Championship Subdivision Football | FCS Football | Stadiums | Blogs | Forums

WASHINGTON -- The administration of U.S. President Barack Obama is canceling NASA's current space shuttle replacement- and lunar exploration-plan and is prepared to fight any congressional effort to save it, the nation's top budget official said Jan. 31.

The president's budget, officially sent to Congress Monday morning, confirms what officials had stated during a teleconference with reporters one day before: White House Office of Management and Budget Director Peter Orszag and White House Communications Director Dan Pfeiffer stated Obama's plan to kill NASA's Constellation program, a five-year-old effort to replace the aging space shuttle fleet with new rockets and spacecraft optimized to return astronauts to the Moon.

"...[W]e are proposing a cancellation of the Constellation program at NASA even while making other investments in long range [research and development] there, which again is a significant step," Orszag said in response to a reporter's question about the tough choices Obama faced in drafting his 2011 spending plan.

http://www.foxnews.com/scitech/2010/02/ ... ange-nasa/

Well the democrats can kiss the 24 distict of florida goodbye. They have no chance of holding that seat with Obama shutting that down. That area is going to lose millons of jobs.

Maybe private industry will step in if it's a viable program. If it's not a viable program, then glad we aren't subsidizing anymore. Now, onto the Post Office & Amtrak....

wildkyle wrote:Well the democrats can kiss the 24 distict of florida goodbye. They have no chance of holding that seat with Obama shutting that down. That area is going to lose millons of jobs.

millions of jobs? I think thats a bit of an exaggeration.

Somehow I am wondering how this is bad? If it helps bring down the deficit and private industry, as stated above, can step it, that can only be a good thing. Seriously, I know I may be in the minority here, but I have always felt space exploration, etc, etc, was overrated and a blight on our economy. Again, just me. Crucify if you must.

wildkyle wrote:Well the democrats can kiss the 24 distict of florida goodbye. They have no chance of holding that seat with Obama shutting that down. That area is going to lose millons of jobs.

"Millions" of jobs? Given to hyperbole are we?

Look, there's not a chance in the world that Obama would be able to shut down a huge program like this without anything short of a 50/50 bipartisan BRAC committee being in charge. Which frankly we should have for all earmark programs (not that NASA's an earmark program) - we have to start somewhere.

catamount man wrote:Somehow I am wondering how this is bad? If it helps bring down the deficit and private industry, as stated above, can step it, that can only be a good thing. Seriously, I know I may be in the minority here, but I have always felt space exploration, etc, etc, was overrated and a blight on our economy. Again, just me. Crucify if you must.

I'm not that extreme as space program has wrought technological advances like the computer, processing speeds, clothing materials, etc....but it's at a point where if it can a viable business, it needs to be in the private sector & if not, then taxpayers shouldn't subsidize a welfare program for out-of-work engineers anymore than it should fund the continued construction of buggy-whips....

We have no business spending the kind of money we do to go back to the moon.

AZGrizFan wrote:

We have no business spending the kind of money we do to go back to the moon.

its not just about going to the moon, its about the steps after that.

Well, there is a certain amount of validity to having the gubment funding space exploration. Private industry will only take over if it has some hope of making money off of it. Well, there are some things that aren't necessarilly profitable in monetary terms, but still needed and worthwhile. I personally think our space program is one of those things. I agree that going back to the moon seems redundant, but wasn't part of this mission to establish a manned station on the moon as a first step experiment for moving on to Mars and further? I kinda figured this was coming, but am disappointed.

UNHWildCats wrote: millions of jobs? I think thats a bit of an exaggeration.

WTF would you know about "A" job let alone millions of jobs?

death dealer wrote:Well, there is a certain amount of validity to having the gubment funding space exploration. Private industry will only take over if it has some hope of making money off of it. Well, there are some things that aren't necessarilly profitable in monetary terms, but still needed and worthwhile. I personally think our space program is one of those things. I agree that going back to the moon seems redundant, but wasn't part of this mission to establish a manned station on the moon as a first step experiment for moving on to Mars and further? I kinda figured this was coming, but am disappointed.

If you count all the jobs that will be lost in the space program it would get to a million and it is not only Florida but in alot of states all across the nation.

wildkyle wrote:If you count all the jobs that will be lost in the space program it would get to a million and it is not only Florida but in alot of states all across the nation.

