Applause for Bush! SERIOUSLY!

2

Comments

  • Reply 21 of 44
    eugeneeugene Posts: 8,254member
    I'd look great in a space suit. At least mommy said so.
  • Reply 22 of 44
    I will applaud Bush if he admits he is a moron and quits office. He could also talk about the real threats posed by IRAQ to the US.
  • Reply 23 of 44
    Instead of innoculating every sub-Saharan African from polio, spending money on schools and HIV/AIDS education in the developing world, researching renewable energy, hell, providing housing, training and healthcare for the millions of poor people in North America, George Bush has decided to put a man on Mars.



    This is an appalling, appalling idea. The last astronaughts on the moon ended up playing golf because they had nothing better to do. Why put anyone up there? What's the damn point? I don't care which president suggests this, this is a waste of money.



    A rat done bit my sister Nell with Whitey on the moon.

    Her face and arms began to swell and Whitey's on the moon.

    I can't pay no doctor bills but Whitey's on the moon.

    Ten years from now I'll be payin' still while Whitey's on the moon
  • Reply 24 of 44
    I told you guys. Now watch for the accurate colored pictures of Mars to begin to leak out.
  • Reply 25 of 44
    All those billions would be far better spent on addressing this.
  • Reply 26 of 44
    billybobskybillybobsky Posts: 1,914member
    Bush contrary to his double the NIH budget rhetoric is actually trying to slow the flow of money to the NIH. The administration claims that they want to make sure that the money isnt being used inappropriately. Individual labs have limited budgets in a year, that induces them to bean count as is. And since most people are jockeying for that money, large scale projects like buildings are more often than not built by committees of actual scientist, ensuring normally that they are not overly generous. Considering the fact that in industrial research there is a spare no expense motivation, ie that if you need a 150000 dollar machine just buy it, this sort of governmental bean counting has no place when the labs they are "competing" with are better funded and dont have any bean counters sitting over their shoulder. Better funded, btw, doesnt mean better science, but good science proceeds more readily with more money.



    This is obviously an election year shaninigan. However, money spent on any venture, even sending billion dollar rovers to mars ultimately improves the quality of life here on earth. So while the money may be spent elsewhere for more immediate human concerns, there is no indication that the science needed to cure malaria wouldnt occur faster after other scientist find a way to put a man on mars. Its very much a question of what you intellectual endevor is.



    I dont believe Bush is proposing anything more than a policy direction for NASA. I also believe that if that rover explodes next week because of some unexpected current spike, this plan will be scrapped.
  • Reply 27 of 44
    matsumatsu Posts: 6,558member
    Last time I saw Bush, I didn't applaud, but she knew I appreciated it.
  • Reply 28 of 44
    alcimedesalcimedes Posts: 5,486member
    Quote:

    spending money on schools and HIV/AIDS education in the developing world



    didn't he massively increase the amount of money the US is giving to AIDS/HIV research? as in it surprised the hell out of everyone it was so much, and coming from him.
  • Reply 29 of 44
    bungebunge Posts: 7,329member
    Quote:

    Originally posted by alcimedes

    didn't he massively increase the amount of money the US is giving to AIDS/HIV research? as in it surprised the hell out of everyone it was so much, and coming from him.



    That was a scam.
  • Reply 30 of 44
    sdw2001sdw2001 Posts: 18,012member
    Quote:

    Originally posted by curiousuburb

    Considering Bush is responsible for gutting the ISS...



    Even money says the only reasons he's even interested now are:



    1_ China joining the Space club



    2_ "Star Wars" Missile Shield Military-Industrial-kickbacks



    I'd love to hear GWB got hit with a vision stick and suddenly clued in to the value of Space,

    but this is Dubya we're talking about.






    And there you have it. "Bush is an idiot". I love it, I really do. If Clinton announced this he would be hailed as a visionary. Because, as we all know...Clinton was a misunderstood genius and was only hindered by the evil Republican Congress and a fat intern.
  • Reply 31 of 44
    sdw2001sdw2001 Posts: 18,012member
    Quote:

    Originally posted by Matsu

    Last time I saw Bush, I didn't applaud, but she knew I appreciated it.





    OMFG!!!
  • Reply 32 of 44
    bungebunge Posts: 7,329member
    Quote:

    Originally posted by SDW2001

    And there you have it. "Bush is an idiot". I love it, I really do. If Clinton announced this he would be hailed as a visionary. Because, as we all know...Clinton was a misunderstood genius and was only hindered by the evil Republican Congress and a fat intern.



    No, I think it's because people really believed that Clinton was highly involved in the decisions he made. He didn't delagate like Bush so proudly announces he does. That means when Clinton said 'I want to do X', it was him and not his administration.
  • Reply 33 of 44
    shetlineshetline Posts: 4,695member
    Quote:

    Originally posted by SDW2001

    And there you have it. "Bush is an idiot".



    Indeed, there you do.



    If you asked Clinton why we should go to Mars or back to the Moon, you'd probably have a hard time shutting him up as he rattled of list of various experiments and exploratory programs, areas of economic opportunity, etc.



    Asked the same question, Bush would stammer a bit, and eventually mumble a few platitudes about "a great nation should do great things" and the "American spirit".
  • Reply 34 of 44
    moogsmoogs Posts: 4,296member




    Well said, Shetline.



