Obama: "Under my watch, NASA will inspire the world once again." + McCain position

Originally posted by Andrew E. Wiggin
reply to post by ngchunter

 

I've had it with these stupid strawmen arguments. I didn't say anything of the sort

Awwww

You can leave the name calling at the door.

If the shoe fits, wear it. Pointing out a logical fallacy is not "name calling" - hiding behind such is an appeal to pity, another logical fallacy.

Your expectations of Barack Obama where NASA is concerned directly relate to wanting him to be there building it himself.

No, they do not and to say such is a gigantic strawman. All I asked for was a direct statement regarding the fate of the Ares V branch of the constellation program.

What do you expect? Him to know everything about everything, and everything about everyone?
What do you expect him to talk about?

No, I already told you what I expect, but your closed mind isn't listening. I'll say it again; a direct and honest answer outlined very simply above. All it would take is a single sentence, that's it, it'd take less time than the meaningless dribble he gave here in titusville.

How the quatum physics of the flux capacitor directly correleate to the dark matter found in subsector alpha-prime nebular 6? (i made all of that up, mind you)

You also made up the idea that what I'm asking for is related. It's a red herring. I never asked for a scientific explanation of how the Ares V will function, I asked for a simple statement of his support for the continued development of the entire constellation program.

Will he cancel the ares V or not? Yes or no. That's the only answer I'm looking for, the rest is irrelevant. People stopped caring about space after apollo 11 was done and the soviets had been beaten to the moon. Except when an astronaut is in peril, no one cares and it's not NASA's job to make them care. I personally don't want to see them catering to those whose greatest interest is paris hilton's latest tape, I'd rather see them do science, whether it's "easily accessible to the public" or not. That's for a different discussion though so it is the last I will say on that off-topic matter. My request is simple, a direct and honest statement that the full constellation program will go forward. Nothing more, nothing less, and no room for obama, or you, to wiggle out of it later. As it stands I will call the "i-told-you-so" when it comes time to start serious work on the Ares V, and I'm betting you'll come back with a statement like, "but he never promised!"

reply to post by Andrew E. Wiggin


We should never have gone to Iraq in my opinion. All these overseas effort only turn around and bite us in the behind.

Charity is something that should only be made my private organizations. Some relief money for natural disasters, I am all for that, but history has shown that government funded charity in third worlds never succeeds in helping anyone, unless it is restricted to emergency aid and medicine.

If you don't think Obama will help his family in Africa a great deal, then you are not thinking things through.

Originally posted by poet1b
reply to post by Andrew E. Wiggin

 

We should never have gone to Iraq in my opinion. All these overseas effort only turn around and bite us in the behind.

Charity is something that should only be made my private organizations. Some relief money for natural disasters, I am all for that, but history has shown that government funded charity in third worlds never succeeds in helping anyone, unless it is restricted to emergency aid and medicine.

If you don't think Obama will help his family in Africa a great deal, then you are not thinking things through.

May I ask what any of this has to do with this thread?

It's not that hard, just throw the word space arbitrarily a couple of times, if only for the sake of pretense.

[edit on 8/14/2008 by schrodingers dog]

reply to post by schrodingers dog


You should try reading the post he's replying to, the link's right there in his post. That'll explain it.

reply to post by schrodingers dog


I'll ask what both posts contribute to this thread

No reply needed.

Back on topic please.

reply to post by schrodingers dog


Actually, I'm a liberal, and I used to be a democrat, but it has become quite clear that the democrats care nothing for the average working guy in the U.S..

For fiscal responsibility look at what Clinton did. There is a place for the middle. When it comes to spending, Obama will be another GW, and probably then some. While I am not crazy about McCain's economic policies, I think that he will be a lot more responsible with our nations tax dollars.

Do you really believe Obama has changed his attitude towards NASA?

reply to post by schrodingers dog


You want to believe that Obama will put something into NASA because he gave a carefully worded speech where he pretends to be changing his attitude towards NASA, I am just pointing out where Obama's true intentions are. Obama has big plans for saving the poor of the world, very big plans, and if he has to shut down NASA to do that, he will.

reply to post by poet1b


Belief is not required imo.
Both candidates' space agenda was posted on the thread.
Both candidates, as politicians, should be interpreted with the appropriate filters.

I chose, after some deliberation, to post this thread on the Space forum.
It is in fact by nature, not a very divisive issue, lest one brings their bias with them.
I have to concede that in a couple of posts, I became what I hate, so I'm sorry for that.
Momentum is a hell of a thing.

But if you go back to the OP, I believe I have favored no candidate.
I am just trying to reconcile both visions with practicality. Not being versed in space exploration, the thread was mostly intended as a call to be informed on the details.

reply to post by schrodingers dog


Sorry man, but I just wanted to point out where Obama's heart really lies. I think it shows that Obama's claims about furthering our nations space program with our current fiscal situation and Obama's other big plans make it very, very unlikely. If you care about NASA, Obama is not your man, and pre-election rhetoric like this can not be trusted.

Originally posted by Johnmike
reply to post by schrodingers dog

 

You should try reading the post he's replying to, the link's right there in his post. That'll explain it.