Obama isnt shutting down NASA, in fact NASA will be getting about a $300 million increase in its budget. Its just the Constellation Program being shut down.

UNHWildCats wrote:

AZGrizFan wrote:

We have no business spending the kind of money we do to go back to the moon.

its not just about going to the moon, its about the steps after that.

What steps? We aren't even close to being able to live in space, outside of a space center. We know no life exists in our solar system outside of Earth, to try to go to another system is just plain dumb and impossible with the money and everything.


I have no problem with this right now.

I am torn. Part of me hates to see it because I find space exploration fascinating, and I doubt there will be a lot of private industry interest. However, we can't pay the bills as a country right now, and this program isn't going to help the nation as a whole. So, with that said, I am ok with this. The benefit doesn't outweigh the cost. If, and it's a big if, private industry can find a way to make this profitable, it would set a good precedent for future space exploration/ colonization.

clenz wrote:

UNHWildCats wrote: its not just about going to the moon, its about the steps after that.

What steps? We aren't even close to being able to live in space, outside of a space center. We know no life exists in our solar system outside of Earth, to try to go to another system is just plain dumb and impossible with the money and everything.


I have no problem with this right now.

That statement is not true.

Long distance Space Exploration is not practical for any single country.

AZGrizFan wrote:

We have no business spending the kind of money we do to go back to the moon.

At the current rate of population expansion, we should be SERIOUSLY exploring the possibilities for colonization. That starts with the moon.

SuperHornet wrote:

AZGrizFan wrote:

We have no business spending the kind of money we do to go back to the moon.

At the current rate of population expansion, we should be SERIOUSLY exploring the possibilities for colonization. That starts with the moon.

Or....we could start by educating the poor and other countries and teaching them how to properly use birth control.


Stats show the most uneducated and poorest countries have the most kids per woman. Something like 8 kids for the third world countries and less than 2 for American and right around 2 for most of Europe.


Living on the moon isn't feasable.

clenz wrote:

SuperHornet wrote:


At the current rate of population expansion, we should be SERIOUSLY exploring the possibilities for colonization. That starts with the moon.

Or....we could start by educating the poor and other countries and teaching them how to properly use birth control.


Stats show the most uneducated and poorest countries have the most kids per woman. Something like 8 kids for the third world countries and less than 2 for American and right around 2 for most of Europe.


Living on the moon isn't feasable.

It's more feasible than getting Catholics to advocate birth control.....

Appaholic wrote:

clenz wrote: Or....we could start by educating the poor and other countries and teaching them how to properly use birth control.


Stats show the most uneducated and poorest countries have the most kids per woman. Something like 8 kids for the third world countries and less than 2 for American and right around 2 for most of Europe.


Living on the moon isn't feasable.

It's more feasible than getting Catholics to advocate birth control.....

i didn't say that Catholics needed to do it. I figured anyone could....why do we have to wait for the Catholics to do shit?

clenz wrote:

Appaholic wrote:
It's more feasible than getting Catholics to advocate birth control.....

i didn't say that Catholics needed to do it. I figured anyone could....why do we have to wait for the Catholics to do shit?

My bad...living on the moon is more feasible than getting a Religious Fundamentalist to advocate birth control....

SuperHornet wrote:

AZGrizFan wrote:

We have no business spending the kind of money we do to go back to the moon.

At the current rate of population expansion, we should be SERIOUSLY exploring the possibilities for colonization. That starts with the moon.

F that. It starts with Canada.

Cost of moon colonization -- 70 gazilliontrillion dollars
Cost of taking Canada -- Couple million cases of Labatt Blue (trust me, it WILL take that many) and a few American flags to stick in the ground. Winner winner chicken dinner.

mcveyrl wrote:

SuperHornet wrote:


At the current rate of population expansion, we should be SERIOUSLY exploring the possibilities for colonization. That starts with the moon.

F that. It starts with Canada.

Cost of moon colonization -- 70 gazilliontrillion dollars
Cost of taking Canada -- Couple million cases of Labatt Blue (trust me, it WILL take that many) and a few American flags to stick in the ground. Winner winner chicken dinner.

I'll see your Canadia and raise you Mexico......

1. Corona is cheaper than Labatt.
2. They already want to be Americans.
3. The weather is nicer.