    Getting back to the fray, Bush Hating? Common guys, I can admit it would be great IF in fact, the President makes a budget proposal THIS YEAR that allocates big money for NASA to do this research. But when someone from his own administration"cautioned" the NYT that what might result from Bush's comments might only be a "mission statement"... what does that tell you? What year is it, for crying out loud?



    Why haven't we haven't heard a single substantive thing from the Administration on this matter (or any serious NASA research projects like the NGT and others) until now? Could it be because everyone at NASA is in feel-good mode over the recent successful landing, and Bush wants to get them back on his side?



    ...because so far, Bush can say all he wants, but all he's *done* is cut NASA funding for non-military programs AFAIK. All I ever read about or hear from astronomers and NASA scientists is "budget cuts" this and "cut backs" that.



    Bush Buddies can do the math if they really try. I'm no staunch Democrat, I just think this whole thing is so obviously a campaign ploy. No conspiracy needed, they give you all the information you need right up front.



    It's in the Mission Statement.



  • Reply 35 of 44
    bungebunge Posts: 7,329member
    Quote:

    Originally posted by Scott

    Big waste of money. If he cut back on shuttle missions give him applause.





  • Reply 36 of 44
    While it's nice to see a rekindled interest in space exploration, I think that money would be better suited towards the environment, I mean after all, it's not like we will be living on mars once the earth goes kaput, best tie up things here a little before going out there *points to stars*



    Also, the skeptic in me says that bush is using this to garner support for re-election, then upon getting re-elected he will scrap the program
  • Reply 37 of 44
    drewpropsdrewprops Posts: 2,321member
    What, did Shetline say anything important? I think I missed it!



    Let's see.... our space program is in Mega Fester Mode, there's been no substantial planning investments made toward the 21st century, our shuttle fleet is wicked old and the head of the agency has been romancing the administration for HOW LONG? At least 1.5 years from what he said in his interview by the press today. So, this isn't something that Bush dreamed up by himself while he was on the crapper.



    If Bill Clinton (who was also, interestingly, a politician) was behind this effort would some of you folks' feelings about this effort be different? It seems that SOME of the people posting here are so incredibly partisan that it's easy to skip through their posts because they contribute nothing but partisan blather.



    I mean, do you guys EVER consider the other sides' strategies and goals without reading in a conspiracy? Ever? I don't think so....



    Is this an election platform bullet item? Darn tootin'. Is it an issue that needs to be addressed sooner than later? Yes. Is the solution (going to the moon, then Mars) the best for our space program? Debatable, but nothing's in concrete now.



    The gap between design and initiative has been closing in industry, from drawing board to product is faster than it's ever been. The opportunities for international cooperation and commerce are huge. This is a fantastic opportunity.



    "But it sucks because my party didn't come up with it"



    Boo Hoo



  • Reply 38 of 44
    I think it sucks because it shouldn't be were our priorities are.



    I think it's great that it's being done, but I would much rather see microsoft buy the moon and move to there erect a giant laser, dub it the death star, and hold the world ransom, than have president bush and co. spend (b)(m)illions of dollars to go to mars when it could be going to the environment, education, health insurance(?)...etc.



    It definitely should happen, no doubt in that, but I don't think this is better as a sooner rather than later, type thing.
  • Reply 39 of 44
    fran441fran441 Posts: 3,715member
    I can't remember who said it, but I heard someone on the radio say, "It's like trying to buy a car with a quarter."



    From what I've gathered, NASA's annual budget has fallen more since Bush took office than what will be gained back in these budget increases.



    The question is, how is NASA supposed to design, test, and develop a new fleet of spacecraft while at the same time maintaining the shuttle fleet (through 2010), completing work on the ISS, and continuing the normal satellite/probe/experiments while only getting a minimal budget increase?



    Don't get me wrong, the idea of humans back in space is intriguing. There hasn't been a human on the moon in my lifetime and sending people to Mars is an interesting prospect. But what are the scientific benefits of sending people back to the Moon, or to Mars when we can send Robots? If we send robots, there are many fewer safety factors involved and we can get the same amount of scientific data (and some say we could get more since the robots could stay on the planet indefinitely). Plus, it doesn't risk lives to send robots.



    I know this next point will be taken as 'Bush bashing', but oh well. It seems that with the new immigration laws and with this NASA proposal that President Bush is looking towards November. He is trying to get votes. But at the same time, just because President Bush would *like* to see the new immigration proposals pass, or just because President Bush would *like* a NASA budget increase, it's not entirely up to him. Even with a Republican controlled Congress, there are no guarantees that any of this will pass. In fact, it's more likely than not that these measures will *not* pass, yet Bush will try and claim these as victories.



    The question was posed would I have a different feeling about this if Clinton had announced it. If this had been announced in 1999 when the US had a budget surplus and there was some real substance behind the initiative, I'd have been excited about it. But this initiative by President Bush is being used to incite memories of JFK while at the same time, doing nothing significant to help NASA. It's going to cost *much, much more* than an extra $1 Billion over 5 years to rebuild the fleet and get missions going to the Moon and Mars.



    Also don't forget the international treaties that the United States has signed against putting bases on the moon. Of course, we can just 'opt-out' of that on one of President Bush's whims. \
  • Reply 40 of 44
    Bush is simply moving money to campaign contributors. This time boeing etc.



    Same modus operandi.
Sign In or Register to comment.