Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you: No adverts like this in the forums anymore. Times and dates in your local timezone. Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance. Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely. Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net. If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

http://news.investors.com/ibd-editorials/082712-623714-neil-armstrong-opposed-obama-space-cuts.htm?p=full

Come on, November.

And so even someone regarded as being one of the greatest of American (or just human?) heroes is pulled apart by red and blue.

I have to be honest, I read this and wondered if it was some attempt at satire?

I love it, best to honour him, make Americans first on Mars.

No spacecraft = Obama screwed up.
Work on spacecraft = Obama is wasting money on crap, let the private sector fly to space.
Post a picture of yourself looking at the moon like so many thousands of other Americans did after he died = egomaniac president.

Nothing he does will ever be good enough for some people.

Pacific wrote:And so even someone regarded as being one of the greatest of American (or just human?) heroes is pulled apart by red and blue.

I have to be honest, I read this and wondered if it was some attempt at satire?

d-usa wrote:No spacecraft = Obama screwed up.
Work on spacecraft = Obama is wasting money on crap, let the private sector fly to space.
Post a picture of yourself looking at the moon like so many thousands of other Americans did after he died = egomaniac president.

Nothing he does will ever be good enough for some people.

It's an article by 'Investors', it attacks Muslims and anti-climate-change, it praises 'the privatization of space', and wants 'the first man or woman on Mars [to be] American'. So it's obviously written by raving right-wing looneys (lol, looney = lunar, get it?)

That article is impressively bad.

 dogma wrote:
That article is impressively bad.

^ This.

I disagree with NASA being neutered, the Earth has finite resources, and us Americans cant keep sharing the same planet with the rest of you for much longer . But something had to go and I can't complain too much. I just hope its something we can get back to in the nearish future.

Besides, Monitering weather is more important then going to space.

 hotsauceman1 wrote:
Besides, Monitering weather is more important then going to space.

But why is it NASA's job?

NASA's job is to put people and things in space, not watch for low pressure areas. Thats the National Weather Service's job.

The nasa program is still sort of active, just no flights.
It will start again when people figure out how to mine on asteriods or effectively terraform the moon or be able to make renewable fuel to fly to a planet elsewhere.

It's pointless at the moment in relative gain, the cost is to much. Pay the debts then start luxuries like a space program again.

Obama has the right idea in my humble opinion.

 Grey Templar wrote:

NASA's job is to put people and things in space...

Actually, that's not true. NASA's job is primarily centered on space and aeronautical research, which may or may not involve putting things in space; and may involve a fair bit of study regarding weather patterns.

Well currently they're focusing on the mars stuff and doing further research into the minerals collected.
Or some secret stuff like putting dust particles into the atmosphere for evil rain purposes.

 dogma wrote:
That article is impressively bad.

IT was painful to read...

 Melissia wrote:

 dogma wrote:
That article is impressively bad.

IT was painful to read...

So is this thread...

http://www.csmonitor.com/Science/2012/0830/Blue-moon-A-cosmic-wink-at-Neil-Armstrong-memorial-service

There's a rare 'blue moon' on Friday, a fitting wink to Neil Armstrong by the cosmic calendar.

That's the day of a private service for Armstrong, the first man to walk on the moon, who died last Saturday in Ohio at age 82...

...Armstrong's family has suggested paying tribute to him by looking at the moon and giving the astronaut a wink.

The photo is a silhoutte of Obama, from behind, gazing up at the moon. Not his face. He's facing the same way as us, gazing up at the sky and the moon in appreciation and wonder. We're looking up together. It's a stock photo, from April. He didn't go out and have a photo shoot They found an appropriate photo to mark and note that the President is doing the same thing we are. Looking up into the sky and being inspired by Neil, and the accomplishments of our astronauts and NASA pioneers.

Man, I can hear Carl Sagan rolling over in his grave.

It appears the article has disappeared. the headline is still at the link.. but no article.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
Now the article shows up.. nevermind.

 d-usa wrote:
No spacecraft = Obama screwed up.
Work on spacecraft = Obama is wasting money on crap, let the private sector fly to space.
Post a picture of yourself looking at the moon like so many thousands of other Americans did after he died = egomaniac president.

Nothing he does will ever be good enough for some people.

Other than the poorly written article...

I'm not sure I agree with the critism against Obama here?

