The American Spectator

Reader Mail

Space Restrictions

8.2.05 @ 12:01AM

FRIST SHALL BE LAST
Re: The Prowler's The Celling of Bill Frist:

One would deduce after reading the spin from whirling dervish Frist supporters about his 180-degree turn on embryonic stem cell research is the White House staff is guilty of shear blindness. Oh yes, Senator Frist has been talking to "a lot of people" including the New York Times. If he did speak to a lot of people his about-face would have wet the pavement long before he tipped off the liberal establishment. Apparently he did not speak to the President or his staff before he made a decision that was sure to cause turbulence.

The Frist supporters and lobbyists who depend on their "top flight air controller" are afraid of being grounded after their flight plan resulted in hitting the side of a mountain. If they think they can spin this thing to make it less bitter to the political base then they are in a thick fog and deserve to be grounded... and then pounded.

It is the staff of Senator Frist that is weak in the anticipation department. Here is an outcome Senator Frist's staff should anticipate: his much talked about run for the presidency has stumbled very badly. They only have themselves to blame for mistaking pot leaves for tea leaves.
-- Diamon Sforza
San Diego, California

Bill Frist has come to his senses. Why don't you?
-- MPM

THIRTY WASTED YEARS
Re: Jed Babbin's Houston, You Have a Problem:

Mr. Babbin's August 1 article on our floundering space program is spot on! I used to be fascinated by the Shuttle and the space station -- now I am sick to death of hearing about them, especially the oh-so-fragile ceramic tiles. I wish both of these turkeys could be shut down and replaced with something else.

Every time NASA's manned program messes up, it provides ammunition for the America-hating progressive types who don't want us to have any people in space at all. They cite various reasons, of course. Oh, the program is so expensive -- though it is microscopic compared to so-called "social spending" on the federal, state, and local levels. The real reason, I suspect is that it makes America look good (when it works) and we mustn't have that.

The American space program went into a blind alley after Apollo. If Bush ever gets his new Crew Exploration Vehicle (CEV), based on updated Apollo technology, it will be what we should have been doing 30 years ago.

NASA has made some really stupid decisions since Apollo -- for example, it originally wanted all flights to be aboard the shuttles, and was even throwing out the old expendable rockets (sorry, "launch vehicles"). When the Challenger blew up, we had only a handful of expendable rockets left. I remember especially one ailing spy satellite they had to nurse along until new rockets came on line.

On the other hand, NASA has had some stupid policies forced on it by others. It originally wanted a smaller, simpler space plane that would have been fully re-usable. You would use expendable boosters to launch the heavy stuff, then the astronauts would go out and assemble it. In a penny-wise, pound-foolish decision, the government told NASA to do something cheaper. NASA had to go to Defense and other places to ask for further support and money, but they gave it only after insisting on many changes. For example, the Shuttle had to be greatly enlarged, to carry Defense's spy satellites. That's how we got a huge, fragile space truck, instead of a souped-up version of the old X-15. It's a good instance of how a camel is a horse designed by a committee.

Thirty wasted years. At least the space probe missions to other planets are a resounding success.
-- John Lockwood
Washington, D.C.

'Not long after the last moon mission returned to earth, America (or was it Jimmy?) decided that our national malaise precluded investing in things that could produce unvalued commodities such as quantum leaps in scientific progress and the sense of national purpose and pride. So we went on to build the space shuttle, a workhorse reusable launch vehicle that could carry large payloads into orbit, but not beyond. '

In fact, it was Nixon that cancelled the Apollo program, and redirected efforts towards a space shuttle. As much as I hate Goober Jimmy and love Tricky Dicky, the sad truth is that Nixon did the sorry deed...
-- Peter

I'm in full agreement with you. What we are doing now would be the same as if after Columbus having make his journeys to the new world Spain decided to park a ship 100 miles of its coast and shuttled people and material back and forth rather than keep going to the new world. That would have been a waste. All the big stuff was found after Columbus.
-- unsigned

Letter to the Editor

topics:
Mainstream Media, Religion, Islam, Books, Constitution, Law, Military, Iraq, NATO, Conservatism