“[Kelly] Did in the interviews I read

[Rand] No, he didn’t. He has said that ULA is more likely than SpaceX to get the work, but he’s never said that he’s not in the running. This is what I mean by your vivid imagination, and making things up.”

Kelly, by just doing some simple searches, you can quit using your “memory” to try and remember “facts”. You don’t seem to be very good at that, so let you fingers do the walking instead of your memory cells doing the talking.

Here is an article that validates what Rand said:

http://blog.al.com/breaking/2010/04/spacexs_elon_musk_sen_richard.html

No, he didn’t. He has said that ULA is more likely than SpaceX to get the work, but he’s never said that he’s not in the running. This is what I mean by your vivid imagination, and making things up.

Michael Steele had more Republican lawmakers up in arms with his comments than Bolden has had with his, so I think this news snippet has run it’s course.

Jon Stewart also gave the subject it’s due last night, and not to give it away, but it was Fox and Friends that ended up looking silly, not Bolden.

Did in the interviews I read — some I thought weer linked to from your blog?
Really, with all the hay made over turning crew carry over to “inexperenced commercials”, do you really think Congress can green light SpaceX or orbital for it over Boeing and/or L-M?

Musk can be out there – but hes not that dumb.

“The unapproved budget proposal you mean? As apposed to the Presidential proposal which its derived from?”

Congress doesn’t fund speeches, they fund budgets.

Politicians say many things to many audiences, and while some of it may be specific, much of it is goal related. Obama didn’t demand that Orion become a lifeboat, he floated the idea. Then NASA testified in front of Congress that they don’t have a budget estimate for it (even if they wanted to add it to the proposed budget), and they don’t even know if they will really go through with it. And then Congress would have to actually fund the Orion budget line-item (which doesn’t exist yet).

You focus too much on public comments, which include a lot of posturing from both government and private companies – public comments are PR, and don’t have the force of law. Contracts and approved budgets are what make the world go round.

And regarding SpaceX, if you want to believe the PR, go ahead – it was aimed at deflecting unwanted attention away from SpaceX ahead of the Falcon 9 test launch, and also to allay fears that NASA was too focused on SpaceX for commercial crew. Once the budget is approved and the RFQ’s go out, SpaceX will be 1st in line to submit their crew proposals.

“As for the rest, argue with NASA, SpaceX, all the top experts in the fields…”

You sound Maj. Eaton from the first Indiana Jones movie:

[Discussing the fate of the Ark]
Maj. Eaton: We have top men working on it now.
Indiana: Who?
Maj. Eaton: Top… men.

Musk has never said that. You can continue to repeat that “Spacex is not in the running,” but repetition doesn’t make it either true or sensible.

>>>= Orion is not in the commercial crew category.
>> Thats under debate.”
> It’s only a debate that lives on in the minds of people
> that don’t understand the difference between commercial
> and government. ==

In this case that includes NASA, Boeing and L/M.

>> “Commercial crew got $6 proposal from Obama, and lifeboat Orion (also mixed in…”
> Kelly, all you have to do is read the NASA FY 2011 Budget ==
The unapproved budget proposal you mean? As apposed to the Presidential proposal which its derived from?

>> SpaceX isn’t in the running for Commercial crew.”
> Actually no one really is yet, ==

No, I mean SpaceX is not in the running, not – even by Musk – considered a acceptable or credible bidder. Boeing and/or L/M are it.

Yes I know Commercial Crew itself hasn’t been approved by congress or funded.

As for the rest, argue with NASA, SpaceX, all the top experts in the fields, Presidential and Bolden policy statement.

> Hmmm. This is the same Dittemore who was on national television
> early on saying they’d dismissed the idea of foam bringing down Columbia.

Wouldn’t surprise me. He was the shuttle program manager, so they’d be someone they’d point a camera at.

You definitely have a thing about trying to show how inept NASA is – the SpaceShipOne thing is the lamest example of “proof”, since it relies on “opinions”, not actual studies conducted by NASA. Do you really think that O’Keefe glad-handing people and saying “yep, it would have cost NASA $1.2B” is some sort of firm-fixed-price contract? You are hilarious!!

“>= Orion is not in the commercial crew category.

Thats under debate.”

It’s only a debate that lives on in the minds of people that don’t understand the difference between commercial and government. Apparently former government contractors like you get confused.

“Commercial crew got $6 proposal from Obama, and lifeboat Orion (also mixed in…”

Kelly, all you have to do is read the NASA FY 2011 Budget (it’s on the NASA website), and it would keep you from having to guess what reality consists of. Commercial crew is one of the many programs outlined in the budget, and none of them is Orion – Orion is an idea they have proposed, not a budget proposal. They don’t even have an official NASA estimate for it (contractor public statements don’t qualify as contractual obligations), and they haven’t determined the requirements for what it would do.

“SpaceX isn’t in the running for Commercial crew.”

Actually no one really is yet, since all they have handed out is a $50M technology development contract, and that was with stimulus money. Here’s part of what NASA says in their budget proposal for the $6B they are allocating:

“NASA will allocate these funds through competitive solicitations that support a range of higher- and lower-programmatic risk systems and system components, such as human-rating of existing launch vehicles and development of new spacecraft that can ride on multiple launch vehicles.”

Despite what every one says in public, there is going to be fierce competition for commercial crew, and if you think SpaceX is going to be standing on the sidelines, you’ll be wrong.

“6+5=11”

Yes, 6 apples + 5 oranges = 11 pieces of fruit, and somehow that has meaning for you – good for you.