LOL

Wow you are digging deep now.

If you think we can't spend money on the space program under Obama's plan- i just ask you to look at the plan. Obviously you haven't.

You're going to blast my thread that he replied to? Its completley on topic in accordance with the chronological chain of events that this conversation has taken.

Up until poet posted about Iraq - you are the only person so far to post off-topic.

On topic:

I agree that "pre-election" rhetoric is all magical sunshine rainbow foofoo kitty fluff

It always has been. So you have to look before the candidate was in the pre-election mode.

At actions. At rhetoric.

For Barack Obama - Here ya go


From another perspective

Popular Mechanics covers it

The Reality
Senator Obama has already declared himself a fan of space: “I grew up on Star Trek,” Obama said, quite famously, in Wyoming last month. “I believe in the final frontier.” But he has also made it clear that he does not agree with the way the space program is now being run, saying as recently as last week in Indiana that NASA “needs to be redefined,” with looming decisions between manned launches and “unmanned probes which are oftentimes cheaper and less dangerous.”

That doesn’t sound like a candidate who is going to stick with the status quo. But how important does Obama really think that fixing the program is? Earlier in the campaign, his Web site had no explicit space policy other than a plan to pay for an early education program with a delay of NASA’s Constellation program (click here to download PDF). It was unclear why he chose that particular pot of money for such a seemingly unrelated item, or how he would maintain NASA’s team for half a decade when it would presumably need to continue to bringing home a paycheck.

In January, Obama released the space policy pamphlet excerpt above. Like Senator Clinton, he claims to support the development of Ares 1 to replace the Shuttle—but also makes no mention of the moon or Mars, at least in terms of sending humans there. How Obama proposes to square the circle of replacing the shuttle with a new vehicle whose development he initially planned to delay appears to be officially unexplained. But in that same Indiana forum last week he called for a national debate about space if he becomes president. Hey, if we’re going to talk it out, doesn’t it make more sense to lay all the policies on the table now, when we’re deciding who’s headed to the White House?

Does Obama want to concentrate ONLY on the space program and get a man to mars as soon as humanly possible?

No.

But the information is there. To those who read it with hopeful eyes, who are open to change, and willing to accept it for what it is - Barack Obama is your man. Not only for space exploration.

Are there better choices? I am positive there are for space exploration.
But nobody running in THIS election is that person.

[edit on 8/14/2008 by Andrew E. Wiggin]

Actions speak louder than words. Obama will cancel NASA program after another for his charity and welfare programs, as has already attempted to do, just as the article you quote points out.

Yeah, his "sekrit Muslim Communist" agenda will take over on day one, and he'll convert the VAB to a giant housing project immediately

Can we please keep the braindead robotic political propaganda to the various political propaganda fora and keep the "Space Exploration" forum focused on facts, not assumptions?

Originally posted by Andrew E. Wiggin
To those who read it with hopeful eyes...

Translation: To those who are under the hopenosis spell and will drink the koolaid with no questions asked...

Your own source is proof that he will not support the development of the Ares V but will support the development of the Ares I and leave NASA with half of a functional manned program. You just undermined your own position. To those who read his policy with any shred of intellectual honesty and discernment can see that he plans to leave us with half of a spaceship that will be incapable of doing anything justifying the initial cost of an entirely new spacecraft. It'll keep the union workers happy even though their jobs will be in support of a completely pointless project.

Here's a concept; do something honest. Either flat out say that you've changed your mind and will fully support the constellation program, or say that you do not agree with the danger and cost of manned space exploration and will pull the plug altogether in favor of unmanned probes or an entirely different manned program from designed from scratch. Either one is an ethical position, and though I may disagree with the latter, I would respect the integrity that it took to take a stand for what you really believe and I respect your right to believe it. I can not and do not respect someone who wants to ride the fence and half-support something, guaranteeing to failure, because they're too frightened of the political consequences of taking a stand in either direction. And I most certainly will not agree with the idea that I need to submit to hopenosis and read the things I want to see in his statements when they just aren't there to be found.

Originally posted by poet1b
Actions speak louder than words. Obama will cancel NASA program after another for his charity and welfare programs, as has already attempted to do, just as the article you quote points out.

I agree with you when you say "actions speak louder than words"

But you are prefacing what you THINK his actions will be based on words that he never said.

If actions speak louder than words - and Obama has never made any actions as president yet, then what exactly are you basing your argument on?

Originally posted by Andrew E. Wiggin
... Its completley on topic in accordance with the chronological chain of events that this conversation has taken...

That statement is not only Off Topic, itself, you're using the wrong criteria, mate.

My understanding is :

The topic should try to stay true to the Thread Title, not to where the ensuing conversation happens to meander.


Everyone... Let's try not to wander off the path , AGAIN.

nevermind

[edit on 8/14/2008 by Andrew E. Wiggin]

My apologies if this link was already posted. If i over looked it - please remove this post.

