• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

How Barack Obama ruined NASA space exploration

Doc91478

Banned
DP Veteran
Joined
Jan 29, 2015
Messages
2,778
Reaction score
790
Location
North East
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Undisclosed
How Barack Obama ruined NASA space exploration​



How Barack Obama ruined NASA space exploration | TheHill
8 Mar 17 ~ By Mark R. Whittington
When Obama came into office, he did what a number of other presidents have done to determine their goals for NASA: he formed a presidential commission to study the space agency and come up with some recommendations.... The program, started by President George W. Bush, had been underfunded and had faced technical challenges for years. The commissions offered two alternatives. The first was Moon First, which would have focused America’s efforts on a return to the moon. The second was Flexible Path, which would have sent American astronauts to every destination besides the moon—the asteroids, the moons of Mars, and so on. Both options would lead to the holy grail of space exploration enthusiasts, a mission to Mars...The kicker was that both options would cost an extra $3 billion a year for NASA to execute. For the Obama administration, which was not shy about spending money in areas that it cared about, this price tag was too dear to bear.
Obama wasted eight years that might have been spent getting Americans beyond low Earth orbit. The Journey to Mars has been the Obama-Care of space exploration--expensive, unsustainable, and not designed to do what it is alleged to do. Part of the mandate of the current president to make America great again will be to turn that situation around and America back toward the stars.


Comment:
Obama turned the Russians into a billion dollar Uber for U.S. astronauts to get into space when he turned NASA into a Muslim outreach agency. The NASA administrator bizarrely stated that improving Muslim self esteem was one of the reasons NASA had been founded. Flying the Saudi prince was certainly an act of diplomacy and high politics. Just like letting the Russians, French and Japanese build most of what was supposed to be *our* space station.
If Progressive Marxist Socialist Dems want NASA to be the globalist warming institute of higher indoctrination, it's only because they actually believe that man controls the weather - and likely voted for the imbecile in chief twice - not willing to admit their contribution to the greatest failure of the Democratic Party.
Tragically, there are many aspects of science, psychology, politics, and even logic that are seen as 'make believe' by those incapable of grasping advanced concepts, or else by those who let their prejudices and hatreds betray their abilities to reason. These are the unwitting allies of those who hate science, exploration, equal opportunity, and progress.
Rather than side with Muslim and other extremists, as so many seem to be doing albeit inadvertently, I'd suggest examining the statements in context of our scientific and political goals, and from positive as well as negative ramifications . . . and see if you don't find yourself in some measure of agreement.
While I am impressed with some of our robotic accomplishments, there's still the argument that human explorers can do a day's worth of robotic work in about 10 minutes . . . plus not have to worried about delayed or compromised signals. In addition, humans 'notice' and 'discover' things that robots might easily miss.
The 'probe' in the example is much more likely to miss something that a human would catch. Until we can make much better robots, there should be room for both types of exploration. Indeed, there's always Hawking and others who argue that humans need 'backup' locations . . . just like data.
The problem in NASA is not just 8 years old. We tend to throw the bums out every eight years and get new bums. The new bum has spent the last few years trash talking the old bum and isn't very interested in continuing the old bum programs. Long term planning is all but impossible. We get a series of eight years plans which is not good science. So we spent $2B for the Superconducting Super Collider hole in Texas.
 
Last edited:
As I mentioned yesterday in another of your Über-partisan rants, Trump couldn't manage the NASA cafeteria without declaring bankruptcy.
 
