I don’t know much about him, but here’s something to consider:

http://www.floridatoday.com/content/blogs/space/2009/01/bolden-no-contact-yet-on-nasas-top-job.shtml

“If I would have any conversation with the transition team, I would plead for continuity — if not in people, at least continuity in execution,” he said.

“Now does that mean we don’t change anything right now in the Constellation system?” he asked. “No, it doesn’t mean that. But it means let’s take a look at things and get to the moon and Mars.”

Personally, I’m all for taking a look at things, but I suspect that Constellation needs more than a look and what sounds like minor changes if it’s going to do what it’s supposed to, which isn’t simply a return to the Moon or a Mars trip, but rather is *supposed* to be a cost-effective, sustainable exploration program that returns significant economic, science, and security benefits (heck, I’ll take 2 out of 3) on a reasonable schedule with reasonable safety and chance of success using commercial space and international participation. It needs to do that while at the same time leaving sufficient budget for Obama’s other priorities identified in his space policy, including Earth observation, aeronautics, and education.

I’d say that Constellation in its current form is pretty far from achieving those goals, or even a good percentage of them, even if it does manage to return astronauts to the Moon.

On the other hand, I think it’s promising that Bolden was just, as Jeff pointed out, participating with the Conrad Foundation/Conrad Awards, which are now separate from the X PRIZE Cup as student business/innovation competitions in lunar exploration, personal spaceflight, and renewable energy fields. That might be an indication that he has what I’d consider favorable views on innovation prizes, competition, entrepreneurial innovation, and education.

Gen. Bolden was a registered lobbyist for ATK, and has personally lobbied Congress for the stick. When asked about this by the Washington Post, he said he was happy to do so.

- FYI

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2005/08/24/AR2005082402015.html

Astronauts Turn to Lobbying

…

It seemed like a natural fit: pairing a company that manufactures space shuttle booster rockets with astronauts. That is just what ATK Thiokol Inc. has done.

According to their lobby registrations, retired astronauts Daniel Barry , Franklin Chang-Diaz , Thomas Jones , retired Marine Maj. Gen. Charles Bolden, retired Navy Capt. Daniel Bursch and retired Air Force Col. John Blaha will help ATK Thiokol “with an education campaign on the design considerations of the next generation NASA launch vehicles, in particular the shuttle-derived concepts through visits with members of Congress and other key decision makers.”

“They, more than most experts, have a clear understanding of the need for safety and simplicity in our vehicles and propulsion systems,” Mike Bender, an ATK-Washington Operations official, said in an e-mail response to questions about the lobby registrations.

…

Bolden and Barry said they were happy to help when asked by Scott Horowitz, a former shuttle commander who is now an official of ATK Thiokol.

Bolden said it was easy to support the company and its rockets because “we lived it. It is systems we know and feel comfortable with.”

I would offer that we were much closer to this convergence of abilities with NASA’s most recent previous administrator. While Mr. O’Keefe didn’t have the technical depth that so many believe he needed—he was first to admit what he didn’t know in that department—as others have pointed out elsewhere, neither did Jim Webb, and he put together the Apollo program.

But Webb had strong 2nd & 3rd team members in Robert Seamans & Hugh Dryden. I would offer that if Garver (not the strongest technically based on what I’ve seen printed about her) lands in the 2nd position under an effective administrator (note the lower-case ‘a’) there better darn be one heck of a strong scientist or engineer in the 3rd position.

Bryan D. O’Connor

Don`t know him and don`t have strong feelings one way or another but I did think it interesting in a “stir up the pot” way. Just because you think he doesn`t have a chance doesn`t mean anything unless you are Mr. Obama.

Now back to your usual squabbling over trivial stuff. Proceed.

That would be a policy disaster. The last thing we want is for NASA to be involved with regulation of either aviation of spaceflight.

It seems most of the publically published short lists have seldom contained the person to eventual get the position.

CHARLIE BOLDEN: I agree that Charlie is a rock-solid A-1 guy that has a good head on his shoulders. But a key fundamental is missing here — we need a “change agent”. I have zero evidence that Charlie is a change agent. In fact, I have a lot of evidence that *suggests* that Charlie is an agent of the status quo.

1) Charlie is a Georgy Abbey-acolyte and a long-time friend of George. George is almost certainly part of the campaign supporting Charlie. Recently Georgy Abbey published a white paper proposing to stop the termination of the Shuttle.

This is completely status quo.

2) Senator Nelson is an agent for the status quo. Senator Nelson is obviously lobbying for Bolden. (It is obvious that Bolden has not been selected, as he has not been called yet by the transition team. But Sen. Nelson is talking to the newspapers about Bolden. Thus Nelson is publicly lobbying for Bolden.)

Senator Nelson would love to keep flying the Shuttle longer.

3) Charlie is a Shuttle astronaut. This is evidence of status quo.
Picking somebody because they are an “astronaut” is a really bad idea. As a general rule, being a Shuttle astronaut should be seen as a evidence against any candidate being a change agent.

We have been to this story before with Dick Truly. Admiral Truly ended up refusing to take direction from the White House, and getting fired, because he was completely native to NASA. In Truly’s book, his job was not execute White House policy, but to save NASA from the White House.

Since Charlie has not made clear what he would do as Administrator, this is a big concern.

I can only add up what I know –> Abbey friend + Nelson friend + Shuttle astronaut = status quo.

If anybody has any hard evidence that Charlie will be a change agent, I would love to hear it. Please be specific. If you can source it, even better.

Examples:

- “Charlie Bolden worked SpaceX/Blue Origins/Bigelow/XCOR/SpaceDev. Read URL here.” )

- Charlie Bolden made a speech saying “I love _____. I think we should do _____.”

- Charlie Bolden told me “_____________”.

FWIW,

- Al

“Politics is not rocket science, which is why rocket scientists do not understand politics.”