Obama on Space - Page 2

Solfe · #31 (**permalink**) 11-August-2008, 04:31 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Disinfo Agent

Off-topic: for some reason, every time I see the title of this thread my mischievous brain insists on half-misreading it as "Obama in space". (Reminiscences of The Muppet Show?

) I guess after his grand tour of Europe and the Middle East, space would be the next logical destination.

That might not be a bad idea.

If we demanded that all Presidents fly in space (Space-Force One could be one of those atmosphere skipping craft.) then I bet the funding would be pretty good.

Solfe

Tuckerfan · #32 (**permalink**) 13-August-2008, 10:40 AM

McCain seems to have shifted his position.

Quote:

As President, John McCain will -

Ensure that space exploration is top priority and that the U.S. remains a leader;

Commit to funding the NASA Constellation program to ensure it has the resources it needs to begin a new era of human space exploration.

Review and explore all options to ensure U.S. access to space by minimizing the gap between the termination of the Space Shuttle and the availability of its replacement vehicle;

Ensure the national space workforce is maintained and fully utilized; Complete construction of the ISS National Laboratory;

Seek to maximize the research capability and commercialization possibilities of the ISS National Laboratory;

Maintain infrastructure investments in Earth-monitoring satellites and support systems;

Seek to maintain the nation's space infrastructure;

.
There is more at the link. It's certainly seems to be a much more forward-looking position than what I have seen from him in the past.

NEOWatcher · #33 (**permalink**) 13-August-2008, 02:45 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Tuckerfan

...It's certainly seems to be a much more forward-looking position than what I have seen from him in the past.

Is it? Here's a post from months ago.
It seems like he was apposed to research subsidies but eager on pure research.

Dgennero · #34 (**permalink**) 13-August-2008, 05:57 PM

Well, I've been following the two candidates' positions for several months.
Some months ago McCain was the one who claimed to support NASA and supported the Orion program and human space exploration too, no Buts.
Obama at that time wanted to delay the replacement of the Shuttle and divert funds to "education" and also argued that robotic exploration is cheaper.

Any shifts since then, especially Obama's sudden enthusiasm for space exploration, are IMO tactical.

Overall, I think when it comes to human space exploration and the Moon/Mars-program, we are better off with McCain who hopefully will stick to it ( his party initiated the program anyway ).

Well, I'm libertarian-leaning anyway and think it is very likely a private Enterprise (pun intended) will place the corporate flag on Mars first

Neverfly · #35 (**permalink**) 13-August-2008, 06:40 PM

I'm about to be hated for talking...

If there's one thing I can't stand about a candidate, it's wishy-washingess.
Changing on issues to pander to the polls is not a good sign.
Now, I understand that the president is a servant to the nation, not a ruler.
But, I have far more respect for a candidate that makes a decision and stands by it.

So I would rather vote for a candidate that says he doesn't like NASA than one that sometimes claims to support NASA and sometimes claims to not support NASA.
It might be tough on NASA for four years, but I prefer the former over the latter.
At least then, I know where he stands. I know where I stand.
I know he can be influenced to support NASA as a public servant, even if he doesn't agree with it. At least then i know he's real and doing his job.
The latter, I have no idea what changes might take place. I have no idea what he might do next. Or which voter or lobby he will try to placate once he's done with me.

If Obama says he supports NASA today, that doesn't mean I will trust him on those words tomorrow.

Chip · #36 (**permalink**) 14-August-2008, 12:52 AM

I'm all for human and robotic space missions but I won't vote for someone just because they say they'll support the Orion program and space exploration while every other aspect of their policy is backward and irrational to me. In my own opinion (not stated by Mr. Obama,) true forward progress in space cannot be made until there is a balance of progressive private enterprise designers and contractors working in harmony with commissioned projects from a large, stable federal government in a liberal democracy. With political candidates we cannot expect them to have all the answers but can support the ones who have intellect and guts to see the big picture, and by all indications will try, so I favor Obama.

Tuckerfan · #37 (**permalink**) 14-August-2008, 10:43 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Neverfly

I'm about to be hated for talking...

