"Question for author (former NASA PAO) Patricia Phillips: And you base these statements of yours on ... facts? You only seem to be citing "rumors". If you actually have some facts, please provide that underlying information to prove that Obama is indeed "anti-space" or perceived to be that way."- editor

Did you read her article ? ... the Cool-Aid must sure taste good.

In reference to your comment Keith...

I didn't think there was a question about whether Obama was perceived as anti-space. For the longest time, the only thing people talked about Obama on space was that he was going to fund his education plan through NASA cuts and delays, and how he was far more in favor of using NASA to study climate change and such. It wasn't until this past week when Obama turned around and gave a NASA support speech at the Titusville meeting and changed his website that pro-Obama people started feeling "at ease" with him on the matter

I think the comments both on this site over this year and others prove that there was an uncomfortable feeling with him, and I'm sure with his current switch (or flip flop, depending on what side of the aisle you're in) some people are more confused or concerned.

I can tell you from a KSC perspective that there's a huge sense of discomfort with him, directly because he had it in writing that he wanted to delay the next program (and with it, put a whole lot of us out of a job).

It's pretty clear that Obama has some serious reservations regarding future manned space exploration. His education plan calls for a five year "delay" in the Constellation project. You know as well as I do this will effectively kill the project. Whether this makes him anti-space is debatable, but the effects of such a delay will reverberate throughout the program and result in some very negative consequences for NASA - both short-term and long-term.

Read this story. Your statement is no longer accurate.
http://blogs.aterra.com/mvt/mt-comments.cgi?entry_id=8756

"I think the comments both on this site over this year and others prove that there was an uncomfortable feeling with him, and I'm sure with his current switch (or flip flop, depending on what side of the aisle you're in) some people are more confused or concerned."

People hear what they want to hear not what is really said sometimes. Obama clarified the "delay constellation" comment back in JANUARY. It just wasn't big news because everyone was screaming he was anti-space. Everyone needs to pay more attention and not get all wrapped up in the Clinton/McCain machine through the media.

Look at this link...

http://www.spaceref.com/news/viewsr.html?pid=26647

It is dated "Thursday, January 10, 2008" was released by the Obama campaign and clearly states:

"Develop the Next-Generation of Space Vehicles: The retirement of the Space Shuttle in 2010 will leave the United States without manned spaceflight capability until the introduction of the Orion Crew Exploration Vehicle (CEV) carried by the Ares I Launch Vehicle. As president, Obama will support the development of this vital new platform to ensure that the United States' reliance on foreign space capabilities is limited to the minimum possible time period. The CEV will be the backbone of future missions, and is being designed with technology that is already proven and available. "

Mike, Steve, thanks for your comments.

Yes, there is concern @ KSC. I understand, as I said in the discussion on my column, that Keith is an Obama supporter. So I also understand that the discussion of Obama's flip-flop, based on his prior statements, may be a little bit uncomfortable for Keith.

I do appreciate the comments from those who know the KSC environment and culture. Space is too important to entrust to anyone who can't make a clear statement, with lots of verbs (flashback to Doonesbury!), and stick to it.

Editor's note: Patricia Phillips made a glaring journalistic error and yet she seems oblivious to the need to inform her readers or to make a correction. She is also apparently afraid to admit that she has made an error. Instead, she tries to shift attention away from her error toward tangential topics - as if these other items somehow excuse her mistake.

If you go to this Obama document dreleased as part of his trip to Florida he says "I'll reestablish the National Aeronautics and Space Council". In this video taken at the event in question he says the exact same thing. At no time does he say "NACA" or the "National Advisory Committee on Aeronautics". But apparently the Washington Examiner is uninterested in accuracy - even when videotape proof exists that the paper is in error.

As I just finally broke down and said in the discussion on my column --I thought it was glaringly obvious--I used the exact same quote that Keith did on his website. Word for word.

I never quoted Obama, Keith's candidate, as saying "I will re-establish NACA."

The reference to NACA was totally a rhetorical question, which I've explained to Keith at length, many times over.

Keith's wrong in his allegation that I quoted Obama as calling for a re-establishment of NACA. But he's been having such a good time being wrong!

He's also trifling around about McDonnell Douglas. That's all explained too, in commentary. It's basically about people, Keith, and the human spirit that drives space workers.

But I've had a great discussion with many readers.

Editor's note: Patricia Phillips wrote "Re-invent NACA, Senator? The National Advisory Committee for Aeronautics was NASA's ancestor, and morphed into NASA in 1958.  Develop plans for exploration, international partners, private sector, and robotic missions?"

Obama never said that he was going to "Re-invent NACA". Period. Why are you reacting as if he did? Really goofy reporting.

Just to add my two cents here. Obama made his position clear back in December 2007 see my letter to him about this: http://theheraclitanfire.blogspot.com/2007/12/open-letter-to-senator-obama-dear.html

Also, along the way he espoused canceling manned spaceflight altogether and doing robotics-only mission. Another ill-informed statement IMO.

Frankly, his judgment on space matters is highly suspect, he has said he doesn't think much of NASA because it doesn't give him the inspiration he remembers from watching Star Trek as a child !?!

Also, his latest turnabout only came after Ben Nelson took him out to the woodshed and explained that, if he wanted to have a chance in hell of winning Florida, he'd better change his mind about cutting 10,000 or so jobs at Kennedy Space Center.

I wouldn't bet my two cents on Obama's support for NASA.

Mr. Cowing, your constant shilling for Democrats in general and Obama in particular leave you with ZERO credibility with regards to politics. Facts? How about that for months and months Obama had posted on his web site that he was going to mothball Constellation for FIVE YEARS!?!? We are just supposed to forget that and assume he is pro NASA because he figured out a week or two ago that this was bad politics? What makes you think he will stick with his new position if elected? Stay away from politics. As said, you have ZERO credibility.

Editor's note: Feel better now?