The space station has more funding by him for his term..

And he told them THEY could continue the moon thoughts,,?(programs)
THEY DECLINED???

At least THATS what my radio news stated for the past three weeks?

I don't know where they got that information. It isn't true. NASA waited on pins and needles to see what Obama was going to do with the budget. He cut (eliminated) ALL future manned space programs for the future, period. NASA had nine billion dollars invested in the Orion project, which is almost ready to test fly, and Obama eliminated the program throwing the nine billion dollars of research away. No one in their right mind would think NASA wanted to do that.

Obama also fielded the idea of crashing the space station into the ocean in 2012, to eliminate it's cost. This idea was shot down as being politically damaging. NASA already has contracts with the Russians to take Americans to the space station after the shuttle is retired this year but that is not a US manned program since we are hitching rides on Russian hardware. It is a Russian program.

Houston (JSC)and the other manned space facilities are now looking at laying off thousands of high tech jobs unless congress overrules Obama and adds money to the budget for Orion/Constellation or something new. The moon/Mars missions were the logical next steps but if completed, would be a Bush legacy, not Obama.

A key issue here is continuity. If the people at NASA involved in manned space flight are "let go" for rest of Obama's term in office. Even if someone else comes in afterwords and tries to resurrect a manned space program, we will be starting almost from scratch because the technical experience and infrastructure will be gone.

The radio show you are listening to is "spin". It must be working.

Honestly, I don't think Abama is capable of making such important and far-reaching decisions solely on his own -- after all, he's surrounded with the whole army of political and economic advisers (who tell him what to say and do...)

Apparently, they deemed a manned space flight as non-essential at the present time!

He is ultimately responsible for what is in his budget.

you know what's gonna happen

we are gonna basically abandon space research and divert the money in favor of more social programs

and then the Chinese are gonna build a giant complex on the moon

and THEN the people will start howling to get us in space and we'll play catch up for twenty or thirty years



but still I dont care.

as long as SOMEBODY gets into space I dont care if its Russians or Chinese or Americans

That could happen. Or we could spend every dime on social programs and never be able to play catch up.

The thing that bothers me about the concept of losing space exploration as our legacy is that we are being TOLD it's for the promotion of education (funding early childhood education.)

The reality is that we will be taking away one of the primary motivators for people to learn and expand knowledge...just think about how many little kids want to grow up to be pilots, astronauts, rocket scientists, etc. No venue for that education means...ummmm...no point in getting that education. THAT doesn't take a rocket scientist to figure out.

There is a boatload of money already being invested in education. Sadly, there is also a lot of interference, stupid rules, and not nearly enough "smarts" being applied. I say this as a person coming from a teaching background (originally) and with two kids just out of public school and in college - it's not like I'm completely unaware of what goes on in our educational system.

metalwing:

. . . only by signing the documents -- not for devising those documents! After all, he's just a puppet, a front man...

I think his plan and the plan of the democrats is to eliminate the programs which would have been long term hallmarks of the Republicans. Going to Mars and the Moon was a Bush initiative. Obama's actions are exactly the opposite of what he promised during his presidential campaign.

I think he acts according to his priorities:

1. maintain peace at any cost;
2. get "his" people out of Harlem! (social programs)
3. continue space exploration...

Unfortunately, I doubt he will accomplish much in 4 years... (since #2 might take decades, if not centuries)

Though, I hope, by the time your kids will graduate from college, galendgirl, he will be gone... (unless "something unexpected" will force him out even before that time!)

Jane, I don't think the manned space program is one of Obama's priorities. He eliminated it from his budget killing all future US manned spacecraft plans.

Here is some of the latest news ....

Begin Quote:

By Joel Achenbach
Washington Post Staff Writer
Monday, February 1, 2010

NASA's grand plan to return to the moon, built on President George W. Bush's vision of an ambitious new chapter in space exploration, is about to vanish with hardly a whimper. With the release Monday of President Obama's budget request, NASA will finally get the new administration's marching orders, and there won't be anything in there about flying to the moon.

The budget numbers will show that the administration effectively plans to kill the Constellation program that called for a return to the moon by 2020. The budget, expected to increase slightly over the current $18.7 billion, is also a death knell for the Ares 1 rocket, NASA's planned successor to the space shuttle. The agency has spent billions developing the rocket, which is still years from its first scheduled crew flight.

