpriced junk.

Count to 10 on January 29, 2010 at 6:57 PM

I could be misinformed, but didn’t he not just cancel the moon program, but also retask NASA to focus on global warming?

I am in the middle if it is just cancel the moon program, although, when one considers the vast billions wasted on lesser goals, and the loss of jobs and skills from canceling this program, I would keep it. When this is canceled, people will lose jobs and find new careers and we *will* lose skillsets.

If NASA is being retasked to global warming, there are no words I can use here to describe my reaction.

Fuligin on January 29, 2010 at 6:58 PM

The wonderful NASA of my youth is gone, NASA has been reduced to cooking the books for the global warmers, they should be completely defunded.

RJL on January 29, 2010 at 6:58 PM

I agree with this move….however, is this money gonna be used to pay down the deficit or is he gonna spend it elsewhere? On FoxNews just now, Kirsten Powers said he wants to shift it towards climate change. If that’s true, then he’s a moron.

Doughboy on January 29, 2010 at 6:58 PM

Hey, I have an idea:

Why don’t we have commercial health care and a government space program rather than government health care and a commercial space program? You know, like in the old days.

dtestard on January 29, 2010 at 6:59 PM

The only reason O’Jugears is nixing the moon mission is because it would further enhance the concept of American exceptionalism, and he will have none of that. You didn’t think it was about the money, did you?

Extrafishy on January 29, 2010 at 7:00 PM

It’s a sad day when we put the space program on hold tho.

JetBoy on January 29, 2010 at 6:56 PM

It’s not on hold, its just that human space flight is dumb (not that I’m going to defend Obama on any of this). Look, we aren’t getting anything out of putting people in space. We are getting a lot (well, as far as I’m concerned) putting various robots up there.

Count to 10 on January 29, 2010 at 7:00 PM

The hilarious part is that the NASA administrator just promised at the AAS conference that Obama would fully fund manned space flight.

Count to 10 on January 29, 2010 at 6:52 PM

If he had read this link he would have known:
http://pajamasmedia.com/victordavishanson/the-obamarang/

zmdavid on January 29, 2010 at 7:00 PM

No ACORN chapters on the moon. Easy choice for Obummer.

bloviator on January 29, 2010 at 7:00 PM

I’m pretty sure that none of the money spent on space exploration is shot out into space. Instead it funds high technology which then gets transferred into other areas that pay back in industry and defense. It is very short sighted to cut the programs when there are isotopes of Hydrogen on the moon that may make fusion power possible as well as water on the moon that can make the moon a long term human habitat. It is also the perfect place to build telescopes that can explore the universe with unparalleled resolution due to lack of atmosphere and lack of radio noise when the so called dark side is dark.

Highplains on January 29, 2010 at 7:01 PM

Waste of money.

deidre on January 29, 2010 at 6:55 PM

Space exploration is a total waste of money, resources and time.

waste

more waste

total waste

cozmo on January 29, 2010 at 7:01 PM

I’ve heard people say “If we can put a man on the moon, we can do “(insert socialist policy)”. Well since we can’t put a man on the moon anymore, I guess that point is moot now.

zmdavid on January 29, 2010 at 6:56 PM

Heh. Good point.

BadgerHawk on January 29, 2010 at 7:02 PM

there is no stronger horse than going to Mars.

johnsteele on January 29, 2010 at 6:57 PM

How about having said trip to the moon have to get permission to go through your orbital defense grid?

Count to 10 on January 29, 2010 at 7:02 PM

“Manned spaceflight is a vanity project for the foreseeable future”?

You know, I’m sure some pencil-necked bean counter in the Castilian court told Queen Isabella the same thing, and that if she were going to hock the crown jewels they’d be best spent on buying off supporters of the crown, or pissed away on the poor of Spain. Ain’t we all glad she ignored the bean counters?

quikstrike98 on January 29, 2010 at 7:02 PM

I’d rather we drill for our own oil, become energy independent, pay down the debt…

… then we can fly to the moon.

