Ah, to jump in between two frothy political arguers... <g

On Apr 2, 2:23 pm, Eric Chomko <pne.cho...@comcast.net> wrote:





On Apr 2, 2:08 pm, simberg.interglo...@org.trash (Rand Simberg) wrote:

On Wed, 2 Apr 2008 10:33:21 -0700 (PDT), in a place far, far away,
Eric Chomko <pne.cho...@comcast.net> made the phosphor on my monitor
glow in such a way as to indicate that:

On Mar 30, 12:37 pm, Michael Gallagher <mikejo...@yahoo.com> wrote:
On Thu, 27 Mar 2008 08:26:56 -0700 (PDT), Eric Chomko

pne.cho...@comcast.net> wrote:
Actually, it was the fact that during the Bush administration a change
to the NASA charter removed any reference to Earth observation; that
had liberals screaming. Further, when you look at the fact that Bush's
VSE is similar to Bush Sr.'s SEI and the latter was never implemented.
As I have stated before, why should we believe Bush Jr. WRT space
exploration if his father was not to be believed?

I think that is an oversimplification.  Bush Sr.'s SEI was cancelled
by his successor, Bill Clinton.

Read this and decide if Clinton was right or wrong.http://history.nasa.gov/seisummary.htm

Yes, I know, it was discussed before, and SEI had problems.

So Clinton put it out of its misery?

But it ran afoul of a Democrat-controlled
Congress that couldn't get past the sticker shock, and Clinton killed it.

Hold it! Congress was controlled by Republicans in 1996!

Who said otherwise?

Michael Gallagher the original poster. Se said that at the time (1996)
that Clinton killed SEI congress was controlled by the Democrats. See
above.

There is an element of truth to this, as the references that I can
find
about the Summary of Space Exploration Initiative ( By: Steve Dick,
NASA
Chief Historian ) states:

" As a result the Clinton Administration's 1996 National Space Policy
officially removed human exploration from the national agenda. "http://www..fas.org/spp/military/docops/national/nstc-8.htm
gives the Clinton National Space Policy date of September 19, 1996

Now, the Republicans won control of Congress on Nov 5, 1996. Prior
to that date, the House had a Democratic majority.

Reread the
link above. You don't recall "Contract on, err with America"? Newt,
Dick Armey, the Clinton lynch-mob of Hyde, Burton and others? All
elected or became committee heads after the 1994 election.

So, was it BUSH SR.'s fault that SEI wasn't implemented?  No.

Based upon your faulty premise of a Democratic congress in 1996?

No one said anything about a Democratic congress in 1996, you moron.
SEI died long before that.

No it didn't! You need to read the link before posting.

You do know how to read, right Rand? I ask because based upon results
there is no proof that you read, therefore proof that you know how to
read.

Perhaps you're like the teacher who could not read:
http://www.10news.com/news/15274005/detail.html

It would explain a lot. No offense to your reader, it is just that
they aren't telling you everything and leaving you with less to work
with. But given your intellect I suppose that is best.

Well, I would still say that September comes before November,
even in 1996...

On Wed, 2 Apr 2008 10:33:21 -0700 (PDT), in a place far, far away,
Eric Chomko <pne.cho...@comcast.net> made the phosphor on my monitor
glow in such a way as to indicate that:





On Mar 30, 12:37 pm, Michael Gallagher <mikejo...@yahoo.com> wrote:
On Thu, 27 Mar 2008 08:26:56 -0700 (PDT), Eric Chomko

pne.cho...@comcast.net> wrote:
Actually, it was the fact that during the Bush administration a change
to the NASA charter removed any reference to Earth observation; that
had liberals screaming. Further, when you look at the fact that Bush's
VSE is similar to Bush Sr.'s SEI and the latter was never implemented.
As I have stated before, why should we believe Bush Jr. WRT space
exploration if his father was not to be believed?

I think that is an oversimplification.  Bush Sr.'s SEI was cancelled
by his successor, Bill Clinton.

Read this and decide if Clinton was right or wrong.http://history.nasa.gov/seisummary.htm

 Yes, I know, it was discussed before, and SEI had problems.  

So Clinton put it out of its misery?

But it ran afoul of a Democrat-controlled
Congress that couldn't get past the sticker shock, and Clinton killed it.

It was dead years before Clinton formally removed it from the policy.