Don't all President "weigh in" whenever a famous person dies?

its one thing to weigh in, its another to "honor" the man with a stock photo, OF YOURSELF, that was taken on april 24, 2012.

 d-usa wrote:
No spacecraft = Obama screwed up.
Work on spacecraft = Obama is wasting money on crap, let the private sector fly to space.
Post a picture of yourself looking at the moon like so many thousands of other Americans did after he died = egomaniac president.

Nothing he does will ever be good enough for some people.

Entirely concurred.

Are we forgetting mars? Major GOP elements screamed that it's a massive waste of money. That we should be entirely abandoning space exploration during this time.

Norquist, for example, derided the Mars landing as a huge waste of time, despite the fact that he and many others remain in support of the Bush invasion of Iraq, something that cost the US 1,200 times the amount of cash.

Basically the right will always stamp it's feet and cry about anything that Obama does, Obama gives a homeless child an ice cream? Obama is destroying children's teeth and causing obesity. Obama takes an old lady across the street, he's trying to control people's lives and bringing about the nanny state.

It's banal, puerile, trire and infantile. I want 4 more years, just so these halfwits stamp themselves through the floor like a herd of Rumpelstiltskins.

Truly, Obama is history's greatest monster.

 Ouze wrote:
Truly, Obama is history's greatest monster.

Au contraire
This is history's greatest monster.

Fun fact: This image was found in an article entitled "The scariest horror movie monsters under 5 feet tall"

 purplefood wrote:

 Ouze wrote:
Truly, Obama is history's greatest monster.

Au contraire
This is history's greatest monster.

Fun fact: This image was found in an article entitled "The scariest horror movie monsters under 5 feet tall"

Gah! Ron Paul!

Obama takes an old lady across the street, he's trying to control people's lives and bringing about the nanny state.

Try a different version. Ryan got the "old lady" bit of pushing her off a cliff by the democrats.

I like to think I've got a pretty good feel for the stupid political fringe of the internet, but then I run across something like this and I have to remember it's actually a lot worse than I let myself believe.

 dogma wrote:
That article is impressively bad.

I don't understand what it was doing on that website at all.

 InquisitorVaron wrote:
The nasa program is still sort of active, just no flights.
It will start again when people figure out how to mine on asteriods or effectively terraform the moon or be able to make renewable fuel to fly to a planet elsewhere.

It's pointless at the moment in relative gain, the cost is to much. Pay the debts then start luxuries like a space program again.

Obama has the right idea in my humble opinion.

The "luxury" of space exploration is responsible for pretty much all of your modern conveniences, from medical, pc's, plastics, etc...

I live right near the JSC in Texas, many of my friends and neighbors worked for NASA. Note I used past tense on their employment. Obama has gutted the best and brightest from the space industry and they have been forced to move onto new careers outside of space exploration. They did not move to private companies. Note that very few actually work for the NASA, most are actually contractors for private companies. So now we have a skeleton crew of the former aerospace community and when we do decide to move forward again we will be decades behind. The momentum and quality personnel are gone. Guys and gals I know who got axed had decades experience in flight control, various engineering disciplines, etc... what does a laid off aerospace engineer do now? Ask my neighbor; she is now a technical writer and Russian linguist. Most former NASA related engineers are now in oil and gas industry. The private sector is not picking up space exploration and this was not a great move by Obama. Not that I thought for a minute he thought it would be a good move anyway.

Right idea you say, really? The DD community is truly amazing!

I like that you say that Obama has gutted the space industry, when it is more the public apathy and the idea that "spending money on space is useless" which is responsible for the cuts on NASA.

It occurs to me that the best way to make Republicans in favour of some element of government spending is to have Democrats cut it.

Meanwhile, the budget of NASA was cut from $17 billion in 2008 to $16 billion in 2012 in inflation adjusted figures... in real dollars the budget of NASA is higher than its ever been. Basically, that little essay from Chaplain Leviticus above just ends up a load of rubbish.

 sebster wrote:
It occurs to me that the best way to make Republicans in favour of some element of government spending is to have Democrats cut it.

Meanwhile, the budget of NASA was cut from $17 billion in 2008 to $16 billion in 2012 in inflation adjusted figures... in real dollars the budget of NASA is higher than its ever been. Basically, that little essay from Chaplain Leviticus above just ends up a load of rubbish.

Adjusted for inflation NASA hit its peak in 1965 at 35 billion, however it is still higher then any post apollo 11 annual budget