How Barack Obama ruined NASA space exploration​



How Barack Obama ruined NASA space exploration | TheHill
8 Mar 17 ~ By Mark R. Whittington
When Obama came into office, he did what a number of other presidents have done to determine their goals for NASA: he formed a presidential commission to study the space agency and come up with some recommendations.... The program, started by President George W. Bush, had been underfunded and had faced technical challenges for years. The commissions offered two alternatives. The first was Moon First, which would have focused America’s efforts on a return to the moon. The second was Flexible Path, which would have sent American astronauts to every destination besides the moon—the asteroids, the moons of Mars, and so on. Both options would lead to the holy grail of space exploration enthusiasts, a mission to Mars...The kicker was that both options would cost an extra $3 billion a year for NASA to execute. For the Obama administration, which was not shy about spending money in areas that it cared about, this price tag was too dear to bear.
Obama wasted eight years that might have been spent getting Americans beyond low Earth orbit. The Journey to Mars has been the Obama-Care of space exploration--expensive, unsustainable, and not designed to do what it is alleged to do. Part of the mandate of the current president to make America great again will be to turn that situation around and America back toward the stars.


Comment:
Obama turned the Russians into a billion dollar Uber for U.S. astronauts to get into space when he turned NASA into a Muslim outreach agency. The NASA administrator bizarrely stated that improving Muslim self esteem was one of the reasons NASA had been founded. Flying the Saudi prince was certainly an act of diplomacy and high politics. Just like letting the Russians, French and Japanese build most of what was supposed to be *our* space station.
If Progressive Marxist Socialist Dems want NASA to be the globalist warming institute of higher indoctrination, it's only because they actually believe that man controls the weather - and likely voted for the imbecile in chief twice - not willing to admit their contribution to the greatest failure of the Democratic Party.
Tragically, there are many aspects of science, psychology, politics, and even logic that are seen as 'make believe' by those incapable of grasping advanced concepts, or else by those who let their prejudices and hatreds betray their abilities to reason. These are the unwitting allies of those who hate science, exploration, equal opportunity, and progress.
Rather than side with Muslim and other extremists, as so many seem to be doing albeit inadvertently, I'd suggest examining the statements in context of our scientific and political goals, and from positive as well as negative ramifications . . . and see if you don't find yourself in some measure of agreement.
While I am impressed with some of our robotic accomplishments, there's still the argument that human explorers can do a day's worth of robotic work in about 10 minutes . . . plus not have to worried about delayed or compromised signals. In addition, humans 'notice' and 'discover' things that robots might easily miss.
The 'probe' in the example is much more likely to miss something that a human would catch. Until we can make much better robots, there should be room for both types of exploration. Indeed, there's always Hawking and others who argue that humans need 'backup' locations . . . just like data.
The problem in NASA is not just 8 years old. We tend to throw the bums out every eight years and get new bums. The new bum has spent the last few years trash talking the old bum and isn't very interested in continuing the old bum programs. Long term planning is all but impossible. We get a series of eight years plans which is not good science. So we spent $2B for the Superconducting Super Collider hole in Texas.

Breaking: space exploration hasn't been ruined. Only a Marxist would assert otherwise.
 
How Barack Obama ruined NASA space exploration​




How Barack Obama ruined NASA space exploration | TheHill
8 Mar 17 ~ By Mark R. Whittington
When Obama came into office, he did what a number of other presidents have done to determine their goals for NASA: he formed a presidential commission to study the space agency and come up with some recommendations.... The program, started by President George W. Bush, had been underfunded and had faced technical challenges for years. The commissions offered two alternatives. The first was Moon First, which would have focused America’s efforts on a return to the moon. The second was Flexible Path, which would have sent American astronauts to every destination besides the moon—the asteroids, the moons of Mars, and so on. Both options would lead to the holy grail of space exploration enthusiasts, a mission to Mars...The kicker was that both options would cost an extra $3 billion a year for NASA to execute. For the Obama administration, which was not shy about spending money in areas that it cared about, this price tag was too dear to bear.
Obama wasted eight years that might have been spent getting Americans beyond low Earth orbit. The Journey to Mars has been the Obama-Care of space exploration--expensive, unsustainable, and not designed to do what it is alleged to do. Part of the mandate of the current president to make America great again will be to turn that situation around and America back toward the stars.