If there's one thing I can't stand about a candidate, it's wishy-washingess.
Changing on issues to pander to the polls is not a good sign.
Now, I understand that the president is a servant to the nation, not a ruler.
But, I have far more respect for a candidate that makes a decision and stands by it.

So I would rather vote for a candidate that says he doesn't like NASA than one that sometimes claims to support NASA and sometimes claims to not support NASA.
It might be tough on NASA for four years, but I prefer the former over the latter.
At least then, I know where he stands. I know where I stand.
I know he can be influenced to support NASA as a public servant, even if he doesn't agree with it. At least then i know he's real and doing his job.
The latter, I have no idea what changes might take place. I have no idea what he might do next. Or which voter or lobby he will try to placate once he's done with me.

If Obama says he supports NASA today, that doesn't mean I will trust him on those words tomorrow.

Well, JFK was not big on space originally, but was persuaded to change his mind. My general rule of thumb is to expect a politician to do the exact opposite of what he or she promises during the campaign.

Dgennero · #38 (**permalink**) 14-August-2008, 09:59 PM

I know it is kind of narrowminded to choose a candidate solely for his attitude towards space exploration; however, in the long run (I'm talking millennia here) mankind definitely will expand into space; the sooner the better, because it would mean that e.g. the next "killer asteroid" won't destroy mankind because it can't impact into two planets at the same time.
Compared to the great adventure of space, all earthly matters like stupid gas price debates dwindle away.
I know, I can't see the trees for the forest

KaiYeves · #39 (**permalink**) 14-August-2008, 10:07 PM

Quote:

Compared to the great adventure of space, all earthly matters like stupid gas price debates dwindle away.

I agree completely.

Tuckerfan · #40 (**permalink**) 15-August-2008, 10:20 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Dgennero

I know it is kind of narrowminded to choose a candidate solely for his attitude towards space exploration; however, in the long run (I'm talking millennia here) mankind definitely will expand into space; the sooner the better, because it would mean that e.g. the next "killer asteroid" won't destroy mankind because it can't impact into two planets at the same time.
Compared to the great adventure of space, all earthly matters like stupid gas price debates dwindle away.
I know, I can't see the trees for the forest

It is no more narrowminded than some of the other issues that folks can be "single issue" voters on, and unlike some of those "single issues" there is a definite economic benefit to space exploration.

KaiYeves · #41 (**permalink**) 15-August-2008, 01:35 PM

Quote:

If we demanded that all Presidents fly in space (Space-Force One could be one of those atmosphere skipping craft.) then I bet the funding would be pretty good.

I think that when VG has done several safe tourist flights, a president might be allowed to go on board. Just as Teddy Roosevelt waited a few years before being the first president to fly in an airplane.

Gemini · #42 (**permalink**) 15-August-2008, 07:48 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by KaiYeves

I think that when VG has done several safe tourist flights, a president might be allowed to go on board. Just as Teddy Roosevelt waited a few years before being the first president to fly in an airplane.

John Glenn actually ran for president in the the early eighties.

KaiYeves · #43 (**permalink**) 16-August-2008, 01:26 AM

Quote:

John Glenn actually ran for president in the the early eighties.

Of all the sad words on tounge or pen, the sadest are these- "What might have been".

Neverfly · #44 (**permalink**) 16-August-2008, 03:10 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by KaiYeves

Of all the sad words on tounge or pen, the sadest are these- "What might have been".

"I might have been killed..."

Yeah, I see what you mean.

Tuckerfan · #45 (**permalink**) 16-August-2008, 09:40 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by KaiYeves

Of all the sad words on tounge or pen, the sadest are these- "What might have been".

Senator Glenn was a less than inspiring candidate. (This comes from a native Ohioian and space geek, BTW.) Had he managed to get the nomination the first time he ran for President, he would have been going up against Reagan in '84, the odds of him being able to defeat Reagan would have been slim. In '88, he would have faced George H. W. Bush, which would have been a more even match. I doubt that if he had won the White House, Glenn could have gotten the support to increase NASA's budget to a meaningful level. Certainly, he would have made sure that the agency had focus, and its possible that the Challenger explosion would not have occurred, but I can't see him as being able to give a big shift to space as a national priority. Still, some times a small shift in the right direction can reap big rewards.