On Thu, 3 Apr 2008 12:04:41 -0700 (PDT), in a place far, far away,
Eric Chomko <pne.cho...@comcast.net> made the phosphor on my monitor
glow in such a way as to indicate that:

So Clinton put it out of its misery?

But it ran afoul of a Democrat-controlled
Congress that couldn't get past the sticker shock, and Clinton killed it.

It was dead years before Clinton formally removed it from the policy.

Why don't you correct the NASA historian then?

Because I have better things to do with my time, and what he wrote
wasn't factually incorrect, simply incomplete (it was stated as a
"summary," if you'd actually bothered to read it).

Perhaps events led up to what Clinton did to SEI in 1996. But, the
fact remains that it was Clinton and in 1996 despite what you say.

Perhaps SEI was dead on arrival?

No, NASA killed it, long before 1996.

On Thu, 3 Apr 2008 12:27:16 -0700 (PDT), in a place far, far away,
Eric Chomko <pne.cho...@comcast.net> made the phosphor on my monitor
glow in such a way as to indicate that:

So Clinton put it out of its misery?

But it ran afoul of a Democrat-controlled
Congress that couldn't get past the sticker shock, and Clinton killed it.

It was dead years before Clinton formally removed it from the policy..

Why don't you correct the NASA historian then?

Because I have better things to do with my time, and what he wrote
wasn't factually incorrect, simply incomplete (it was stated as a
"summary," if you'd actually bothered to read it).

Why don't you provide a link that spells out the details rather than a
summary?

Why don't you learn a little history without the grownups having to
hold your hand?  And stop posting and annoying the rest of us until
you're at least slightly informed?  I know that it's way too much to
ask.

Perhaps events led up to what Clinton did to SEI in 1996. But, the
fact remains that it was Clinton and in 1996 despite what you say.

Perhaps SEI was dead on arrival?

No, NASA killed it, long before 1996.

Provide a citation for that if you can.

I also have no time to provide citations to ignorant morons who will
simply forget it within a day or so, as evidenced by the fact that
this subject has come up in this newsgroup many times over the years.

I've learned from long experience that you're ineducable, but if you
want to learn NASA history, go actually study it, instead of reading
half-page summaries on the web.

So Clinton put it out of its misery?

But it ran afoul of a Democrat-controlled
Congress that couldn't get past the sticker shock, and Clinton killed it.

It was dead years before Clinton formally removed it from the policy.

Why don't you correct the NASA historian then?

Perhaps events led up to what Clinton did to SEI in 1996. But, the
fact remains that it was Clinton and in 1996 despite what you say.

Perhaps SEI was dead on arrival?

So Clinton put it out of its misery?

But it ran afoul of a Democrat-controlled
Congress that couldn't get past the sticker shock, and Clinton killed it.

It was dead years before Clinton formally removed it from the policy.

Why don't you correct the NASA historian then?

Because I have better things to do with my time, and what he wrote
wasn't factually incorrect, simply incomplete (it was stated as a
"summary," if you'd actually bothered to read it).

Why don't you provide a link that spells out the details rather than a
summary?

Perhaps events led up to what Clinton did to SEI in 1996. But, the
fact remains that it was Clinton and in 1996 despite what you say.

Perhaps SEI was dead on arrival?

No, NASA killed it, long before 1996.

Provide a citation for that if you can.

No, NASA killed it, long before 1996.

Provide a citation for that if you can.

I also have no time to provide citations

Read this and decide if Clinton was right or wrong. http://history.nasa.gov/seisummary.htm

Hold it! Congress was controlled by Republicans in 1996! Reread the
link above. You don't recall "Contract on, err with America"? Newt,
Dick Armey, the Clinton lynch-mob of Hyde, Burton and others? All
elected or became committee heads after the 1994 election.

It tells you whether they had true commitment or not. They are both
from Texas and have commitment to the state and JSC, not NASA.

since Gallagher stated
that at the time Clinton killed SEI, congress was controlled by
Democrats ....

On Wed, 2 Apr 2008 13:42:02 -0700 (PDT), Eric Chomko

pne.cho...@comcast.net> wrote:
since Gallagher stated
that at the time Clinton killed SEI, congress was controlled by
Democrats ....

I did not!  Where did I use those exact words?  I did not!  

Let's go over it again:

George Bush Sr.  announced SEI in July, 1989.  Almost immediately, Ted
Kennedy and other Democratic leaders held a press conference and IIR,
Tes uttered the words "No free launch."  

