Today’s Washington Post reviews what the 2008 presidential candidates have said about space and finds that (to no one’s surprise who reads this blog regularly) they have said very little. The article uses as a hook Barack Obama’s announcement earlier this week that he would delay NASA’s Constellation program for five years to fund part of his education plan. The article does include a quote from a Hillary Clinton spokesman in response to Obama’s plan: “Senator Clinton does not support delaying the Constellation program and intends to maintain American leadership in space exploration.”
Most of the other information in the article has been published elsewhere: the statement from the John Edwards campaign, for example, was published back in July, while the Mitt Romney statement came from an August visit to Florida’s Space Coast. Of interest is this passage from the Post article:
When asked about their candidates’ positions on the moon-Mars project, a spokeswoman for Sen. John McCain (Ariz.) did not respond, while one for former New York mayor Rudolph W. Giuliani said, “I’m not sure anything is out there on this subject.”
That last part is not entirely correct: Giuliani has said he would “aggressively pursue space exploration” earlier this year. And, of course, he’s ready to defend the planet from alien invasion.
The headline was a loittle bit misleading, albeit technically accurate. Still the Post admitted:
‘But the same day, Clinton somewhat muted her support for an aggressive human space exploration program by telling a New York Times reporter that travel to Mars “excites people,” adding that she is “more focused on nearer-term goals I think are achievable.” ‘
And as predicted the Clinton campaign let Obama have it for his plan to gut Constellation funding.
[…] mean that they side with Obama about cutting Constellation or other NASA programs. Recall from this morning’s post that Giuliani has argued for “aggressively” pursuing space exploration, while Romney […]
[…] Space Politics » Reviewing the candidates’ space positions (or lack thereof) […]