Posts Tagged ‘ nasa

An update to the post about Rev. Wright 14 March 2008 at 9:03 am by Jason 116 views

After doing a bit more searching, I came across this video:

“Hillary Ain’t Never Been Called A N****r”

This was a sermon given by the good Reverend and it is incredibily racist, and also pretty shocking.  He compares Obama to Jesus (as both being poor black men), he compares the Romans to Hillary Clinton and Giuliani, he talks about the “rich white people” as if they’re the devil.  Why is this okay?  Why is it okay to hate white people in this country?  No matter what you want to say, it’s still racist.  Why is it that we have the spiritual advisor to someone who may become President spouting it left and right, with almost no news of it?  Why doesn’t Obama condemn what he says?  And before Obama can give the standard “Well, they’re not parts of my official campaign” speech… Reverend Jeremiah Wright is part of it, via Politico:

Wright is a member of Obama’s African American Religious Leadership Committee — the sort of largely honorary, advisory body that in recent days has recently been used mostly to throw people off who say controversial things.

Anywho, here are some good quotes (and good info) for you.  First, from A Candidate, His Minister and the Search for Faith:

While Mr. Obama stated his opposition to the Iraq war in conventional terms, Mr. Wright issued a “War on Iraq I.Q. Test,” with questions like, “Which country do you think poses the greatest threat to global peace: Iraq or the U.S.?”

 Mr. Wright, who has long prided himself on criticizing the establishment, said he knew that he may not play well in Mr. Obama’s audition for the ultimate establishment job.

“If Barack gets past the primary, he might have to publicly distance himself from me,” Mr. Wright said with a shrug. “I said it to Barack personally, and he said yeah, that might have to happen.”

From Obama’s Pastor Speaks Out:

Forgive me for having a momentary lapse. I forgot that The New York Times was leading the bandwagon in trumpeting why it is we should have gone into an illegal war. The New York Times became George Bush and the Republican Party’s national “blog.”  The New York Times played a role in the outing of Valerie Plame. I do not know why I thought The New York Times had actually repented and was going to exhibit a different kind of behavior.

From Barack Obama seeks to re-gain momentum (Obama’s response to his plan to cut NASA funding):

“I grew up with Star Trek. I believe in the final frontier,” he explained. “I understand the inspirational role our space programme plays. But Nasa has lost focus. It is no longer a source of inspiration. What we have to do is rediscover that excitement.”

Or how about this from Michelle Obama’s hospital: On senator’s wish-list:

Among the pork-barrel spending requests Barack Obama has made since arriving in the U.S. Senate is $1 million for the hospital where his wife worked at the time and $8 million for weapons technology made by a big defense contractor with close ties to a major fundraiser.

It looks like this all might start to get some press as new articles on the subject that are just now popping up.  I’m not posting all of this to say Obama is a bad guy, but all we keep being told is that he’s in it for “Change”, it’s not going to be “Politics as usual”… yet that’s exactly what all of this looks like to me.  Burying it doesn’t make it go away, you know.



+ Why does Obama hate science? By Jason 05 February 2008 at 8:57 am 358 views 1 Comment

As a “young person” who is apparently supposed to be enthralled with Barack Obama, I’m quite upset that pretty much everyone has ignored the fact that he has stated that he would cut NASA’s budget (and delay the manned space exploration projects for 5 years) to fund other programs (even if for education).

Doing a search on Google will net you quite a few people upset over this fact, and it’s getting absolutely no coverage. The news organizations seem to be completely head-over-heels in love with Mr. Obama to the point where it almost looks like he can do no wrong. Why wouldn’t something like this be a major talking point? Look at these quotes:

Well, what we’re going to do is, we are going to delay or cut programs that I don’t think are as high a priority. And we’ve identified a range of ways that we can save money in terms of how we purchase goods by the federal government. There are some programs related to NASA, for example, that we would not eliminate – but defer – so that the spending is spread out over a longer period of time. There are a host of programs at the federal level that I think are less of a priority than making sure that our kids are getting a good start in life.

And another (on page 15 here):

The early education plan will be paid for by delaying the NASA Constellation Program for five years

Wired Magazine wrote a great article about this (Obama Pits Human Space Exploration Against Education)… here are some snippets:

Given that that Space Shuttle is retiring in 2010 and there is already a four year gap before the Ares I vehicle will be ready to launch crews to Space Station, a five year delay of the Constellation program would leave the United States government without its own human launch capability for nearly ten years.

Such a delay would result is a loss of capability as the workforce with the knowledge to build spacecraft will not be around when you want to hire them in 2020 and there will be few to train any students coming out of the education pipeline.

According to a 2004 press release from Congress, there are three times as many scientists and engineers at NASA who are over 60 years old then are under 30 years old. It is unclear either group would be around 13 years from now to restart the program.

Most of the veteran spacecraft builders will be retired by 2020. The youngest person to walk on the moon, Harrison Schmidt, will be 85 and the first man to walk on the moon, Neil Armstrong, will be 90.

It’s really sad, in my opinion, that no one is picking this up. Hillary Clinton is currently the only candidate who seems interested in space, science, and technology. Here are quotes from her site about the issue:

And in pursuing next-generation programs, Hillary will capitalize on the expertise of the current Shuttle program workforce and will not allow a repeat of the “brain drain” that occurred between the Apollo and shuttle missions.

Hillary is committed to a space exploration program that involves robust human spaceflight to complete the Space Station and later human missions, expanded robotic spaceflight probes of our solar system leading to future human exploration, and enhanced space science activities. She will speed development, testing, and deployment of next-generation launch and crew exploration vehicles to replace the aging Space Shuttle.

Once again, Wired Magazine picked up the fact that Hillary is pro-science, and no one seemed to notice/care. Here’s a wonderful article they wrote that has gotten no play: Hillary Clinton Stands Up for Science. A quote from the article:

Under her administration, she said, the federal government would return to funding “ethical embryonic stem-cell research,” ban political appointees’ interference with government scientists’ conclusions, elevate a science advisor to report directly to the president, and boost research into space exploration, the earth sciences and alternative energy.

Now why in the world is this not getting more airtime? All anyone seems to care about is gay marriage, or race/gender, or a billion other minor issues. Science is a huge thing, and if we have one candidate saying he’s going to slash funding, and another saying she’s going to promote it… that is something that should matter. I guess we’ll have to wait and see what happens, I just worry that people are glossing over the wrong things, and that if we cut NASA’s funding, we’ll fall even farther behind when it comes to Science and Math. :(

EDIT - Here’s a good link with even more opinions and facts concerning this: Space vs. Education? @ MSNBC