>> Who am I to challenge your faith, which you hold regardless
>> of evidence, or lack there of.

> No, it’s not “regardless of the evidence.” It’s because I know
> how to read a budget, ==

Ah ha.

>> To the point, the public and Congress are not going to buy it you’re way.

> That’s a separate issue.

Not really.

>> No future programs to or past LEO in work.

> There would have been if Congress had simply passed the Obama
> budget, ==

That would be part of the Ah ha.

No, it’s not “regardless of the evidence.” It’s because I know how to read a budget, and take the time to do so, instead of indulging in ignorant hysteria.

To the point, the public and Congress are not going to buy it you’re way.

That’s a separate issue.

No future programs to or past LEO in work.

There would have been if Congress had simply passed the Obama budget, instead of engaging in a wasteful porkfest that just kicks the can down the road. There may still be yet, but no thanks to Congress.

> Rand Simberg wrote @ July 26th, 2010 at 4:34 pm

> No, it’s not, regardless of how often you repeat this nonsense==

Who am I to challenge your faith, which you hold regardless of evidence, or lack there of.

To the point, the public and Congress are not going to buy it you’re way. Congress has seen to many “long term studies” deliver nothing, they have seen to many reports and studies telling them to expect no more in such cases in the future.

The headlines are NASA abandons moon program and grounds shuttle, and buys tickets on Russian craft to get to the ISS. I.E. NASA stops flying people or being a space program.

No future programs to or past LEO in work.

No, it’s not, regardless of how often you repeat this nonsense, whether it’s “rilivent” or relevant.

> == Again, this is true, but has no relevance to the present policy discussion.

Its the Obamaspace plan, which seems relivent.

Again, this is true, but has no relevance to the present policy discussion.

> Rand Simberg wrote @ July 26th, 2010 at 2:24 pm
>
> No, it’s where it is to those who can’t read a budget.

You can pour all the money on something you like, but if you already gutted out, its still dead.

A NASA that doesn’t send folks anywhere, has no project in work to send someone anywhere, is in a public sense out of business. Doing that and keeping the budget the same is just going to further enrage the public.

No, it’s where it is to those who can’t read a budget.

> Rand Simberg wrote @ July 25th, 2010 at 11:35 pm
>
> That is both true and completely irrelevant to the conversation.

That’s where NASA under Obamaspace is to all but the faithful.