Seven Percent Solution on January 29, 2010 at 6:51 PM

Yep, it’s all about priorities gotta get a handle on debt and energy independence, but I also wonder what about all those ‘pet earmark projects’ that still are managing to get in bills- seems this would be $$$$ better spent in space exploration rather than exploring the sex lives of rare insects or college coeds, let alone cap and tax- God forbid!
In fact how bout we just dismantle Fannie and Freddie and channel those funds into something like space as there is credibility to the argument of the relation to homeland defense/security……

huskerdiva on January 29, 2010 at 7:02 PM

It isn’t the fix length programs like this that we are concerned about… it’s irreversible entitlements that are orders of magnitude larger than this program that we are worried about.

Privatization is good, but this is just talking about using contractors to ferry astronauts to and from the space station. Right now, there are no private solutions to a long-term human presence on the moon… this is one of the few scenarios where it is true that only government can actually pull something like this off. We should encourage private moon expeditions and the like, but as a stepping stone to Mars this is something the gov needs to do.

Plus, this was another campaign promise, no?

DaveS on January 29, 2010 at 7:02 PM

I am still waiting for my flying car.

portlandon on January 29, 2010 at 7:02 PM

“We should be spending the money here instead of in space,” is a straw man worthy of Obama. There are no cash registers in space. All the money is spent here. The scientific spin offs from the space program are numerous to count. Just the recruiting tool that space exploration gives to steering high school grads to science and engineering is worth the money.

InterestedObserver on January 29, 2010 at 7:03 PM

Serves NASA right for backing the Global Warming HOAX…

… but think of all of the cool stuff were going to miss.

Seven Percent Solution on January 29, 2010 at 7:03 PM

Why does it matter, Allah? Because it’s a key component of defense. We make advancements (particularly in long-range communications) most rapidly in space exploration, and we also have the Chinese and India racing for the moon.

In addition, the overriding majority of funds that are not there for the moon mission are chasing the will-o’-the-wisp that is “climate change”.

What more do we need out of the space program? Start with enhanced reliability of boosters… miniaturization and reduction in weight of pressure suits… enhancement of our knowledge of water production and purification (helps a lot when you’re in a land war in Asia)… and so forth.

Johnsteele makes an excellent point in his above comment about the strong horse… this is ultimately one more sterling example of Obama’s inability to see how anything outside his immediate consciousness affects the rest of the world.

tmi3rd on January 29, 2010 at 7:04 PM

If he had read this link he would have known:
http://pajamasmedia.com/victordavishanson/the-obamarang/

zmdavid on January 29, 2010 at 7:00 PM

Heh.
He said he had personal reassurances.
His speech:
http://www.parabolicarc.com/2010/01/06/video-nasa-administrator-boldens-speech-aas-meeting/

Count to 10 on January 29, 2010 at 7:05 PM

The wonderful NASA of my youth is gone, NASA has been reduced to cooking the books for the global warmers, they should be completely defunded.

RJL on January 29, 2010 at 6:58 PM

*ding ding ding* We have a winner.

boomer on January 29, 2010 at 7:05 PM

We had to stop the program.
China found out that we were going to borrow money from them to build a space ship then skip out to another galaxy before we paid ‘em back.

TheSitRep on January 29, 2010 at 7:05 PM

I am still waiting for my flying car.

portlandon on January 29, 2010 at 7:02 PM

Where is my unicorn!

upinak on January 29, 2010 at 7:05 PM

RJL on January 29, 2010 at 6:58 PM

The NASA of your and my youth has been gone for a long time.

chemman on January 29, 2010 at 7:05 PM

Are you all so down in the weeds that you can’t see the importance of human space exploration? History is not going to remember the specifics of Porkulus. It will remember, however, that Obutthead was the president who was allowed to kill America’s place as the leaders in space exploration.

Going to the moon and NASA have given us engineering and technical breakthroughs that we’d have never achieved without it.

Keep the moon shots open. Reprioritize your staggering budgets, but don’t kill space exploration.

Tennman on January 29, 2010 at 7:05 PM

I thought a great part of our technological innovations came from work in the space program, ie microprocessors and such, tiny robotic tools etc

I think it is a mistake to leave this ground for Russia and China to man space and develop technology ahead of us, it is always also a security concern IMO

but I am a Dem after all , lol
to me this is good spending, I want Constellation!

ginaswo on January 29, 2010 at 7:06 PM

huskerdiva on January 29, 2010 at 7:02 PM

Of course, you are right…

… but what ever happened to Tang?

