Congressman Alan Grayson: Is NASA Becoming a Faith-Based Initiative?

[Tx4obama]

Run time: 05:27 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nrY44-DVv2U   Posted on YouTube: February 25, 2010 By YouTube Member: Views on YouTube: 0   Posted on DU: February 27, 2010 By DU Member: Tx4obama Views on DU: 1890

 
Grayson questioning NASA Administrator Charles F. Bolden during a Science and Technology hearing on the NASA budget.

I LOVE listening to Alan Grayson 'forcefully' questioning folks that do not want to give 'the answers' to the questions he asks!

[trumad]

1. Yep...

The bureaucrats master in the no answer strategy. Alan masters in making them answer.

[ProgressOnTheMove]

2. It's a difficult one because we need a get out of jail free card with a new planet but th cost is...

considerable. A nice new planet preferbsaly without any Pandorans, the fascinating part about Avatar is by the time we find somewhere habital we'll be pretty desperate.. Unless we manage to find global unity on population and comsumption first, otherwise why trash another nice planet.

[RoccoR5955]

3. I think what Grayson should have said

is that we are taking the space program and instead of WE THE PEOPLE running it, Bolden wants them, the corporations to run it.
This will result in higher costs, delays, budget overruns, as always is the case when hiring contractors to do what was formerly done by the government.

[baldguy]

4. Giving NASA away is the only logical way to go.

Because privatization has worked so well with the military.

[JCMach1]

5. Excellent post!

rec

[greenman3610]

6. I like Grayson, but he's being a dick here

[baldguy]

8. I don't think so.

We've spent $10B so far to develop Constellation so fat, and need another $10B to complete it to deliver payloads for use in LEO and beyond to the Moon and Mars - which are the stated goals of NASA. The STS won't be flying after this year, and if we scrap the Constellation program and start over, we'll have to spend at least another $20B to get a new launch system, and it'll be at least 10 yrs before it's ready to fly.

Meanwhile we'd have to rely on the ESA, China & N Korea to get out satellites in orbit.

[bobbolink]

9. And that 10B would have housed all the homeless people in the nation.

We KNOW what the goal is there.

Obviously, with NASA, the goal is murky.

Yet, people are left to suffer and die on the street.

Sometning is VERY wrong.

[baldguy]

10. There will always be poor people.

And this is the only time in human history when we first learn how to live in space. Either America will do it, or Russia, Europe, China or N Korea will.

The simple fact is, as the wealthiest nation on the planet WE can do both - if we just get our priorities straight. We don't need to spend half of our tax money building weapons to kill people, or a trillion dollars bailing out banks that steal our money and still can't run a profit. I'd much rather spend it on helping our citizens & learning about our universe.

[Name removed]

11. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[baldguy]

12. Thank you for not reading my post at all.

And for making a giant leap to a conclusion with no prospect of landing safely.

[Name removed]

13. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[baldguy]

14. ?

What is it about "I'd much rather spend it on helping our citizens & learning about our universe." that you don't understand?

Or did you think that eleven carrier strike groups at $20B each is a fair trade for homelessness & ignorance?

[bobbolink]

15. Thank you very much for your snark where the most vulnerable citizens are concerned.

To return snark for snark, what was it about "the poor you always have with you" that you didn't get?

Could you please grow a heart.

[Name removed]

16. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[JHB]

21. So why take it out of NASA's budget instead of the Pentagon's?

There's nothing you can take out of NASA's budget where it wouldn't be more productive to take triple that from the bloated military budget.

[JHB]

22. I think you misunderstood the poster you're responding to...

Grayson is being a dick here, though I'll also fault Bolden for perhaps taking "destination" too literally and not clearly articulating the next step: developing life support systems that can reliably work for months or years at a time without regular resupply from Earth. Doing that and getting the bugs worked out would need to be done in relative safety near Earth, which means orbit, the moon, and the Lagrange points.

[1776Forever]

7. Knowing what I know this privatization of the Space Industry in the US is tricky!

There are so many environmental and legal issues that the US is giving away to the hands of private corps that it is really going to be something that just might get away from us and we, the people of the US, will play hell getting it back! Mark my words!

[stlsaxman]

17. Will Bolden go where NASA has gone brefore? Nope. He's gonna privatize space.

[Tx4obama]

18. So, what if ....

since the taxpayers of the USA have spent all these billions of dollars on the space program over all of these decades we should say to the private companies ''pay us the total amount of money we have spent plus 25% then you can have it"... then we'd get all of our money back (which can be used to pay down the deficit) -- and then we'd come out ahead with a profit - otherwise F'off! ;)

[PhD]

19. Bolden is an embarrassment

It's sad to see the NASA legacy created by Kennedy to be in a death spiral under Obama.

[izquierdista]

20. What a dipshit!

An obvious case of promoting and promoting someone because they were too incompetent to handle their jobs, until they ran out of promotions.