NASA Administrator Says He Plans To Leave Position Under Biden Administration (theverge.com) 197
NASA administrator Jim Bridenstine says he plans to leave his position at the space agency under the new Joe Biden administration, even if he's asked to stay, according to an interview he did with Aviation Week. Bridenstine said the decision would be to ensure NASA has the right leader who connects with the new president. From a report: "What you need is somebody who has a close relationship with the president of the United States," Bridenstine told Aviation Week. "You need somebody who is trusted by the administration... including the OMB [Office of Management and Budget], the National Space Council and the National Security Council, and I think that I would not be the right person for that in a new administration." President Trump nominated Bridenstine, then a Republican representative from Oklahoma, to lead NASA in 2017. Bridenstine's confirmation became a contentious one, with many lawmakers decrying the idea of a politician running a scientific agency like NASA. "NASA is one of the last refuges from partisan politics," former Sen. Bill Nelson (D-FL) said during Bridenstine's confirmation hearing in November 2017. "NASA needs a leader who will unite us, not divide us. Respectfully, Congressman Bridenstine, I don't think you're that leader." Eventually, the Senate did narrowly confirm him in April 2018, with lawmakers voting along party lines.
Bi den (Score:5, Funny)
Re:Bi den (Score:5, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2)
Are you saying you don't want international cooperation in space?
Re: (Score:2)
International cooperation for space is of course, a good thing.
But it seems strange to have NASA dedicated to muslim outreach....where's the love for the Buddhists, etc?
No that Obama directive didn't sound like it was for something like cooperator in space, it sounded like he wanted NASA to somehow try for political correctness rather than have its focus be purely on science and space rather than make nice-nice with the folks that view us as the great satan.
Re: (Score:2)
Yes. I do not want "international cooperation" in space. The reason being is that really just boils down to globalist working together to bring large contracts to their international corporations of choice. Actual accomplishments become secondary.
What I want is international competition. With multiple states trying different approaches and having pressure to outdo each other, and it being as much a matter of national pride as who's soccer team wins the World Cup.
Eventually, any space colony that becomes
Re: (Score:3)
This is inconsistent with the goal of increasing the survivability of our species? An independent colony should be the objective, not a reason to abandon the project.
Re: (Score:3)
As I recall, we made the fastest and most progress in space exploration when international competition, not cooperation, was the name of the game. All we've done in the cooperative era that followed is fart around in low earth orbit for nearly half a century.
Actually protecting "old space" not "new space" (Score:2)
Well, maybe under Biden, the new NASA head can finally get back to business, you know...
Joking aside you are not far from the truth. However it may be more about protecting "old space", those wonder large aerospace contractors that have been working with NASA and the Pentagon for decades. "New space" is seen as a threat, a more entrepreneurial approach to space. Bridenstine is an advocate for "new space" so the swamp was aligned against him. Former Attorney General Jeff Sessions was quite hostile towards "new space", lots of "old space" contractors in his home state. Trump turned out to like t
Re: (Score:2)
Pardon my ignorance...
But once again...exactly when did muslim become a race?
Re: (Score:2)
Pardon my ignorance...
Gladly. Admission of ignorance should always be met with pardon.
But once again...exactly when did muslim become a race?
Oh, that's simple.
When it became a thin veneer used by cowards to dress up their dislike of brown people. [wikipedia.org]
Re: (Score:2)
I suppose it has nothing to do with all the terrorists actions (9/11, etc), beheadings, etc....yep, nothing but peace loving muslims out there?
Re: (Score:2)
i.e., you might be missing a little bit of history right there.
Anti-muslim sentiment predates 9/11. In fact, 9/11 is merely an event in war.
But regardless, you don't see a lot of Chechens killed in the streets... But I dare you to walk around Harrison, AR wearing a turban. Bonus points if it's a Seikh turban.
Bridenstine is a pretty good NASA admin (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3)
There's a big difference between a commissioner and the chairman.
As much as I hate lobbyists, an oversight commission should have representation from the industry over which that commission has oversight. Otherwise you end up with bullshit like the current drone regulations where drone manufacturers and users are excluded from discussions and people flying actual airplanes end up writing all the rules for something barely more dangerous than a kite.