It remains to be seen whether Congress will accede to Obama's change in direction. Industry insiders expect a brutal fight in Congress. The early reaction to media reports about the budget request has been filled with howls of protest from lawmakers in districts that would be most affected by a sharp change in strategy.

...

Former NASA administrator Michael Griffin, who championed the Constellation program, views the Obama budget as disastrous for human space flight.

"It means that essentially the U.S. has decided that they're not going to be a significant player in human space flight for the foreseeable future. The path that they're on with this budget is a path that can't work," Griffin said, anticipating the Monday announcement.

He said that, although he pushed for seed money for commercial cargo flights to space, he doesn't believe that the commercial firms, such as SpaceX and Dulles-based Orbital Sciences, are ready to take over the risky and difficult job of ferrying human beings to orbit.

"One day it will be like commercial airline travel, just not yet," Griffin said. "It's like 1920. Lindbergh hasn't flown the Atlantic, and they're trying to sell 747s to Pan Am."

...

White House spokesman Nick Shapiro said Sunday, "The president is committed to a robust 21st-century space program, and his budget will reflect that dedication to NASA. NASA is vital not only to spaceflight, but also for critical scientific and technological advancements. The expertise at NASA is essential to developing innovative new opportunities, industries and jobs. The president's budget will take steps in that direction."

The administration estimates the new funding for the commercial program would create up to 1,700 jobs, which could help offset the expected loss of 7,000 jobs in Florida when the space shuttle is retired next year. (There are many thousands more jobs in Houston and Alabama which would be cut).

Although the Obama budget would give NASA a boost of more than $1 billion a year, it's not nearly as much as the $3 billion a year that a president-appointed panel said last year would be necessary for NASA to pursue a worthwhile human space flight program. The panel, headed by retired aerospace executive Norman Augustine, was harshly critical of NASA's strategy, saying that Constellation didn't have nearly the funds to meet its stated goal of a 2020 moon landing, particularly if the space station were to be kept operational.

The panel favored a new strategy for NASA in which returning to the moon would be just one possible element of a broader capacity to launch astronauts beyond low Earth orbit. No human beings have ventured farther than such an orbit since the last Apollo moon landing in 1972.

The public announcement of NASA's new direction will culminate more than a year of closed-door strategizing. That should end Monday with a series of press conferences, interviews and the messages contained in the budget itself.

End Quote:

One billion instead of three???

Yeah, when the gooing gets tough, the tough gets going!

Actually his budget added one billion overall while removing all funds from the MANNED programs. Programs such as Earth science, global warming, etc., got the extra money. He is spending a little more money while ending the Mars and Moon current plans. The shuttle was ending it's life this year and nothing is being built yet to replace it. Current needs to finish the space station will be rented from the Russians. Obama suggested then crashing the space station into the Pacific Ocean in 2012 (but got shot down) to save additional funds.

Next thing ya' know, the spaceships will come with the labels, Made in China and Made in Mexico.

You haven't heard of the Mexico Aeronautics and Space Program?

They call it MASA!

And the rockets look like tamales, I suppose?

I don't know whether the rockets look like tamales, but I'm sure they would, probably, wear big Sombrero hats on top of their helmets!

The battle between Obama and congress begins:

Begin Quote:

SHELBY: NASA BUDGET BEGINS DEATH MARCH FOR U.S. HUMAN SPACE FLIGHT


February 1, 2010

Washington, D. -

U.S. Senator Richard Shelby (R-Ala.), ranking member of the Commerce, Justice, Science (CJS) and Related Agencies Appropriations Subcommittee, today issued a statement sharply criticizing the Obama Administration’s proposed NASA budget for fiscal year 2011. NASA’s budget is under the jurisdiction of the CJS Subcommittee. Constellation is NASA’s current human space flight program. A critical component of Constellation, the Ares I rocket, completed a successful test flight in October of 2009. Disregarding Constellation’s progress, the Obama Administration’s proposed fiscal year 2011 budget for NASA, released today, would cancel the program and instead fund “commercial” providers who have failed to fulfill current contracts with NASA to deliver even cargo to the International Space Station.