Seven Percent Solution on January 29, 2010 at 7:06 PM

The new world was colonized not by governments, but by private interests (with government approval).

I’m well aware of that – though not for central and south America so much, which is part of why they are such basket cases. And the colonization of space must be done by private interests to be done best. But we are not at colonization, yet. Because of the scale of this project and the national security interests, I am for funding it for the foreseeable future – while commercial space ventures finally start getting off the ground.

Quite frankly, the prospects look better that we will colonize them with robots (sentient or otherwise) than that we make getting human bodies out there profitable.

Count to 10 on January 29, 2010 at 6:55 PM

Robots will be all over, for sure, but humans are heading into space in a big way, too. It’s just in our nature. Once people get into space growth is going to be absolutely phenomenal.

neurosculptor on January 29, 2010 at 7:06 PM

“Another Obama Decision Unexpectedly Causes Unemployment to Rise”

Lily on January 29, 2010 at 7:07 PM

We should have went to Mars 20 years ago!
I’m upset with for obama cancelling JFK’s as well as alot of little kids dreams. Why become an astronaut if you are going to only hang around earth’s low orbit.

It would kind of like if Columbus had decided that the Canary Islands or Sao Miguel were far enough to go. Where would be today??

To borrow a saying for James T. Kirk, we should boldly go where no one has gone before! To think of all the alternative energy resources. There may be cures to diseases out there awaiting us. It could solve the problems that the lefties have with over population.

Some may say at what risk, I would be willing and I am sure there are others as well. And if we want the USA to be first, why not in space as well, instead of India or China.

On top of all this, in 2063, warp speed is supposed to be in existence by then. ;-)

I say we go for it. Our children and grandchildren will thank us for being bold instead of cowering.

ConservativePartyNow on January 29, 2010 at 7:07 PM

It sure is going to be interesting taking a total backseat to Russia, China and India. President Obama is going to teach us quite a few lessons over the coming years.

myrenovations on January 29, 2010 at 7:08 PM

Some thoughts…

1) We can’t have anything like this that might inspire American pride in the post-American era!

2)

BO: Hmm… I’ll show you “budget cuts”! Rahm, do we know of any large-ish programs that exist primarily in areas that didn’t vote for me? Preferably programs which may evolve into bright spots on the Bush legacy?

Rahm: Your holiness, you know I keep exactly such a list in my pocket at all times!

3) This is a bad time to be cutting a program that actually employs people in high-paying, skilled, long-term science/engineering jobs actually producing something useful.

DaveS on January 29, 2010 at 7:09 PM

Hey con’s you are all idiots. There never was a moon landing, it was all staged in Hollywood.

……..getalife

Knucklehead on January 29, 2010 at 7:09 PM

I imagine American left-”liberals” are making some new, very intelligent enemies.

Kralizec on January 29, 2010 at 7:09 PM

Another Obama maneuver to humble America and allow anyone else – Russia, China, India, perhaps Japan – to take the lead in this area. And it denies American prestige, inspiration for our youth and new technical innovations that would improve our quality of life.

This is an extremely petty and shortsighted decision.

T J Green on January 29, 2010 at 7:09 PM

I blame Obama.

backwoods conservative on January 29, 2010 at 7:09 PM

Why does it matter, Allah? Because it’s a key component of defense.

tmi3rd on January 29, 2010 at 7:04 PM

I agree. Also, previous space exploration missions gave us much more than Tang®. They led to American advances in technology and education. Wikipedia: Space Race Advances

Additionally, my dad worked in aerospace during the late 60s, as it seemed about every other dad in our subdivision did. It was a good gig while it lasted. Wouldn’t Constellation also have created many new jobs?

jix on January 29, 2010 at 7:10 PM

Because we’re cutting the wrong programs. Instead of eliminating our return to the moon while China and India work on getting there, how about not passing cap-and-trade or cutting out green technology crap?

amerpundit on January 29, 2010 at 6:50 PM

Exactly. Even if every dollar of the ‘stimulus’ had instead been spent NASA, it could easily have yielded something to show for the money. Instead we have…what, exactly? A few changed numbers on a few papers, none of which are helping anyone?

Manned space flight is reduced to a dwindling amount of outdated breadboxes with wings. There’s less CPU power in those dinosaurs than a freaking PSP!

