Comments on: Mixed reactions to NASA budget proposal

By: Robert Clark

Robert Clark — Tue, 11 Mar 2014 17:01:53 +0000

Some key Republicans support the SLS. Is that anti-Science?
It’s more complicated than just along party lines. Alot of it has to do with key aerospace industries in the Congressman’s or Senator’s districts or states.

Bob Clark

By: Robert Clark

Robert Clark — Tue, 11 Mar 2014 09:05:23 +0000

I believe you are referring to SpaceX. Boeing has also said they would be ready by 2015 with sufficient funding.
Time to stop fooling around and get it done.

Bob Clark

By: josh

josh — Sun, 09 Mar 2014 23:26:26 +0000

o’keefe was the best administrator after james webb. figures you didn’t like him.

By: josh

josh — Sun, 09 Mar 2014 23:25:23 +0000

no, in recent years republicans have been blatantly advocated for corporatism and crony capitalism. just take a look at what’s happening with broadband internet in the us. or the banking sector. it’s disgusting.

By: josh

josh — Sun, 09 Mar 2014 23:22:55 +0000

i highly doubt it. but assuming it was true: it would be right up your alley. going from corrupt old space into the corrupt healthcare industry.

By: josh

josh — Sun, 09 Mar 2014 23:19:57 +0000

yeah, because 3 billion in pork per year isn’t enough. right, windy? admit it already, lol, you want the taxpayers to pay your salary and nothing else matters to you.

By: vulture4

vulture4 — Sun, 09 Mar 2014 14:21:07 +0000

I agree space is a bipartisan issue. However the major change in direction in the past twenty years was the termination of Shuttle and initiation of Constellation. The migration from Constellation to SLS/Orion did not signal any major change in strategy, although the goal shifted from lunar landing to an uncertain choice between objectives not requiring a lander. Although COTS was initiated under the Bush administration it was seen as a temporary measure until the termination of US participation in ISS. Commercial Crew and ISS extension were not foreseen.

There was and remains a clear divide between supporters of Commercial Crew/ISS on the one hand and Constellation (now SLS/Orion) on the other. These represent two distinct strategies; development of the LEO architecture first or development of bases on the lunar surface (or, in the absence of landers, in cislunar space) supported directly from the Earth’s surface.

By: amightywind

amightywind — Sat, 08 Mar 2014 20:45:27 +0000

No. They need to zero out the ISS and transfer all $3 billion to SLS/Orion.

By: Vladislaw

Vladislaw — Sat, 08 Mar 2014 17:50:18 +0000

Congressional porkonauts only want endless, no bid, cost plus, fixed fee, FAR development contracts that never end. NASA has little say in the matter.

By: seamus

seamus — Sat, 08 Mar 2014 13:52:02 +0000

Anti-science is a distinctly Republican trait… or reality just has a liberal bias.