Comment:
Obama turned the Russians into a billion dollar Uber for U.S. astronauts to get into space when he turned NASA into a Muslim outreach agency. The NASA administrator bizarrely stated that improving Muslim self esteem was one of the reasons NASA had been founded. Flying the Saudi prince was certainly an act of diplomacy and high politics. Just like letting the Russians, French and Japanese build most of what was supposed to be *our* space station.
If Progressive Marxist Socialist Dems want NASA to be the globalist warming institute of higher indoctrination, it's only because they actually believe that man controls the weather - and likely voted for the imbecile in chief twice - not willing to admit their contribution to the greatest failure of the Democratic Party.
Tragically, there are many aspects of science, psychology, politics, and even logic that are seen as 'make believe' by those incapable of grasping advanced concepts, or else by those who let their prejudices and hatreds betray their abilities to reason. These are the unwitting allies of those who hate science, exploration, equal opportunity, and progress.
Rather than side with Muslim and other extremists, as so many seem to be doing albeit inadvertently, I'd suggest examining the statements in context of our scientific and political goals, and from positive as well as negative ramifications . . . and see if you don't find yourself in some measure of agreement.
While I am impressed with some of our robotic accomplishments, there's still the argument that human explorers can do a day's worth of robotic work in about 10 minutes . . . plus not have to worried about delayed or compromised signals. In addition, humans 'notice' and 'discover' things that robots might easily miss.
The 'probe' in the example is much more likely to miss something that a human would catch. Until we can make much better robots, there should be room for both types of exploration. Indeed, there's always Hawking and others who argue that humans need 'backup' locations . . . just like data.
The problem in NASA is not just 8 years old. We tend to throw the bums out every eight years and get new bums. The new bum has spent the last few years trash talking the old bum and isn't very interested in continuing the old bum programs. Long term planning is all but impossible. We get a series of eight years plans which is not good science. So we spent $2B for the Superconducting Super Collider hole in Texas.

013r3ma.gif
 
Another opinion piece, and somewhat clever timed to avoid talking about the other messes Trump has made.

When all else fails... mention socialism, guns, the military, NASA, or anything “exceptionalism.”
 
Another opinion piece, and somewhat clever timed to avoid talking about the other messes Trump has made.

When all else fails... mention socialism, guns, the military, NASA, or anything “exceptionalism.”

NASA. The flavour of the week when the right wants to beat up on Obama but just try to cite NASA data in a global warming discussion and they'll be a bunch of leftist pseudo-scientists with a political agenda.
 
No fear. We now have a Space Force.
 
As I mentioned yesterday in another of your Über-partisan rants, Trump couldn't manage the NASA cafeteria without declaring bankruptcy.

Hmm...., Seems the economy is doing great under Trump. Even the Lame Stream Media is admitting that. Seems the Dow Jones has reached 27,000 what was is during the 8 years Obama was in the W.H.?
 
Hmm...., Seems the economy is doing great under Trump. Even the Lame Stream Media is admitting that. Seems the Dow Jones has reached 27,000 what was is during the 8 years Obama was in the W.H.?

Well, since you asked nicely:

Starting with Trump’s inauguration, the Dow has risen from 19,827.3 to 25,075.1 -- an increase of 26 percent. That’s impressive.

But it’s not as impressive as its performance during the equivalent period under Obama. Under Obama, the Dow increased from 7,949.1 to 10,572 — a rise of 33 percent.

In fact, the Dow’s rise was even more impressive under Obama if you start measuring at the market’s low point, on March 9, 2009, during the depths of the Great Recession. That day, the Dow closed at 6,547. Between then and Jan. 5 — a 10-month period — the Dow rose by a stunning 61 percent. That’s more than three times faster than Trump’s rise over the same period in his term.