The stars can still be ours if we get our national financial priorities straight. But otherwise, we might as well knock it off entirely. The charade we’re running with creaky shuttles and a long-unfinished space station is a disgrace.

Dark-Star on January 29, 2010 at 7:10 PM

You know, I’m sure some pencil-necked bean counter in the Castilian court told Queen Isabella the same thing, and that if she were going to hock the crown jewels they’d be best spent on buying off supporters of the crown, or pissed away on the poor of Spain. Ain’t we all glad she ignored the bean counters?

quikstrike98 on January 29, 2010 at 7:02 PM

Um, no…
Everyone with any sense knew Columbus was an idiot with a pet math error. The king and queen of Spain threw some of the gobs of money they were confiscating from the wealthy Jews as they kicked them out of the country at old Chris, and he hit the Carabian by mistake. To top that off, he was trying to find a new trade rout, which would benefit private trading businesses.

Count to 10 on January 29, 2010 at 7:10 PM

. We are getting a lot (well, as far as I’m concerned) putting various robots up there.

Count to 10 on January 29, 2010 at 7:00 PM

You bring a tear to a Trekee ;)

Electrongod on January 29, 2010 at 7:10 PM

Well I do not accept second-place for the United States of America.

Barack Obama, 2010 State of the Union

All his statements have expiration dates, that one lasted what, about 3 days?

trubble on January 29, 2010 at 7:11 PM

it’s irreversible

entitlements

that are orders of magnitude larger than this program that we are worried about. DaveS on January 29, 2010 at 7:02 PM

Since the SCOTUS ruling in the 60′s that no one is entitled to a Social Security check and that Congress can quit paying SS at anytime there is no such thing as an entitlement. This is smoke and mirrors and my bet is that within the next 30 years they will quit paying checks while keeping the tax in place.

chemman on January 29, 2010 at 7:11 PM

Wouldn’t Constellation also have created many new jobs?

jix on January 29, 2010 at 7:10 PM

Hell yes! Plus, they would have been jobs requiring professional knowledge and justifying a college education, instead of just more mindless wage-slave positions.

Dark-Star on January 29, 2010 at 7:11 PM

NASA, private space agency……. Either way, we can`t fall behind China and India. I want the first flag on Mars to be the good `ol red, white and blue!

ThePrez on January 29, 2010 at 7:11 PM

Glenn Reynolds points out that the program is a serious mess- quite true (my wife works for Lockheed), and that he’s likely opposed to space exploration for a number of reasons.

Bottom line: many of our significant scientific advances in the last 50 years have come as a result of things needed for space exploration.

tmi3rd on January 29, 2010 at 7:11 PM

Will the government really allow industry enough freedom to explore space privately? If they do, might the resulting technology be stolen by enemy/rival nations?

zmdavid on January 29, 2010 at 7:12 PM

He sure ain’t no John Kennedy…

d1carter on January 29, 2010 at 7:12 PM

Of all the programs the government has, the space program is the most likely to develop technologies that would allow us to use energy like we do now without producing co2, so it makes sense that this program would be cut.

Having said that, that I like the purpose of a particular program doesn’t mean everyone else should pay for it. I say cut the program along with all the others and lower my taxes so I can privately invest in space exploration.

Jens on January 29, 2010 at 7:12 PM

The stars can still be ours if we get our national financial priorities straight. But otherwise, we might as well knock it off entirely. The charade we’re running with creaky shuttles and a long-unfinished space station is a disgrace.

Dark-Star on January 29, 2010 at 7:10 PM

Pipe dream.
There is no reason, at this time, to mess with putting people in space. They can’t do anything out their that a computer couldn’t do better. I’m not saying cut space funding, I’m saying stop wasting it on this crap.

Count to 10 on January 29, 2010 at 7:13 PM

NASA’s mission will now be changed to focusing entirely on the dreaded “global warming”. Of course they’ll receive a massive budget increase to help them.

darwin on January 29, 2010 at 7:13 PM

White House: The new moon mission is canceled

Well it didn’t make her proud of her country when we landed there in 1969
So why keep the program going ?

macncheez on January 29, 2010 at 7:14 PM

It’s not on hold, its just that human space flight is dumb (not that I’m going to defend Obama on any of this). Look, we aren’t getting anything out of putting people in space. We are getting a lot (well, as far as I’m concerned) putting various robots up there.