From 1989 until January, 1993, when Congress was controlled by
Democrats, it rebuffed the Bush Adminstrations attempts to fund SEI.
When Clinton was elected, he dissolved the National Space Council that
Bush had reformed to implement SEI.  That was, effectively, the end of
it.  The goal was removed from NASA's doucments in 1996, but that came
after the space council was dissolved in '93, and the period from '89
to '93 when Congress gave Bush a hard time over it.

Now, as I said, I was reading AVIATION WEEK AND SPACE TECHNOLOGY every
week at that time and followed these developments.  If I fudged some
details, mea culpa.  But even then, I did NOT say that Dems controlled
Congress in 1996.  They did in 1989, when Bush proposed it; that is
the time I was referring to.  

Clear now?

On Wed, 2 Apr 2008 10:33:21 -0700 (PDT), Eric Chomko

pne.cho...@comcast.net> wrote:
Read this and decide if Clinton was right or wrong.http://history.nasa.gov/seisummary.htm

Whether we agree on whether he was right or wrong, the fact is Clinton
did it and we agree on that.  That's my point:  You are complaining a
cancelled program has shown no results.  But by definition, a program
can't show results if it's been cancelled.  Knocking down straw men
may burn callories, but has little other value IMHO.

Hold it! Congress was controlled by Republicans in 1996! Reread the
link above. You don't recall "Contract on, err with America"? Newt,
Dick Armey, the Clinton lynch-mob of Hyde, Burton and others? All
elected or became committee heads after the 1994 election.

Yes.  But I remember the Democrats controlled Congress in 1989 when
Bush Sr. proposed SEI.  IRRC, Ted Kennedy and other leading Democrats
held a press conference right after his proposal if not that day
saying "no free launch."  Who do you think controlled Congress when
"NASA was repeatedly rebuffed in its efforts to gain Congressional
support for the plan"?  Until 1994, Democrats.  And IIRC, as soon as
he was inaugurated in 1993, Clinton terminated the National Space
Council.

 That was the end of SEI.

 I was reading AVIATION WEEK
faithfully at public and college libraries in those days, so I am
pretty sure of the details.  If you want to blame
eeeeeeevvvvviiiiiiiilllllllllllll Republicans for all the world's
ills, be my guest, but at least have your facts straight.  

All of which is beside the point.  Once again:  Clinton cancelled SEI,
so of course, it has shown no results. QED.  Partisanship has nothing
to do with it.

It tells you whether they had true commitment or not. They are both
from Texas and have commitment to the state and JSC, not NASA.

Clinton was not from Texas and he continued both Station and Shuttle,
which meant giving money to JSC and Texas.  \

He also continued
planetary exploration even though he is not from JPL's home state of
California.  So maybe the president's state of origin has nothing to
do with it.

You miss the point. SEI was DOA. Why can't you just admit that?....

..... Only when they attribute Quayle quotes to Gore. You are aware of your
fellow GOPers who do that, right?

.... Everything except for the fact that the Republicans starting in 1995
did nothing to stave off Clinton killing SEI in 1996 ....

On Mon, 7 Apr 2008 11:02:11 -0700 (PDT), Eric Chomko
pne.chomko@comcast.net> wrote:

.... Everything except for the fact that the Republicans starting in 1995
did nothing to stave off Clinton killing SEI in 1996 ....

If it was in '96 and not '93. But we agree Clinton killed it, on that
at least. We agree that the program was cancelled, yes?

Stay with me here .....

Would this explain why SEI has shown no results from the time of its
cancellation to the present? I think it does. That is what I am
talking about! With me now?

On Mon, 14 Apr 2008 10:49:19 -0400, in a place far, far away, Michael
Gallagher <mikejo...@yahoo.com> made the phosphor on my monitor glow
in such a way as to indicate that:

On Mon, 7 Apr 2008 11:02:11 -0700 (PDT), Eric Chomko
pne.cho...@comcast.net> wrote:

.... Everything except for the fact that the Republicans starting in 1995
did nothing to stave off Clinton killing SEI in 1996 ....

If it was in '96 and not '93.  But we agree Clinton killed it, on that
at least.  We agree that the program was cancelled, yes?

Stay with me here .....  

Would this explain why SEI has shown no results from the time of its
cancellation to the present?  I think it does.  That is what I am
talking about!  With me now?

One would have thought that you'd have figured out after all these
years that Eric is an idiot.