(Glenn, it should be noted, was dogged by some questionable accusations during one of his runs. He never was convicted of even the slightest ethical violation [and his squeaky clean image is most likely not a put-on], but it did weaken his position as a Presidential candidate to a degree.)

Ara Pacis · #46 (**permalink**) 20-August-2008, 07:16 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by tofu

A truly visionary leader would say, "I'm going to support a project that has a future, and phase out the shuttle, which, though successful, has outlived its usefulness." But the difference between a politician and a leader is that a leader goes in one direction, even if it's not the popular direction. A politician goes every which way in order to maximize immediate popularity. A good leader is the one who picks the right direction. A good politician is the one that everybody likes.

emphasis mine

That seems to have caused some issues of late. I'm not starting a political discussion, but using that to point out that a leader, a good leader, will make it popular. Look at Kennedy, not only did he follow a policy that would take us to the moon, he made made people want it to happen. A leader needs to be more enthusiastic than saying "oh, now that you mention it, sure, I want NASA to succeed."

01101001 · #47 (**permalink**) 04-November-2008, 07:03 PM

Obama shuttle topic (here, Obama on Space)... or McCain shuttle topic (Extending Shuttle life - McCain's letter to the President)... where to put this...

I choose... here. This one got a little more discussion.

MSNBC Cosmic Log: How safe is the shuttle?

Quote:

Both of this year's presidential candidates - Barack Obama as well as John McCain - have called on NASA to look into the idea of flying the space shuttle fleet past its scheduled 2010 retirement date.

Now the space agency is providing some sobering estimates of the costs and the risks that would be involved - leading one seasoned space observer to wonder whether the shuttle program should be throttled back rather than extended.
[...]
The question NASA has to ask itself is whether each mission between now and the fleet's retirement is worth a 1-in-80 risk of losing the crew. Griffin is saying it's worth that risk for finishing the space station (and fixing the Hubble Space Telescope). But in his view, it's not worth that risk for transporting crew members back and forth - particularly if there's a Russian alternative.
[...]

Michael Griffin's guest column in Florida Today this weekend: Time to Retire the Shuttles

Quote:

If NASA was directed to fly the space shuttle past 2010 without additional funds to develop systems to replace it, our nation would continue to be stuck in Earth orbit, as it has been for more than 35 years since Apollo 17. We would continue without a guiding vision, while other nations are out on the space frontier.

KaiYeves · #48 (**permalink**) 04-November-2008, 08:24 PM

Tonight's the night. Gosh, I'm worried.

Tuckerfan · #49 (**permalink**) 09-November-2008, 09:31 AM

Well, President-elect Obama is looking for suggestions. Those with a pro-space viewpoint might want to drop him a note or two.

KaiYeves · #50 (**permalink**) 09-November-2008, 08:31 PM

Now is the sort of time I really wish I had an e-mail address.

jaksichj · #51 (**permalink**) 12-November-2008, 02:23 AM

As someone who grew up during the space race of the 1960s and 70s--I remember being glued to my analog T.V. watching and cheering for Gemini and Apollo programs. It occurs to me that this was one of the reasons for my eventual studies. I feel that the Obama/Biden ticket will be much more responsive to the needs of our country than an any other administration could be. We do have shortages of scientists and engineers...I, personally, feel that he would address the crisis in science/math research and education. I hope I have not gone too off-topic...

Argos · #52 (**permalink**) 14-November-2008, 05:19 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Disinfo Agent

Off-topic: for some reason, every time I see the title of this thread my mischievous brain insists on half-misreading it as "Obama in space".

Brief Hijack: it would be cool to see a presidential visit to the space station [after all, they´ve made themselves present at war fronts, aircraft carriers, etc.]. A superb PR for the space program.

01101001 · #53 (**permalink**) 14-November-2008, 05:34 PM

Universe Today: New NASA, New Administrator Under Obama?

