Fair enough. I was looking at JFK and Nixon as the sole exceptions to a rule that has held from Eisenhower to Bush-43, but they could also be viewed as bookends to the 1960s.

As for Nixon, he had a tough choice, support NASA’s plans or get us out of Viet Nam. He chose to pay to cleanup the mess.

Actually, as others have pointed out, many of Nixon’s tough choices regarding Apollo were actually made for him, either by LBJ (capping the Saturn V production line), NASA (choosing the “dry-workshop” Skylab, which forced the cancellation of Apollo 20) or by Congress (cancelling Apollos 18 and 19). Nixon essentially took the easy way out on Apollo by not attempting to reverse any of these prior decisions. His only big choices in space were to initiate both Apollo-Soyuz and the Space Shuttle – both of which looked pretty visionary back then.

I can’t back the following up, but had JFK survived (weather or not he won a second term) we would have had CATS today.

You’re certainly entitled to your opinion. My opinion is that JFK would have followed through with his rhetoric about making Apollo a joint project with the USSR. Knowing what we know now (Apollo was successful without Soviet involvement, the Soviet program was nowhere nearly as advanced as US intelligence thought in 1963, and the Soviets didn’t even give the formal go-ahead to their own lunar program until 1964), I am convinced that this would have resulted in the failure of the Apollo program – if not technically, it would have foundered politically after the USSR’s 1968 invasion of Czechoslovakia. And the “wrong lessons learned” from that failure would have resulted in the gutting of manned space programs in the US.

Why are we talking about the book ends when its the book we should be looking at.

JFK had a term of 3 years, and the last two was the ones post “We choose to goto the moon” speech. So to beat the Soviets they had to have a higher budget in those two years.

As for Nixon, he had a tough choice, support NASA’s plans or get us out of Viet Nam. He chose to pay to cleanup the mess.

Now the real spotlight needs to be on LBJ. He is who bloated NASA in the early days, he did it to re-industralize the south. Made bad descions that kept us in Viet Nam.

JFK is rummered to have planned a full withdrawl of the small force we had there. Mainly so he could support NASA more as a more cost effective means of stoping communism, by the technical expertease we would have created.

I can’t back the following up, but had JFK survived (weather or not he won a second term) we would have had CATS today. And the VSE could actually be more then just a Vision. For the science that politicians bicker for, could be done by agencies other then NASA.

Do you think that’s a valid excuse for opposing a policy you’d otherwise favor? If so, that’s the most childish and petty thing I’ve read in quite a while. I’m in rare agreement with Greg on this one: oppose Bush on the policies you disagree with, but don’t oppose a policy you favor just because Bush favors it as well.

Mark Whittington:
Ferris forgets that Jack Kennedy, Lyndon Johnson, and Richard Nixon have one thing in common. They are dead.

Ferris Valyn:
Mark, them being dead is relevent how???

It’s relevant because the policies of the two major parties have changed, quite a bit, since those days.

Adjusted for inflation, JFK is the only Democrat to leave NASA a higher budget at the end of his presidency than at the beginning, and Nixon the only Republican to leave NASA with a lower budget.

Mark greatly exaggerates the extent of opposition to manned space in the Democratic party. However, while the latest Gallup polls and congressional votes show that both parties favor manned space, they also show – far beyond the margin of error of the polls – that opposition to manned space is stronger among Democrats.

Donald Robertson
And, Nixon would probably register as a Democrat.

Greg Kuperburg:
Rest assured that Liddy is a Republican.

These historical transplantations are getty silly.

Just because Liddy (a right-wing Republican then and now) served Nixon then doesn’t mean Nixon (a moderate Republican then) wouldn’t have switched. In addition to Donald’s list of Nixon’s left-wing policies, you can add his disastrous wage-and-price controls.

Jeff Foust:
The amendment was defeated in a voice vote and, later, on a roll call vote, although the statistics for the vote aren’t posted yet.

The stats are up now:

Ayes Noes PRES NV
Republican 55 168 7
Democratic 89 106 6
Independent 1
TOTALS 145 274 13

— Donald

I love these analogies! They’re dead on.

Ferris: Each of those definitions Donald cites has the underlying point of obtaining knowledge.

It looks to me like definitions one and three clearly imply physical exploration, to at least the degree they imply the search for knowledge. I do not contest that robots and teleoperation can obtain knowledge. What I do contest is the view that they can obtain all kinds of knowledge, or that they are necessarily the cheapest or most efficient method of obtaining those limited kinds of knowledge that they are good at obtaining.

Advocates of robotics and teleoperation have simultaneously over-estimated what they can achieve (by a great amount), their total costs, and the efficiency with which they do those limited things they can do. I believe that history will show that this has been to the detriment of 20th and 21st Century Solar System exploration.

Mike: I believe that a sea change in American politics has occurred. Both parties, to at least some degree, now support (or at least do not oppose) the larger goals of the VSE. That does not mean they support the specifics — nor necessarily should they — but the goal of human exploration of the moon and ultimately Mars do seem to be national goals at this point in time. I think it’s critical that we take advantage of that national consensus — which may not last very long — as quickly as possible.

It is without basis. If you really believe that, there’s something wrong with your thought processes. Unless, of course, you mean in the trivial sense that anyone “in bin Laden’s” shoes would do exactly the same thing as bin Laden. (I have to admit, I’ve always found the construct, “If I were you, I would…” quite strange from a logic standpoint–obviously, if I were you, I’d do exactly what you do…)

> Which proves, you don’t know enough –
> http://www.onthemedia.org/transcripts/transcripts_011301_billoreilly.html

Oh, gosh. So, he meant to register as an independent but accidentally registered as a Republican? That proves he’s pure evil? And a mindless clone of George W. Bush?

And you call other people extreme?

> Which, quite coincidentally, matches definition number 2 from
> Donald’s list “1. Travel through (an unfamiliar area) in order
> to learn about it. 2. Investigate or discuss in detail.

Yes, and which definition takes priority?

Clearly, the first definition applies here. When people talk about “space exploration” they don’t mean simply discussing space. They mean travelling in space.

> What I distrust is this idea that someone else’s religion must permeate
> my life, or anyone else’s life, who doesn’t agree with it, and that it must
> permate it to such an extant that every one of my actions is dictated by it.

Hm. “Permeating your life” means you heard him on TV. How does that dictate every one of your actions? It appears that many of your actions are now dictated by your hatred of the Rev. Falwell and others, but that is your choice — not something anyone else dictated.

> Its not that I disagree with him – its that he accused me of being a terrorist,
> and has said that there can be no compromise.

Even in your quote, he does not say “Ferris Valyn is a terrorist.” It seems you’re inventing things to be upset about.

“There can be no compromise” actually sounds a lot like what you are saying. What would you do with those who “permeate your life” by going on teevee and saying things you don’t like? Prison? Execution?

It did not come close to breaking on party lines. The Republicans were a bit more pro but pretty well mixed. Plesantly suprised.

Mark,

You can now claim the VSE has bipartisan support and easily back it up.

I admit its not an actual video, but I think this should be close enough.

Finally, and yes, I will admit this is speculation, but not without basis IMHO – if Falwell were in bin Laden shoes, would he have done the same thing? I have no doubt that the answer is yes.