Putting that representative in the position of chair not on
Pleasantly surprised (Score:3, Interesting)
Seems the ousting of our petulant-child-in-chief is already changing the discourse.
Re: (Score:2)
No, it is fake humble-bragging by an unqualified partisan moron who nobody could imagine being asked to stay. LMFAO
Re: (Score:2)
Well it is like when a person does a fake apology. They at least know at an intellectual level that they did something wrong, while at an emotional level they feel quite justified. But if a fake apology can get the outcome of what you did behind you, might as well.
In the end doing the Right Thing because it is just expected to do. Vs Doing the right thing because you believe it is the right thing, still has the same outcome of the right thing being done.
Re: (Score:2)
Dude from the least classy administration in US fucking history demonstrates some class, and now we have a thread full of liberals acting like Trumptards.
Fucking embarrassing.
Re: (Score:2)
No, it is fake humble-bragging by an unqualified partisan moron who nobody could imagine being asked to stay. LMFAO
Very well said. That is exactly what it is...
Re:Pleasantly surprised (Score:5, Insightful)
I really dislike the guy, but this is a classy explanation for a classy move, so kudos to him.
Of course it could also be that he estimates his chances of being asked to stay at zero percent. But I like your explanation better.
Seems the ousting of our petulant-child-in-chief is already changing the discourse.
Not yet, not yet.
Republicans are distancing themselves, but none of them are publicly saying "Concede and stop embarrassing yourself" to Trump. At best, they are saying "Let the recounts finish", although it seems pretty clear that nothing is changing. While it was close, it wasn't that close.
Re: (Score:2)
Of course it could also be that he estimates his chances of being asked to stay at zero percent. But I like your explanation better.
Oh I'm sure that's the reason, absolutely.
But still, he is choosing to duck out and give a... classy reason for it.
I think that's good.
Not yet, not yet.
I said changing, I didn't say changed.
Obviously the fucking Trumpian troll-farm is still working to normalize again.
Re: (Score:2)
To be fair, there is usually a good amount of this when ever leadership changes. Especially when there is a political party change.
Every boss will want to do things differently. A lot of people who work under the big boss themselves have a job with a lot of power in which the old boss hired them to do things their way, which is inline with the bosses way.
When a company merges or get bought out. You will often see a lot of execs placing in a resignation, because they know they will not be doing things the
Re: (Score:2)
It's not that the a political appointee is leaving after the Administration that appointed him goes (even though, in this instance, the NASA Administrator very often overlaps administrations)
It's that an otherwise shitheaded dude has done so with laudable class.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
First, it is more normal for the NASA Administrator to be retained. [wikipedia.org]
Second, and more to the point since I was never arguing the first:
What he did was classy. What he said was classy. It didn't have to go that way. It's also normal for the losing President to gracefully accept his loss.
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
Let's be frank, Trump was a *politician* who lied about not being one, lied to the country, lied to his base, lied about his predecsssor, liked about his successor, and probably lies about his golf score. But he's been in the business of shady deal making and cooking the books for decades.
Yes, Biden is unremarkable in some ways. But a toy monkey with cymbals would make a better president than Trump (who is clearly in failing mental health).
Re: (Score:2)
Trump's more of a shady salesman who realized that the skills are very transferrable to reality TV, and possibly even more transferable to getting elected. Unfortunately the real job of politics starts where the nasty getting elected bit ends.
Not a great administrator - but good on him (Score:4, Insightful)
I was never positively impressed with Mr. Bridenstine as administrator. He always seemed to be out of his depth; never really in command, nothing new was created under his watch and he seemed to spend most of his time bitching about problems with those around him. His resignation is a positive and something that redeems him at least as an honourable person that understands that more is required than loyalty to the president (and party).
The new administrator is really picking up where things were in 2016 but with a few milestones met in the existing plans. This person will have to figure out what is going on with manned space exploration and try to figure out NASA's place in it and they have a lot of work to do on the aviation side of things to have a coherent strategy for the 2030s and beyond.
Maybe somebody who knows what they're doing? (Score:2)
That said let's not give Biden a pass until we see whether he will do better. A NASA administrator should have both scientific bona fides and be a seasoned and accomplished manager / administrator, which is not a position that many could fill.