It only adds to the discussion

Barack Obama wants to Increase funding to NASA

Over the weekend, Democratic senator Barack Obama made a public statement during his presidential campaign trail in Titusville, Florida. Whilst responding to a question about oceanic research, Obama elaborated on his plans for the future of NASA. Previously, there have been hints that a possible Obama Presidency would see a reduction in space funding in favour of a boost in education spending. However, Saturday's statement was followed by some detailed text on Obama's campaign blog outlining his priorities for the US dominance in space, the possibility of extending the Shuttle's operations and speeding up development of the Constellation program…

Many will argue that NASA is operating on a shoestring budget as it is under the current Republican US government, so when reports circulated that the Democratic Presidential candidate Barack Obama wasn't prioritising NASA spending, many became concerned about the bleak future for the space program should Obama be voted in. Republican candidate John McCain has always said that if he is voted in that NASA funding would continue to be a priority.

However, in the most detailed statement yet about his vision for the future of NASA, Obama has stated, "we have an administration that has set ambitious goals for NASA without giving NASA the support it needs to reach them." This sentiment will be shared by many, not least by NASA officials, who have become very worried about the US position in space. Dr. Michael Griffin, NASA's Director, is fully aware of the international competition the US space agency is facing. In a recent interview with the BBC, Griffin was realistic about China beating the US back to the Moon. "Certainly it is possible that if China wants to put people on the Moon, and if it wishes to do so before the United States, it certainly can. As a matter of technical capability, it absolutely can." he said.

Ultimately, NASA is overstretched and under-funded, but will Obama's promises be followed through after the election campaign trail? Regardless, Obama has some big policy plans indicating his increased interest in space exploration. Firstly, he is highly critical of the current funding situation and voices his concern about the Shuttle-Constellation "5-year gap":

"And we have to do more than provide short-term relief. We have to secure our long-term prosperity and strengthen America's competitiveness in the 21st century. One of the areas where we are in danger of losing our competitive edge is our space program. When I was growing up, NASA inspired the world with achievements we are still proud of. Today, we have an administration that has set ambitious goals for NASA without giving NASA the support it needs to reach them. As a result, they've had to cut back on research, and trim their programs, which means that after the Space Shuttle shuts down in 2010, we're going to have to rely on Russian spacecraft to keep us in orbit."

These points are shared by others. U.S. Senator Bill Nelson recently headed a rally at Cape Canaveral in response to the announced Shuttle retirement job losses, voicing his opinion that once the Shuttle is shelved, NASA will rely on Russia for human space flight. This would have the effect of losing skilled spacecraft engineers in the US, only to provide jobs in Russia. Obama confronts this concern and highlights Nelson's aims for the future of Cape Canaveral employees:

"We cannot cede our leadership in space. That's why I will help close the gap and ensure that our space program doesn't suffer when the Shuttle goes out of service by working with Senator Bill Nelson to add at least one additional Space Shuttle flight beyond 2010; by supporting continued funding for NASA; by speeding the development of the Shuttle's successor; and by making sure that all those who work in the space industry in Florida do not lose their jobs when the Shuttle is retired - because we cannot afford to lose their expertise."

Wrapping up his online statement, Obama appears to be devoted to future manned missions to the "Moon, Mars and beyond," with increased spending toward robotic missions. He also links strong space technology development with improvements in the US economy and world inspiration:

"More broadly, we need a real vision for space exploration. To help formulate this vision, I'll reestablish the National Aeronautics and Space Council so that we can develop a plan to explore the solar system - a plan that involves both human and robotic missions, and enlists both international partners and the private sector. And as America leads the world to long-term exploration of the moon, Mars, and beyond, let's also tap NASA's ingenuity to build the airplanes of tomorrow and to study our own planet so we can combat global climate change. Under my watch, NASA will inspire the world, make America stronger, and help grow the economy here in Florida." - US Sen. Barack Obama

Whilst many may be suspicious of any Presidential candidate's visions before they are voted in, it is a relief to know Obama has the drive to increase NASA spending and understands that this will have far-reaching benefits for the US and the world.

Source

(my bolds to outline importance)

Hopefully he means it. I'm usually against government spending, but NASA's a huge exception.

reply to post by Andrew E. Wiggin


I am predicting Obama's future actions based on his past actions in his attitude towards NASA, and the long list of very expensive world charity efforts that Obama is far more passionate about.

The only thing Obama says he will do is "supporting continued funding for NASA', which doesn't even obligate him to remain at the current funding levels, he could cut NASA funding and still claim he is for sending NASA some money. It sounds to me like Obama plans on doing nothing for NASA, but make a few flowery sounding speeches.

No where does Obama say that he will increase NASA funding, or the funding for space programs. People just choose to believe that they want based on a lot of empty words with no promises. Drink some more cool aid.

reply to post by Andrew E. Wiggin


I see nothing in there that guarantees the development of the Ares V. I only see the desire to speed the development of the Ares I to close the gap, as mentioned before. Show me where he explicitly states he will continue the development of the Ares V and related payloads for a manned lunar mission. Not just some article saying that he "appears to support it," which your article admits it's assuming based on his support of robotic missions. I want to see the quote of HIM saying it specifically about manned missions to the moon and beyond. Does it even exist? Yes or no?

[edit on 15-8-2008 by ngchunter]