Go back to the moon? Manned Mars mission??

ok.. don't bite my head off or hate me. hehe..

I just wanted to say that I've wanted this almost my whole life. I want us to do more in space so badly that I cannot even begin to explain my feelings. I don't want to die before we have at least set human foot on Mars (closed in a space suit of course.. hehe). That's just a lifelong dream of mine.

Me too Pendari That's why I hope we're not wasting money on things that are more for show than a genuine stepping stone.

I heard there was an article in the NYT yesterday that basicly said a president planning something this far in the future is political grandstanding and isnt going to happen. Unless of course there are other presidents who share his exact vision and will carry it out.

My disclaimer is I didnt read it. I didnt look for a link since I know you have to subscribe (free).

I'm all for going back to the Moon and onto Mars and to other destinations in our Universe...

I'm still waiting for a ride into space to become "reasonable" in price.

Anyone that wants to call this political (not saying it isn't at least partially, nor that it is), I have to wonder...is there *any* major decision Bush could make right now without it being called either "political" or "self-interest"?

JFK did basically the same thing, with Apollo.

JKF was nothing like Dubya.

Times were different in the early 60's. We didn't have a huge defecit, state governments weren't cutting budgets to the bone, and Kennedy actually won his election fair and square. Americans weren't so polarized and partisan. Big business had a much smaller influence on the White House and crooked politicians were MUCH more discreet and much less brazen. I could go on, all day...

Bottom line, ANYTHING that comes out of Bush's mouth from now to November is political. From his plans for future manned spaceflight to his new immigration plans to that half-assed visit to MLK's grave the other day, its all pandering for votes.

I never said JFK was like Bush, I'm merely saying they've both set challenging goals for human space exploration.

I'm not going to disagree with the other things mentioned either (except maybe that everything Bush does is ONLY for political reasons), all politicians do "suck", people are FAR too partisan now, etc. But that door swings both ways--it's not just the Rush Limblow "ditto-heads" I have a problem with; the wacky liberals out there are just as bad (well, probably much worse but it all depends on who you're comparing). Many people's problem now is that they're so damn tied up with Democrat/Republican that they forget--what really matters is Liberal/Conservative. I can name Republicans I hate and Democrats I like. (Well, a few anyway.)

Side note: I'm not sure doing things for "political reasons" is always bad, as long as the something is genuine, and not going to vanish after an election. If you're doing something for political reasons it must be because the majority of the population actually wants it, right? If Bush is re-elected, and before his term is up his space goals are scratched, then I'll agree that it was entirely political.

If anyone thinks Dean would be so much better than Bush and that he won't be influenced by corporate interests (as all politicians are today), and that HE won't do things for political reasons (yes, the MLK visit seems a little "political" to me), and so on...that's just dead wrong. If you're going to favor one politican for doing something wrong, it at least HAS to be something that the other politican hasn't done.

From the scattered tidbits I've been hearing, Dean appears too extremist to represent the majority of the American people. Even many Dems don't seem to like him, but so many people just hate Bush so unconditionally that they'll vote for anyone to get rid of him--that strikes me as *very* dangerous.

I like this discussion so far, it's been actually been pretty interesting, and void of personal attacks or belittling attitudes (so far ).

Just shows how different things appear to outsiders. The word 'extremist' and Dean don't seem to go together. I had hoped that Dean might appeal to the American people because he was (from my point of view) a moderate.

Dean may have a few good ideas, just like the rest of them, but with this election, even picking the best of a bad lot is a tough one. Dean in particular, with his connections to some of the worst of the Wall Street arbitrageurs (he was very friendly with Michael Milken AND Ivan Boesky) and his close connections with MONSANTO and other companies that are into GMO foods means that I could never support him.

I think this will be the easiest election for me to decide since I've been a voter. I'm voting for anyone but Bush. Whoever's got the best shot at beating him gets my vote.

Go to the moon: Olive 40,40

llPushObject(mars_lander, <0,0,999999999>, <0,0,0>, FALSE);