Re: (Score:2)
That said let's not give Biden a pass until we see whether he will do better.
Biden literally could not do any worse, so lets aim higher than "do better" :)
I also look forward to the day when none of the White House major advisors are close relatives of the president.
Re: (Score:2)
No, you don't understand. Biden's the lame cop, in the bad cop, lame cop game.
His job is to be a meh-ningless flounder while the actual policies stay the same, to get people used to them, so the next one can switch to the next gear of madness.
Case in point: Obama.
Nice guy, definitely, but let's be honest, Guantanamo is still open. The USA PATRIOT Act still exists. (And it wasn't even his fault. The Republicans repeatedly blocked him, and then complained that he didn't do what they just blocked him on.)
W. Bu
Re: (Score:2)
You mean someone connect to big aerospace (Score:2)
Last I checked NASA itself is chock full of people with exactly those qualifications.
But those aren't the qualifications for Administrator. Which is a business position, where one administers a very large and complex organization. Where one has to explain to Congress why money spent on a particular project is important. Where one has to persuade politicians. Basically a skill set where engineers and scientists routinely fail.
The real reason he is out is that he is a advocate of "space 2.0", a more entrepreneurial approach to space development and big aerospace is heavily against him and
Re: (Score:2)
Sometimes it is better to have a non-scientist doing the Administration, just as long as they realize that their job is Administration, and let the scientist do their work.
I work in Software Development. Often getting a Manager who use to be a software developer makes the worse manager. Because they don't want to give up their own job. So they want to micromanage people what they are doing, so things would be coded the way he would code them. This is actually not too helpful. Because you need the cod
Re: (Score:2)
But there is no need for an either-or.
They can be both.
Re: (Score:2)
But there is no need for an either-or. They can be both.
Sorry, we can't wait for unicorns.
Quit before they fire you. (Score:4, Informative)
Yeah, NASA is not the kind of place where you need a close relationship with the President. Secretary of State, Chief of Staff, etc. maybe.
He brought it up because his 'close relationship' with the President was his only qualification.
So with that gone, even he realizes he has no business being there.
Re: (Score:2)
He brought it up because his 'close relationship' with the President was his only qualification.
I look forward to the day when Ivanka Trump releases a similar statement.
Re: (Score:2)
The Kardashians showed us that that is in no way necessary.
You only have to be famous ... for being famous.
Re: (Score:2)
The NASA Administrator serves as a science advisor to the President, and is an inherently political position.
Does that mean you should put someone unqualified into the position? No, it does not. But to claim that the position doesn't require a close relationship to the President and the organs of State is dumb as fuck.
A week in, and you're already chipping away at my faith in liberals.
Re: (Score:2)
No, it does not. But to claim that the position doesn't require a close relationship to the President and the organs of State is dumb as fuck.
No it is not dumb. It is simply professional if you give advice to people on a professional level even if you do not agree with their "party line".
Re: (Score:2)
It is simply professional if you give advice to people on a professional level even if you do not agree with their "party line".
A close relationship does not imply agreement with their party line, though I suppose I'm not surprised you'd conflate them so in this climate.
Re: (Score:2)
Which makes him a smarter man than you think, and probably a good candidate for a leader. ;)
He's been a great administrator (Score:5, Insightful)
If you follow the space industry news, SpaceX, etc., you'll notice that most space nerds think he's an excellent administrator, in spite of their initial misgivings. He's navigated the political landscape well, encouraged private space industry and "new space," isn't in bed with Boeing. and has the respect of the rest of the industry. Not every NASA admin has been that good.
Re: (Score:2)
If you follow the space industry news, SpaceX, etc., you'll notice that most space nerds think he's an excellent administrator, in spite of their initial misgivings.
I honestly have no idea either way.
But if he is an excellent administrator, why has he ruled out staying if he is asked to stay?
Re: (Score:2)
But if he is an excellent administrator, why has he ruled out staying if he is asked to stay?
Note he is an advocated of "new space", "space 2.0". Big aerospace is calling in favors.
Re: (Score:2)
Probably because he's done the job and doesn't relish being a political appointee of the wrong colour. Lucrative private consulting positions and $10000 per lecture sounds better than weird glances and feet shuffling every time you walk into the boss's office.