Despite an attempt to drastically cut funding for Constellation in the House version of the fiscal year 2010 omnibus appropriations bill, Shelby was successful in restoring $600 million to the program, funded at $3.46 billion total. Shelby was also instrumental in including language that limits NASA’s ability to terminate or alter the current Constellation program. This requires the Administration to work with Congress and wait for approval prior to changing any current human exploration plans.

The President’s annual budget request is a proposal. Congress determines final funding levels for departments, agencies, and programs. Shelby’s statement on the Obama Administration’s fiscal year 2011 NASA budget proposal is as follows:

“The President’s proposed NASA budget begins the death march for the future of US human space flight. The cancelation of the Constellation program and the end of human space flight does represent change – but it is certainly not the change I believe in. Congress cannot and will not sit back and watch the reckless abandonment of sound principles, a proven track record, a steady path to success, and the destruction of our human space flight program.

“Constellation is the only path forward that maintains America’s leadership in space. The successful test launch of the Ares I rocket in October represented years of work and great advancement in our Nation’s human space flight program. To discard Ares I as the foundation of space exploration without demonstrated capability or proven superiority of an alternative vehicle, is irresponsible and not cost-effective. There is no other rocket today that is as safe, or that has successfully demonstrated it can meet the country’s needs for the exploration of space.

“We cannot continue to coddle the dreams of rocket hobbyists and so-called ‘commercial’ providers who claim the future of US human space flight can be achieved faster and cheaper than Constellation. I have consistently stated the fallacy of believing the cure-all hype of these ‘commercial’ space companies, and my position has been supported time and again by both the experts and the facts. Those who believe that it is in our nation’s best interest to rely on ‘commercial’ space companies need only examine their current track record. Of the companies enlisted to deliver only cargo to space, not humans, one company failed to move beyond paper drawings, another is years behind schedule, and a replacement company for the first failure will not even be ready for test flights for years to come.

“As a resounding rebuke to the Augustine Commission Report, the Aerospace Safety Advisory Panel, whose sole focus is on ensuring lives are not needlessly lost in our space program, stated in their 2009 report, that no commercial manufacturer ‘is currently human-rating requirements qualified, despite some claims and beliefs to the contrary.’ This is after their 2008 report, written in part by the current NASA Administrator, declared that commercial vehicles ‘are not proven to be appropriate to transport NASA personnel.’ NASA’s safety experts agree that current commercial vehicles are untested and unworthy of carrying our most valuable assets – our nation’s astronauts.

“It is unfortunate that on the anniversary of the loss of the Columbia crew this Administration is choosing to abandon our nation’s only chance at remaining the leader in human space flight. It is ironic that Constellation, a program borne out of the recommendations of the Columbia Accident Investigation Board, would be eliminated in lieu of rockets repeatedly deemed unsafe for astronauts by NASA’s own Aerospace Safety Advisory Panel.

“Rocket science is not simple and it is not easy. Newcomers to this arena are continuing to learn this lesson as they struggle with repeated delays in getting their operations off the ground. It makes little sense for NASA to establish yet another social welfare program for these ‘commercial’ companies. It is simply not ‘commercial’ when the development work for your company is funded by the Government. That may be the General Motors model, but it should certainly not be considered the commercial model.

“On Friday, India announced they will be ready for their first manned space flight by 2016. With this administration’s nonsensical NASA budget request, the US will still be working on launching people on rockets that do not exist while Russia, China, and India are actually doing it. If this budget is enacted, NASA will no longer be an agency of innovation and hard science; it will be the agency of pipe dreams and fairy tales.

“I will never support a NASA budget that does not have a robust human space exploration program grounded in reality. New commercial space companies do have a chance at being successful, but that time is still too far in the future. Now is not the time to turn human space flight over to inexperience and hopeful aspirations. Instead, it is the time to cement our leadership in space with a program we know will keep America at the forefront of space exploration. Constellation as envisioned successfully delivers that objective.”

His budjet might become his "Acheles' foot"!!!

Looks like it's not over yet!

"President Barack Obama predicted today his new space exploration plans would lead American astronauts to Mars and back in his lifetime, a bold forecast relying on rockets and propulsion still to be imagined and built."

TBO.com