No discourtesy was intended. I thought the link was as on-topic as others that have been posted here, but if Jeff would prefer that commenters not post links to their own site I will comply with with whatever he prefers.

To return to the topic at hand, I will ask, if Griffin wants the SLS budget increased by $400 million a year through the end of the next decade, where does he propose NASA finds that funding?

If you want to discuss something on Space Politics, then say it here. Otherwise it looks like you’re just trying to use Jeff’s blog to advertise for your own (i.e. SPAM). A little courtesy here.

Oh, and don’t just copy what you said over there to here, because that would be spamming too. If you have an original thought, bring it forth.

“the congress that disposed of the original FY 11 budget request and produced the 2010 Authorization Act was a Democratic-controlled Congress. The Authorization Act was passed in a lame-duck session prior to the GOP taking over.”

Matt you keep forgetting what was in the FY11 Budget proposed by the Administration:

1. Cancel Constellation (Approved)
2. Extend the life of the ISS (Approved)
3. Fund Commercial Crew (Approved)
4. Keep the Orion as the MPCV (Approved)

Now what the Administration didn’t want was the SLS, but since the Senators that proposed it stated that it was to preserve jobs, it’s not unexpected to get Congressional support after canceling such a large program like Constellation.

So where is this big failure and repudiation that you’re talking about? We all had a party and celebrated the victory for the future of NASA HSF, because that’s what it was.

You keep focusing on the things that don’t matter, like what people say. All that matters is what Congress funds, and since the President got most of what he wanted, it was a victory.

And No, I didn’t vote for this President, but I was willing to give him a chance-not just on space, but other issues. Again, it was the perception that the Administration being hostile to HSF that generated the opposition. And in case you forgot, it was bipartisan. The politics of the day ensured that the original FY 11 budget-as it was presented, was DOA on The Hill. Even the revised plan submitted after Dr. Holdren and General Bolden were in front of the Senate-again, the hearing where Neil Armstrong, Capt. Cernan, and Dr. Augustine testified in Panel II-faced an uphill battle. So Congress threw out the original and revised plan and wrote their own. Don’t like what resulted? Try and get your Senators or Congresscritter to change things.

Again, that “space summit” was just the choir meeting. NO contrary views presented at all: just the same song sheet. What should’ve happened was the President’s speech, then a real summit, with speakers pro and con of the Administration’s plans, with opportunity for alternative proposals. If that takes 2-3 days to carry out, so be it.

The article from MSNBC’s Alan Boyle is a good start. NASA and other agencies were putting “meat on the bones” of what, so far, is a very thin exploration outline. Which is what critics have been saying ever since the Administration put out that botch of a rollout on 1 Feb 10. Details, missions to specific destinations, and so on. Vague promises are one thing. Actual plans are another, and the article (and this related one) help flesh FlexPath out.

http://www.ibtimes.com/articles/206245/20110830/nasa-mars.htm

I agree: the ultimate destination is Mars. The arguing is how to get there, and where to go on the way.

Not after FY11. Obama was going after the Shuttle political industrial complex, of course they were going to be furious. He deliberately kept them in the dark for as long as possible so they couldn’t coordinate a unified response. No mere communications strategy could have brought them on board. You are simply spouting propaganda.

Was that the friendly congress that set a filibuster record?

“the politics was lining up against what the Administration wanted after that disaster known as FY 11”

Potato, Po-tah-to – I say good budget proposal, you say bad.

“And that was a Congress friendly to the Administration!”

Oh yes, that Republican House was super friendly to the Democratic President. Yep, no doubt.

You are only hearing what you want to hear Matt, and you are naively believing that politicians only act in the interests of the nation. And politics, both local and national, don’t play a part. If only that were true, but it’s not.

As onr piece of evidence, I said:

“And all Administration budgets are mere suggestions, since it’s up to the House to create spending bills, not the Administration. Learn some civics.”

And you said:

“The Congress properly disposed of the FY 11 NASA Budget and wrote their own. As is their RIGHT to do so.”

See Matt? You’re not listening. You’re just arguing for the sake of arguing.

But that’s OK, because as Eugene Cernan would tell you, “you don’t know what you don’t know.”

Unless, that is, you can finally answer the question many of us have been asking you – who is going to use the SLS, and when will Congress approve the funding for the millions of pounds of payload that only the SLS can carry?

Any answers yet? Or is Cernan right about you?

And Ron: you know full well the old D.C. Adage: “The Administration proposes, but the Congress disposes.” The Congress properly disposed of the FY 11 NASA Budget and wrote their own. As is their RIGHT to do so. Remember, perception counts in politics, and in this case, the Administration was perceived as being hostile to HSF, statements to the contrary, and so far, NO amount of damage control and spin has changed that perception where it counts: on Capitol Hill.

“It’s not necessarily the message itself: but the TONE of the message.”

I guess you hear what you want to hear Matt. You don’t like the President, so anything he says has the wrong tone. That’s your personal problem, and one not shared by others.

“it was the preception that he was dissing lunar return that ensured continued Congressional (and other) criticism that guaranteed that even the revised FY 11 Budget would be DOA on The Hill”

What a load of horse-pucky. No one in Congress is pushing for us to get back to the Moon, and their budget proves it.

And all Administration budgets are mere suggestions, since it’s up to the House to create spending bills, not the Administration. Learn some civics.