“yes Joe, I am sure.”

Ahh, then it must be true. Sorry to have bothered you.

There is not a single alternative, no matter if it is cheaper, quicker to impliment, less labor intensive. If it does not include the monster rocket, Marcel will not even consider it. Doesn’t matter what expert opinions are put forward, for Marcel, it has to include the monster rocket. Also, you can not even allow commercial companies, who have stated it could be done for 10 to 6 times cheaper, it has to be a monster rocket and built the most expensive way possible. The stalinist model of big government.

The fixation isn’t mine, it’s Marcel’s.

– It doesn’t matter with Marcel F. Williams. Unless the system you describe has a huge phallic symbol for America it just wont work.

– Fuel Stations? … ah .. no .. where’s the monsterous phallic symbol?

-Gas and go, reusable systems? .. ah .. no … where’s the monsterous phallic symbol?

– Marcel only wants one thing for America, and space exploration isn’t it. You can show him a million alternatives, hell they could even be free from santa .. but if it doesn’t include a 30 – 50 BILLION dollar monster phallic symbol .. it is a non starter.

Four “phallic symbol” references in one (for you) short post. Are you sure Marcel is the one with the “phallic symbol” obsession?

“Today NASA is using commercial space as its scapegoat of failed policies.”

Elements of it are. The commercialists within NASA are using LEO as a crutch to justify and maintain short-term HSF operations and external commercialist are trying to leverage NASA as a crutch for exploitation they otherwise cannot afford to do on their own. Separating the two, leaving NASA to explore BEO w/government funding and commercial to exploit LEO w/private funding and no government subsidies is the way to go.

Fuel Stations? … ah .. no .. where’s the monsterous phallic symbol?

Gas and go, reusable systems? .. ah .. no … where’s the monsterous phallic symbol?

Marcel only wants one thing for America, and space exploration isn’t it. You can show him a million alternatives, hell they could even be free from santa .. but if it doesn’t include a 30 – 50 BILLION dollar monster phallic symbol .. it is a non starter.

Nice list of categories. I think political preferences also play a role, those who work for government agencies will be hostile to advocacy of market forces in any sector, even if they themselves don’t work in it, because they may be next.

No, if the White House wanted to zero human space exploration, the President would have vetoed the bill. He didn’t.

What the White House wanted to do was concentrate human space exploration dollars after Shuttle on actual human space exploration technologies and systems through competitive procurements. Instead, Congress wanted to lock-in Shuttle workforce and contracts that had been set to expire since the Bush II Administration. The Obama White House, having bigger fish to fry, compromised, and we’re where we’re at today — using the same expensive workforce and the same sole-source contracts to rearrange pieces of the Shuttle like a jigsaw for another couple decades, instead of exploring.

The reason we’re not spending any significant dollars on human space exploration is because we’re still spending billions each year on Shuttle workforce, contracts, and infrastructure. Although the orbiters will soon become museum exhibits, thanks to Congress, the Shuttle program was never retired — it was just reanimated in the form of SLS and MPCV. Until it is retired, NASA won’t have any funding freed up to conduct exploration. The high cost of the Shuttle program crowded out exploration spending for the past 40 years, and unless stopped, will do so for another 20-odd years in the form of SLS/MPCV.