How Donald Trump, Barack Obama compare on the stock market | PolitiFact
 
Well, since you asked nicely:


~~~~~~
I guess it all depends on what math you use. According to my calculations the Dow Jones has increased 25.82% since Jan 21, 2017 as compared to Obama's Dow Jones increases of 13.29% from Jan 20, 2009 to Jan 20, 2017.... That is nearly double of the Dow gain for Trump in two and a half year as compared to Obama's eight years in office. One supposes that you've been using the new Math created by Progressive Marxist Socialist educators to have skewed Obama's economic success that was less than mediocre at best.
 
Last edited:
It’s funny I remember when Obama was president conservatives were saying NASA is unconstitutional and an example of federal government overreach because it’s not an enumerated power. Now Obama didn’t do enough?

Man it’s hard to please you guys!
 
I guess it all depends on what math you use. According to my calculations the Dow has increased 25.82% since Jan 21, 2017 as compared to Obama's 13.29% from Jan 20, 2009 to Jan 20, 2017.... One supposes that you've been using the new Math Created by the Progressive Marxist Socialist educators.

Nah the Dow TRIPLED during the Obama administration (~300%).
 
Nah the Dow TRIPLED during the Obama administration (~300%).

Not according to the stats you produced. At best the Dow passed 14,000 for the first time under Obama on Feb 01, 2013 whereas the Dow has topped 27,000 under Trump.


Dow Jones Industrial Average hits 14,000
Dow Jones Industrial Average hits 14,000 - CBS News
Feb 01, 2013 · Dow Jones Industrial Average hits 14,000. NEW YORK The Dow Jones industrial average climbed above 14,000 for the first time since the Great Recession. The index rose as high as 14,000.97 in early trading. The index last traded above 14,000 in October 2007. The Dow has gained 6.7 percent since the start of the year. A budget deal,...
************

Dow hits 27,000 for first time ever
Dow hits 27,000 for first time ever | TheHill
07/11/19 · The Dow Jones Industrial Average rose to a record high on Thursday after testimony from Federal Reserve Chairman Jerome Powell hinted tha Dow hits 27,000 for first time ever
 
Last edited:
Not according to the stats you produced. At best the Dow passed 14,000 for the first time under Obama on Feb 01, 2013 whereas the Dow has topped 27,000 under Trump.


Dow Jones Industrial Average hits 14,000
Dow Jones Industrial Average hits 14,000 - CBS News
Feb 01, 2013 · Dow Jones Industrial Average hits 14,000. NEW YORK The Dow Jones industrial average climbed above 14,000 for the first time since the Great Recession. The index rose as high as 14,000.97 in early trading. The index last traded above 14,000 in October 2007. The Dow has gained 6.7 percent since the start of the year. A budget deal,...
************

Dow hits 27,000 for first time ever
Dow hits 27,000 for first time ever | TheHill
07/11/19 · The Dow Jones Industrial Average rose to a record high on Thursday after testimony from Federal Reserve Chairman Jerome Powell hinted tha Dow hits 27,000 for first time ever

So Obama’s Dow was much bigger than Reagan’s. So that means Obama was that much better president than Reagan, right?:lamo
 
It’s funny I remember when Obama was president conservatives were saying NASA is unconstitutional and an example of federal government overreach because it’s not an enumerated power. Now Obama didn’t do enough?

Man it’s hard to please you guys!

Really? Please post evidence of that. I don't recall anything like you're suggesting.

What I do find interesting is the New Democratic Party would gladly spend 3 x's more per year than the $3 billion mentioned in the OP, on the new voters they are inviting into the country.
 
Nasa got out of launching things into near space. Opening the door to private enterprise and it seems to be working today with a couple of private companies at least working on creating launch systems. Some are commercially operational right now.

Nasa should not focus on things that can be done commercially but on actual exploration and research
 
So Obama’s Dow was much bigger than Reagan’s. So that means Obama was that much better president than Reagan, right?:lamo


~~~~~~
We were discussing the economy advances of the Obama administration in 8 years versus the advances of Trump within a 2 and a half year period.
Rather than comparing the Reagan economy to Trump's economy, l guess you forget that Jimmy Carter was the president than preceded Reagan and if you want to compare apples to oranges you have to include Jimmy in this fruit salad. Hands down the Republicans win.. Carter and Obama vs. Reagan and Trump.
:rofl :boom
 
Back
Top Bottom