Obama Choosing NOT To Go To the Moon

bonch writes "Obama's budget proposal will contain no funding for the Constellation program, which was to send astronauts to the moon by 2020. Instead, NASA will be focused on terrestrial science, such as monitoring global warming. One anonymous official said: 'We certainly don't need to go back to the moon.'"

Don't worry

[istartedi]

We are just a few decades from Zefram Cochrane's first warp flight amidst the backdrop of a post-apocalyptic USA. Conventional rockets are a waste anyway.

Re:We choose

[e2d2]

I always loved the pause in JFK's original speech:

We choose to go to the moon. We choose to go to the moon.. <pause while JFK thinks>
and do the other things.. (?)

Re:Sad news

[Jeremy Erwin]

The moon is a backup.

we've been to the moon . . .

[rev_sanchez]

The next space race should be about who can take the largest, most unweildly animal to the moon, let it run around, and bring it back safely. I say we try to a gorilla or a buffalo or a bear in a space suit that fits them and let them run around the moon a little bit and then the animal returns a hero. If that works we start with marine life. Let's put an enclosed dolphin tank on the moon and do a little show and then bring it all back home.

If we're doing this for science we can send probes cheaper and safer. If we're doing this for glory then send a giraffe or hippo.

Re:Unsurprising

[gimmebeer]

Actually, very suprising. He's actually following through on something he promised during his campaign. This is new territory, hang on to your butts.

Re:Sad news

[Logical Zebra]

We just need to explore Mars first and find the Prothean ruins there.

Re:National Aeronautics and Space Administration

[navygeek]

A trip to space without Tang is just not worth the money, period. If you're going to do a half-assed job of it, don't do it at all. :-)

Re:Sad news

[Jason Earl]

Yesterday I had a Jimmy Dean Flapstick. That product is a true culinary achievement, and I gladly spend my own money to help support Jimmy Dean R&D. Sending astronauts to the moon, on the other hand, is something that has been done. In fact, it was done before I was born, and I am old.

Besides, what Obama really needs isn't a man (or woman) on the moon. He needs an excuse that will allow him to pass the Carbon Cap and Trade bills so that he can raise billions in new tax revenues. NASA already has plenty of experience inventing climate data, so it is the perfect organization for the job. With enough money, convincing the voting public that CO2 is driving global warming should be pretty straightforward. In fact, the real problem may be knowing when to say when. With the increased funding NASA should be able to convince voters that they are actually ON FIRE.

Re:Sad news

[pnewhook]

Replace 'volunteer' with 'patent lawyers', then turn around and forget about them and you got yourself a deal!

Re:Sad news

[Rei]

Step 1: Convert ourselves into robots so we can be built out of titanium.
Step 2: ???
Step 3: Profit!

The moon is also rich in silicon. Perhaps we should convert ourselves to Chenjesu.

China Wins!

[Anonymous Coward]

Nice to see that we are letting China get to Mars first. Or India. NUMBER 2!! We're NUMBER 2! Or 3? YEAH! We're NUMBER 3! Or MAYBE 4!...

I know a few people...

[Anonymous Coward]

that would like to send Obama to the moon.

The Earth is our East Germany Now

[tjstork]

Socialists don't want people to learn how to live in space so they can keep them slaves on earth. With this decision the Left Wing makes the Gravity Well our prison as much as it did the Berlin Wall.

The only answer left is civil war.