Count to 10 on January 29, 2010 at 7:00 PM

TONS of stuff comes from the space program…

To name a few:

scratch resistant lenses

water purification system

high-density batteries

trash compactors

shock-absorbing helmets

home security systems

composite golf clubs

smoke detectors

flat panel televisions

freeze-dried technology

sports bras

hang gliders

quartz crystal timing equipment.

JetBoy on January 29, 2010 at 7:14 PM

“Turtle Tunnels” and other pork projects, or a mission to the moon? Give me a break. Let’s go to the moon before the Chinese.

Dale on January 29, 2010 at 7:14 PM

Fly me to the moon.
JFK would be disappointed.

carbon_footprint on January 29, 2010 at 7:15 PM

You bring a tear to a Trekee ;)

Electrongod on January 29, 2010 at 7:10 PM

Good or bad?

Count to 10 on January 29, 2010 at 7:15 PM

But how will Obama ever find the “Mother Wheel”?

reppac122 on January 29, 2010 at 7:16 PM

I could see this coming even before Obama was elected.

A sad day for human progress.

Crux Australis on January 29, 2010 at 7:17 PM

I’m not saying cut space funding, I’m saying stop wasting it on this crap.

Count to 10 on January 29, 2010 at 7:13 PM

Well, perhaps I can meet you and those like you halfway, if it means keeping SOME aspect of space exploration going.

Dark-Star on January 29, 2010 at 7:17 PM

have family working at kennedy space center, so i’m torn about this issue

cmsinaz on January 29, 2010 at 7:17 PM

Steve Hayes on the Fox All Stars said what I’ve been thinking. It was followed by retired NASA engineers making the claim that private industry isn’t up to the task. Being a fan of the NASA TV channel especially during manned missions, I see evidence of the massive bureaucracy that government generates.

It is really important that we learn how to get off this rock for the very same reasons why humans had to learn how to sail the oceans.

Skandia Recluse on January 29, 2010 at 7:17 PM

Blow it up.

BKeyser on January 29, 2010 at 7:18 PM


May I suggest
Southwest Airlines

– Mac

GREAT idea! I’d be on the non-rev list every day!

I already can’t stand Obama, but now I h… h… h… strongly dislike him even more. I’ve been teaching daughter everything I know about space, NASA, the planets etc and telling her she’s gonna be the first woman to walk on Mars … in THIS very program that just got killed. Thanks for being a dream killer, Obama. I guess I’ll just push her into something more worthwhile, like maybe trying out for American Idol.

Tony737 on January 29, 2010 at 7:18 PM

I understand he is just “pivoting” NASA’s focus to climate change. I’d rather my tax dollars go toward space exploration, if that is the alternative.

ctmom on January 29, 2010 at 7:18 PM

Pursuant to the space station- it’s a horrid design, and was funded by us as an olive branch to the Russians (who were panicking about losing their scientists to higher-paying jobs elsewhere in the world). It’s going to be allowed to go through orbital degradation and burn up in the atmosphere.

Ultimately, we’re going to need to be able to run regularly between at least the moon and Earth for a myriad of reasons (ranging from scientific to defense, and a key element is medical- it’s easier to synthesize some chemicals in microgravity). Some of these things- and I understand where you’re coming from, Count- are a hell of a lot easier to do when you’ve got people standing over the experiments.

tmi3rd on January 29, 2010 at 7:18 PM

All the science can be done by remote now, and it will only tilt farther in that direction as computers are improved.

Count to 10 on January 29, 2010 at 6:48 PM

Isn’t this how we got into this global warming hoax?

Rovin on January 29, 2010 at 7:18 PM

TONS of stuff comes from the space program…
JetBoy on January 29, 2010 at 7:14 PM

Uh, hu. And how much of that is a) only due to manned space flight alone, and b) wouldn’t have been invented by some private research at some point anyway?

Government projects are not the most efficient way to drive economically useful innovations, people.

Count to 10 on January 29, 2010 at 7:19 PM

ooops! ‘… teaching MY daughter …’

Tony737 on January 29, 2010 at 7:19 PM

Option 3 no doubt. It’s easy and it makes me feel good.

jukin on January 29, 2010 at 7:19 PM

Comment pages: 1 2 3 5