Re:He's been a great administrator (Score:5, Interesting)
> But if he is an excellent administrator, why has he ruled out staying if he is asked to stay?
He wants to privatize everything he can. He hired SpaceX to land on the Moon and gave Blue Origin a nice contract to try to get into orbit.
A Biden administration will be like an Obama administration, backing up trucks of cash to ULA and dumping it on SLS, which may still never get off the ground.
The net result will be less space exploration and more grift. He's not willing to have those fights.
I was skeptical of him, but he proved me wrong. The guy was at NASA as a college-age kid, which I didn't know back then. He'll wind up in industry wherever he can do the most good. He's not a political hack - he's a politician who is also a real space nerd.
Re: (Score:2)
If you follow the space industry news, SpaceX, etc., you'll notice that most space nerds think he's an excellent administrator, in spite of their initial misgivings.
Seemingly you're the only person here with that opinion. Most other comments here are quite critical of his complete lack of anything notable. But to address the things you specifically mentioned:
- Navigated the political landscape - easy to do when POTUS is your pimp.
- encouraged private space industry - errrr no, that's not his achievement to take in any form other than it happened on his watch. The breakdown of Boeing and the rise of SpaceX and the private industry was well underway before he even knew h
Re: (Score:2)
If you follow the space industry news, SpaceX, etc., you'll notice that most space nerds think he's an excellent administrator, in spite of their initial misgivings.
Seemingly you're the only person here with that opinion. Most other comments here are quite critical of his complete lack of anything notable. But to address the things you specifically mentioned:
- Navigated the political landscape - easy to do when POTUS is your pimp.
- encouraged private space industry - errrr no, that's not his achievement to take in any form other than it happened on his watch. The breakdown of Boeing and the rise of SpaceX and the private industry was well underway before he even knew how to spell NASA.
- respect of the rest of the industry - Industry respects anyone with the decision making power to sign you multi billiion dollar deals.
I do agree he hasn't been a bad NASA admin, but then I'm more challenging the fundamental premise. He hasn't really been an admin. He's just been *there* and nothing of note has happened as a result with business just ticking away as it was before he came.
If you go someplace filled with Space Nerds, like the comments on Eric Bergen stories at Ars Technica, there is broad admiration for the guy. Working with both a Democratic House and a Republican Senate simultaneously is a tough job. Congress saddled NASA with some real pork-filled boondoggles, like the SLS rocket. Bridenstine was always careful to say the right things about the SLS while at the same time shifting things to make it much less necessary. He got Commercial Crew back on track, it had bee
Re: (Score:3)
As one of those space nerds, who also works in the industry, I wish I had mod points to mod you up, but thankfully someone with mod points took care of that.
The head of NASA (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
That is only half of what's necessary. He should be a good leader and manager *too*.
Otherwise you get a Peter Principle situation.
And unfortunately, it's very hard to find somebody who is good at those *two* jobs at the same time. (But on the plus side, you only need one.)
Its a shame (Score:5, Insightful)
Bridenstine has been a great administrator. He has pushed hard for increasing participation of new commercial space entities in an industry that is rampant with pork and graft. SLS has been nothing more than a jobs program and Bridenstine was forcing them to actually get things done. I had hoped he would stay on and continue to guide things but I suppose he decided it was easier to step aside than it was to be tossed out.
Re: (Score:2)
He's jumping ship on the assumption that he will be summarily dismissed.
Because thats how The Trump Administration would do it, an immediate purge of perceived enemies.
Where's the confidence that he actually did a good job and would be retained in his role because of that fact?
Seriously folks: Just because the last employer you "had a great relationship with" (bootlicker!) was a complete ratbag doesn't mean that your new employer is one. Of course one understands the concept of bei
Re: (Score:2)
People generally cannot admit that. Not even to themselves.
It's exactly the basis for con jobs, and why they work so well. As well as why people defend a crappy product once they decided to invest a lot in it. (E.g. Apple fanboys.)