Quote:

NASA appears to be in the position of being a priority for our new president, somewhat of a rarity. So what can NASA expect under the Obama administration? NASA administrator Mike Griffin met with employees at the Kennedy Space Center on Thursday where workers asked if he would continue as administrator under the new president. “If the next president asks me to continue I would be happy to do it,” said Griffin, “But, I doubt that will happen.” However, if asked to stay, he would only if the Obama White House didn’t interfere with the direction NASA is going (presumably he meant the Constellation program and returning to the moon), and didn’t try to force any personnel on him. He also spoke out against extending the shuttle or using EELV rockets to transport humans to space instead of NASA's current Ares I rocket design.“If somebody wanted me to stay on but said, ‘No, we need to go over here,’ well,” he said with a shrug, “do it with somebody else.” So what can NASA expect with the new presidential administration?
[...]

More there.

KaiYeves · #54 (**permalink**) 14-November-2008, 08:35 PM

Man, if NASA gets a new administrator next year I'm going to have to change my Age of the Phoenix story!

01101001 · #55 (**permalink**) 22-November-2008, 05:53 AM

MIT Technology Review: Obama's NASA Dilemma

Quote:

The fate of the U.S. space program hangs in the balance

[...] By April 30, 2009, the new president must decide whether to shut down the Space Shuttle program--currently the United States' only way to get humans into space and to service the International Space Station (ISS)--or extend the program at no small cost. [...]

This is so critical that the General Accounting Office, a nonpartisan congressional agency that investigates government expenditures, included the conundrum of whether to retire the Space Shuttle on a list of the 13 most urgent issues for the next president beyond the economy and protecting the homeland. That's because the decision will have ramifications that go far beyond determining a retirement date for the Shuttle fleet. [...]

jaksichj · #56 (**permalink**) 23-November-2008, 01:09 AM

I don't as much find blame for the incoming administration as I find fault with the outgoing(!)...for better or worse ( or indifferent )... IMO Obama/Congress need to be lobbied vigorously (duh!?)...I, personally, will be writing letters...to as many Politicians that I can think of...

_____________________
aside:

There is an obvious civil defense component to space exploration (NEO, unwanted Solar Storms disrupting the power-grids, public-outreach and (?) education as why/how space exploration benefits us and continues to benefit us, etc, ...)---- I don't need or want to seem as if I am bemoaning (or for that matter belittle) the situation... and again ... best wishes...

Tuckerfan · #57 (**permalink**) 23-November-2008, 01:23 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by jaksichj

I don't as much find blame for the incoming administration as I find fault with the outgoing(!)...for better or worse ( or indifferent )... IMO Obama/Congress need to be lobbied vigorously (duh!?)...I, personally, will be writing letters...to as many Politicians that I can think of...

This is something everyone should be doing.

KaiYeves · #58 (**permalink**) 23-November-2008, 05:36 PM

I wrote a letter to him back when he was running. I can only hope it was received.

01101001 · #59 (**permalink**) 23-November-2008, 07:06 PM

AP: Official: Richardson to be commerce secretary

That puts a pro-space, and pro-space commerce, person on the Cabinet. Some had suggested Richardson as head of a recreated NASC (Wikipedia: National Space Council), but that was probably too low-level for his broad skills. Maybe he can head Commerce and NASC.

Space.com: Obama Vetting Bill Richardson, Space Enthusiast

Quote:

"Here's what I want to be sure of ... that the Obama administration is pro-commercial space ... that the administration is pro-space, pro-government space, pro-commercial space," Richardson observed.

He has fostered New Mexico state agreements with Armadillo Aerospace, Rocket Racing, and Spaceport America.

PraedSt · #60 (**permalink**) 23-November-2008, 10:28 PM

That's cracking news

Thread Tools	Search this Thread
Show Printable Version Email this Page	Search this Thread: Advanced Search
Display Modes
Linear Mode Switch to Hybrid Mode Switch to Threaded Mode

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
Privatization of Space	The Bad Astronomer	Space Exploration	177	28-August-2009 08:13 PM
The Future to Exploration of Space	StarLab	Astronomy	31	18-August-2005 01:05 AM
Favourite astronomy book(s)	kashi	Astronomical Observing, Equipment and Accessories	40	10-June-2004 10:36 AM
100+ Space products and services	cygonaut	Space Exploration	0	07-October-2003 10:55 PM