Why Didn't Bolden Just Say So In The First Place?

Are Joe Biden and Charlie Bolden related?

I have NO doubt Bolder meant exactly what he first said. This latter nonsense (about "outreach") is simply CYA. And I have no doubt BO instructed Bolden to use NASA as a tool for social engineering, that's simply consistent with what this administration is ALL about: social engineering.

Forget real engineering! Forget human space exploration! BO has more important purposes in mind.

What is "outreach" if not diplomacy? Bolden said that this wasn't "a diplomatic anything.

Then there is this about priorities from Lori Garver

[The President's budget, should it be approved by Congress, will enable NASA to align with the priorities of the Nation and to more optimally contribute to our Nation's future.

These key national priorities that I am referring to are:

* Economic development (poverty, hunger, jobs)
* International leadership/geo-politics (world peace)
* Education (societal advancement)
* Environment (future of planet and humanity)]

And the cherry on top: White House Science Adviser [John P. Holdren] Advocated 'De-Development' of the United States

….Angry opposition to de-development can be expected from some technologists who are used to having their schemes for progress accepted without question by a dazzled public," the authors wrote. "SSTs (solid state technologies), space colonies, thermonuclear weapons and delivery systems, geodesic domes over cities, fission power, giant automobiles, plastic wrappings, genetic engineering, disposable packages and containers, synthetic pesticides, and the like are supposed to be accepted as self-evidently desirable.”

They [Holdren, Paul and Anne Ehrlich] added: “However, many technologists now correctly perceive that, if the ODCs [over developed countries] are to be de-developed and civilization is to persist, the halcyon days of unquestioning public acceptance of technological ‘progress’ must disappear forever.”.....

"BO has more important purposes in mind."

Duh?

Concerning John Holdren:

From his Presidential Address to the AAAS in 2007:
I would characterize the roles of S&T [Science and Technology] in addressing the challenges of sustainable well-being in broader terms as follows:
•Advances in science improve our understanding of shortfalls, dangers, and possibilities and enable advances in technology.
•Advances in technology help meet basic human needs and drive economic growth through increased productivity, reduced costs, reduced resource use and environmental impact, and new or improved products and services.
•S&T together provide the basis for integrated assessment of challenges and opportunities, advice to decision-makers and the public about these, and formal and informal education toward a more S&T-literate (and therefore more informed and capable) society.
(full transcript at : http://www.sciencemag.org/cgi/content/full/319/5862/424)

He sounds pretty pro-technology to me. He may not have been back in the '70s, but accusing him on that logic would be like accusing David Horowitz of being a Communist since he was the editor of the New Left magazine Ramparts back in the early '70s.

With that said, I do suspect he probably doesn't know much about space policy, and probably doesn't concern himself very much with it. Which is unfortunate. But to assume that he's somehow involved with some sort of sinister anti-technology cabal is, well, to quote Hanlon's razor, never attribute that to malice which can be adequately explained by stupidity.

Since the Obama administration appears to be trying to turn NASA into a make-work program, what do we expect?

Mr. Bolden should be meeting with important Congressional leaders on both sides about the future of NASA and manned spaceflight, not this nonsense!

Marcel F. Williams

Enough with the straw-man rhetoric: Devise the dragon of your choice, then slay him. That's kindergarten politics, and a waste of breath.

Who's to know Obama's "real objectives"? Certainly not you, because you aren't really listening. I believe just as strongly, and with hardly any more evidence than you have, that Obama is making thoughtful calibrated steps along a centrist path (i.e. halfway between the nuts on the right and nuts on the left) that unites several US objectives: restarting the economy, improving energy security and independence, defanging violent religious extremism, protecting the environment, decelerating global climate change, and yes, fostering the next age in space -- founded on competitive commercial providers rather than a government monopoly.

You have no idea how they might be intertwined to any advantage, so you start off by ridiculing rather than thinking, asking, or researching. Brain off, mouth on... not a great way to learn what's "really happening."

Disgusting. Stupid. I could go on for days.

Off to count how many days to Election Day, November 2012.

Bolden says some other stuff in that interview.. I'm pretty sure no-one got past the hate-button-pushing comments at the beginning. As such I made this:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Xq5O6LtTHGg

Very interesting perspective there!