The only way out that I know of, is to not see it as "I made a crappy decision, and now I'm going back to not being a moron.", but "I made the best decision that I was able to at the time, and now I've improved on that, and can make an even better decision.". Even if not true, it
Re:Its a shame (Score:5, Informative)
Bridenstine was met with a lot of skepticism when he started, but he really earned the respect of NASA and the wider science community. People should do a bit of research before they blabber on (start with NASA Watch [nasawatch.com] (sorry, no https ...) or many of the other resources).
Granted, maybe he is the only Republican who could ever admit he was wrong about global warming. But he did, and he turned out to be not only enthusiastic, but he routinely shines with excellent detail knowledge, and he kept White House politics out of NASA (no climate kerfuffle or "science direction" the likes of which NOAA, CDC, and others have had to endure). Instead Bridenstine listened to the science communities –and he tried to steer the ship that is NASA as best as is possible. I'd say he may be better for NASA than the last three or four administrators combined –because he was not an "administrator" but, against all odds, a capable champion of NASA. Find yourself some NASA folks and ask them You may be surprised.
This may be the first time in a long time that the majority of NASA employees actually may *want* their administrator to stay at such a juncture. And that's sayin' somethin'.
Wasnt that bad (Score:3)
Actually he was a good administrator, have to admit that. I wish he had managed to convince congress to provide companies doing reusable launch systems such as Blue Origin or SpaceX more funding, --- even if that mean gutting Space Launch System (SLS) (which let's face it, as a non-reusable system is a massive waste of money).
good (Score:2)
The only time that he backs Commercial space is when Trump/Pence do so. THEN he is fully supportive of SX/BO/etc.
In addition, rather than work with Bigelow Aerospace, he and his underlings choose to add more tin cans to the ISS and support a NASA person with COSTLY overseas works. Bigelow has shown over and over that they can do this for a fraction of the costs of the tin cans. Yet, Bridenstine pushed him o
How well did he do? (Score:2)
Being selected by someone who is considered an ass, doesn't automatically make you one. So for those who having been following NASA closely for the past few years, can you comment on how good of a job he did?
Beyond the selection process, I get the impression he did an okay job, but I haven't been following NASA that closely, so a non-partisan evaluation of him would be good.
Re: (Score:2)
Don't forget: How good was he able to be, given the confines that he had to operate within?
The greatest race car driver cannot win a formula 1 race in a Bobby-Car.
Re: (Score:2)
He didn't kill SLS.
That's a pretty big failure right there.
He didn't kill SLS. Next ! (Score:2)
SLS will be rendered obsolete before it launches any men, or tokens, to the moon.
A decent admin will kill it before then.
Do your fucking job, you coward (Score:2, Insightful)
It's absolutely irrelevant who the president is. You have a job, that is space faring and research, not politics and old boys club circle jerks. That job hasn't changed. Do your job.
Re: (Score:2)
It's absolutely irrelevant who the president is. You have a job, that is space faring and research, not politics and old boys club circle jerks. That job hasn't changed. Do your job.
When you resign, it's not your job anymore. Nobody is going to stop doing his job. Why so angry about this?
KILL SLS. Before it gets MORE embarassing. (Score:2)
I don't know if Bridie was in the pockets of Big Space or just does what he's told by Incompitrump, but the SLS MUST be stopped before it wastes more tens of billions of dollars, on the way to being rendered *obsolete* by SpaceX ( and possibly even BO too ).
Re: (Score:2)
Do you have any idea how any of this works?
Trump himself has very little say in whether or not SLS is completed. These things are funded by Congress, who have all sorts of little call-outs to get things built in their districts. It's not going to get de-funded, because that would be cutting someones welfare job.
Irritating, curiously (Score:5, Informative)
Stuff like this is extremely irritating from an European point of view.
Why is the US always replacing the higher ranks in most agencies when the President changes?
Makes no real sense, probably the main reason your country makes no real progress.
Sure, in this situation he probably want to go before he gets fired ... but bottom line: a high ranked official has sworn allegiance to the people and the country. Not to the president. Unless your country is run by cronies who want to pull in family and friends into rewarding positions, it does not make any sense at all to exchange them every 4 - 8 years.
Re: (Score:2)
"Unless your country is run by cronies who want to pull in family and friends into rewarding positions"
Kennedies, Bushes, Clintons.
Nuff said.
EU POV (Score:2)
The US really is run cronies who want to pull family and friends into rewarding positions. The only thing to admire about a America is the tech accomplishments of the few. There is nothing to admire about our nation be it our vile plebs or sociopathic masters.
Europe should get its act together such that it does not need a USA. That it still does reflects European incompetence not American virtue. There is only one US virtue, our wealth.
NASA is dead (Score:2)
That's far fetched (Score:2)
So is he planning to head NASA till 2024?
Sen. Bill Nelson was wrong (Score:5, Insightful)
...former Sen. Bill Nelson (D-FL) said during Bridenstine's confirmation hearing in November 2017. "NASA needs a leader who will unite us, not divide us. Respectfully, Congressman Bridenstine, I don't think you're that leader."
In the beginning most of us space nerds suspected the Senator was right, but in the end, he was wrong. Bridenstine was a great leader who did unite those of interested in advancing space exploration and technology. Granted he was unable to undo much of the congressional pork barrel that is built into NASA's budget, but was more successful than many of his predecessors in working around some of the road blocks congress put in his way. His congressional experience may have in the end been more valuable than any scientific or engineering background. From his deputy down his team had plenty of STEM background.
Well.... (Score:2, Insightful)
aren't you just the cat's ass?
Re: (Score:2)
He has been backing SLS, and only supporting Commercial launch when Trump/Pence were doing so.
He tore into SX for their manned launcher, even though he was part of the GOP that voted CONSTANTLY to kill off funding for SX.
When it came time to push for multiple private space stations, he instead, fought with Bigelow, pushed them out and instead, brought in his buddies.
Keep in mind, the next admin will be pushed to do a lot more earth science. The question becomes, will they also push for t
Re: (Score:2)
"It is NOT your qualifications but who you know."
Biden said before he chose his VP that he would pick a black woman.
So your VP-Elect was EXPLICITLY chosen for her gender and her race.
Trump is a horrible sexist and a horrible racist.
So are peoeple who support chosing candidates by gender and race.
Re: (Score:2)
Biden said before he chose his VP that he would pick a black woman.
So your VP-Elect was EXPLICITLY chosen for her gender and her race.
Yes, because there is an overwhelming body of evidence that diverse teams produce far better results than like qualified people. If you're black woman at a old white sausage fest then that is a qualification that is of far more importance to delivering an actual result than you fear of reverse sexism taking your job away.
And good on Joe showing the world that being a racist sexist cunt is not actually a pre-requisite to being POTUS.
Re: (Score:2)
"Yes, because there is an overwhelming body of evidence that diverse teams produce far better results than like qualified people."
Grown ups don't believe in fairies or sociology research.
"If you're black woman at a old white sausage fest then that is a qualification that is of far more importance to delivering an actual result than you fear of reverse sexism taking your job away."
So you're a sexist.
"And good on Joe showing the world that being a racist sexist cunt is not actually a pre-requisite to being PO
Re: (Score:2)
It really depends on context.
If trendy companies all decide they want to hire female minorities exclusively, then a fair complaint can be made that was unfair and denied a lot of people across an industry opportunity based on gender and race, just the opposite of historical discrimination.
For a VP pick, well, there is never going to be a way to have a 'fair chance' at being VP of the USA as there is exactly one position in the whole world. Similarly, you can apply whatever 'trendy' filters you want and stil
Re: (Score:2)
Blah blah.
Or we could just REALLY stop discrimination and make it REALLY illegal to hire based on gender or race, whether for VPs or garbage persons (sic).
How about it, Kamalatoken ?
Re: (Score:2)
"If you're black woman at a old white sausage fest"
You might want to avoid such language given how she attained her job as California Attorney General.
Re: (Score:2)
Poor snowflake. So much anger.
Re: (Score:2)
Seems you do no know what a sexist is :P Hint: open a dictionary.
"Yes, because there is an overwhelming body of evidence that diverse teams produce far better results than like qualified people."
Grown ups don't believe in fairies or sociology research.
Actually grown up believe:
a) in science
b) personal experience
If you are to dumb for a), that certainly is your fault. If you have not b) - then the question is: do you actually ever reflect about your successes and failures or do you just go on for ever?
Re: (Score:2)
You think sociology is a science ?
Bwahahahahahaha.
Grow up.
Re: (Score:2)
Diversity isn't a magical recipe, whereby adding one person of non - x group improves the group's output. It's the diversity level of the group as a whole.
That's just weaksauce justification for making placements based on sex, race, etc.
Re: (Score:2)
And he perhaps get a female or black voter who is insecure what to vote, on their side.
Got appointment because of "space 2.0" (Score:5, Insightful)
Like ALL Trump appointees, he is incompetent and got the job because he is a Trump crony.
Bullshit. Internally Bridenstine is liked at NASA and considered a good administrator.
He got the appointment because he supports the concept of "space 2.0", or "new space". A more entrepreneurial approach to space development and research, one less reliant on "old space", ie. the huge aerospace contractors that have been working with NASA and the Pentagon for decades. "Space 2.0" has NASA focusing more on the riskier long range projects, ex robotic missions to the other planets. Allowing for a more entrepreneurial approach to near earth projects.
The actual story is big aerospace will be calling in favors for his removal.
Re:Of course. (Score:4, Informative)
I thought I would respond with how much of an asshole you are, but then I remembered I have mod points so I'll mark this as "flame bait" and move on.
Really? Then you are an idiot. Proof: a graduate of Rice University with majors in Economics, Psychology, and Business, and has an MBA from Cornell University. [wikipedia.org]
No science or engineering background and here he is in charge of NASA. His qualifications? Trump stooge.
Yet another example of Trump's incompetence and corruption.
Re: Of course. (Score:2, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
So Columbia was W's fault and Challenger was Reagan's? Cool. But you do realize that if you say yes, you forfeit your ability to blame Trump for those two.
Huh? I never said I did or wanted to. WTF?! You people are just fucking nuts!
Re:Of course. (Score:4, Insightful)
Incompetence would be thinking that a science degree is necessary to run a government agency.
That would be incompetence at life.
What a NASA administrator really does ... (Score:2)
No science or engineering background and here he is in charge of NASA.
And do you know what a NASA administrator does? Its not science and engineering. It is (1) Explaining to Congress why the money spent on this project is important. (2) Administering a large complex organization. Two very different skill sets from science and engineering.
Re:Of course. (Score:5, Informative)
a graduate of Rice University with majors in Economics, Psychology, and Business, and has an MBA from Cornell University. [wikipedia.org]
A Naval aviator as well (keep in mind NASA is the National Aeronautics and Space Administration). And a three-term congressman (and also keep in mind that understanding Congress is critical for a NASA administrator), and a member of the congressional Committee on Science, Space and Technology during the 113th, 114th, and 115th Congresses.
He was very well qualified for the job.
Re: (Score:3)
The head of NASA does not need to be a scientist or an engineer. He needs to be able to present a credible plan to the administration and OMB, request the appropriate budget, and make sure those engineers and sci
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3)
His main "achievement", if you could call it that, was trying to offload critical projects involving human spaceflight to private companies that still can't keep their rockets from blowing up.
Space X seems to be doing great and it was the right call to "offload critical projects" on them. Boeing was also raked over the coals for incompetence, so that was also uncharacteristically decisive.
Re: (Score:2)
I'm not American. Maybe you can explain. Shouldn't Republicans be in favour of "offloading critical projects" to private industry?
Re: (Score:3)
You would think so, but the old way of doing things, cost-plus contracts to companies with facilities in mostly rural states, becomes in effect a big jobs program.
It is championed by senators such as Alabama's Richard Shelby, chair of the Appropriations Committee and major supporter of the SLS program.
I guess hiding welfare policies behind the space industry make them a bit more palatable for the Republicans.
Re: (Score:2)
NASA's commercial space programs began under Bush in 2006. Commercial Crew began in 2010 under Obama. Trump didn't start or have any major influence on any of them, and it was just a coincidence that Commercial Crew happened to come to fruition during Trump's presidency. If Clinton had won the election, the timelines would have been mostly the same. By all measures, commercial resupply and commercial crew have been spectacular successes, delivering cargo and crew to orbit for a tiny fraction of the cost of