Shorter Charles Krauthammer
- The moon, which I have often called the Celestial Hitler, can sense that our resolve is weakening. Make no mistake: Neville Obama’s refusal to conquer this deadly foe will prove to be his undoing.
‘Shorter’ concept created by Daniel Davies and perfected by Elton Beard. We are aware of all Internet traditions.™
Give Krauthammer credit: I never thought he could possibly apply the neocon narrative of “Everyone = Hitler, Obama = Neville Chamberlain” to space exploration. But lo, I was wrong:
Next week marks the 40th anniversary of the first moon landing. We say we will return in 2020. But that promise was made by a previous president, and this president has defined himself as the antimatter to George Bush. Moreover, for all of Barack Obama’s Kennedyesque qualities, he has expressed none of Kennedy’s enthusiasm for human space exploration.
So with the Apollo moon program long gone, and with Constellation, its supposed successor, still little more than a hope, we remain in retreat from space. Astonishing.
Chuckles obviously has forgotten the wingnut meme of howling about the deficit since going to the moon is, you know, goddamn expensive and whatnot. I suppose he could try to square this circle by proposing that we send all welfare mothers to live on the moon, thus satisfying his twin desires to explore space and punish poor people. But that seems like a topic for another column.
And then there’s this:
Why do it? It’s not for practicality. We didn’t go to the moon to spin off cooling suits and freeze-dried fruit. Any technological return is a bonus, not a reason. We go for the wonder and glory of it.
In other words — even though sending humans to a worthless piece of space rock has no material value to us, we should do it anyway. Because it will make me feel tuff.
Another jewel:
We’ll be totally grounded. We’ll have to beg a ride from the Russians or perhaps even the Chinese. So what, you say? Don’t we have problems here on Earth? Oh, please. Poverty and disease and social ills will always be with us. If we’d waited for them to be rectified before venturing out, we’d still be living in caves.
It’s amazing to see so many wingnut pathologies playing out at once. Chuckles Krauthammer is clearly insecure about the size of his penis. But instead of doing what normal people do and buying P1LLS 2 GROW UR MONSTER!!!1!, he decides to compensate for his minuscule member by living vicariously through the United States government. Thus, whenever the government does something that makes him feel strong — say, by invading other countries for no reason or sending people to the moon for no reason — he gets a stiffy.
I can’t imagine having my own manhood and self-worth dictated by whether or not my government does a bunch of stupid shit that has no value. But fuck it, that’s why I’m not a neocon.
I like science and space exploration as much as the next guy, but there’s no reason for people to go to the moon (or Mars, either). We can get way more exploration for our tax dollar with unmanned vehicles.
That’s a defeatist’s attitude. Why it’s a wonder that the moon hasn’t yet invaded with all these Neville Chamberlains mincing about!!!
To be more precise: almost 40 years spent in low Earth orbit studying, well, zero-G nausea and sundry cosmic mysteries.
Price check for nebulae on aisle 5!
Barack Obama wants to spread AIDS in Africa!!!!111elf
He might also want to ask the teabaggers and the glibertarians whether space exploration is a valuable use of taxpayer dollars. They rage, rage, rage about yucky wasteful gubmint NASA, while filling their free market sexual fantasies with thoughts of the X-Prize. If their sort didn’t make up the bulk of Congress, maybe things would be different.
Alternate shorter: going to the moon for no particular reason > millions of jobs.
Wasn’t it Bush who proposed going to Mars, then cut NASA’s budget?
“Why do it? It’s not for practicality. We didn’t go to the moon to spin off cooling suits and freeze-dried fruit. Any technological return is a bonus, not a reason. We go for the wonder and glory of it.”
For shizzle!
Jesus, good pick-up, Brad – this one’s really Krauthammer in full-throated winger mode.
The space shuttle is simultaneously a ‘magnificent bird’ and ‘hopelessly impractical’ (wait, does he like it or not?) … turned into ‘a truck for hauling goods and people to a tinkertoy we call the international space station, itself created in a fit of post-Cold War internationalist absentmindedness as a place where people of differing nationality can sing “Kumbaya” while weightless.’
‘… created in a fit of post-Cold War internationalist absentmindedness’ is classic high wingnut — we could have had a live nuclear exchange if we’d just kept our eye on the prize.
low Earth orbit studying, well, zero-G nausea
Figuring out how to stay healthy during long periods of weightlessness? Pfft, who needs that shit? What, loss of bone marrow? Suck it up!
Then there’s the obligatory stimulus-bashing. But the best part for me is that three Republican presidents, including a pair of two-termers, are let completely off the hook for failing to get us back to the moon … it’s the new guy’s fault.
I support the exploration of space, but not for the glory of the flag. For the chance to discover things like how to solve the energy crisis here on earth and how to better recycle and reuse our resources, and maybe even to stock up on shit like water from comets.
We owe it to mom.
Wasn’t it Bush who proposed going to Mars, then cut NASA’s budget?
Why, I do believe you are correct, Tom65!
The Bushies wanted to put NASA under the DoD. It’s practically there already…name one pilot of a spacecraft who hasn’t been active military…but that wasn’t good enough.
I’m sorry, guys, I gotta disagree to an extent – maybe it’s my technofetishist side, but I want to see us go back to the Moon and stay. No, it’s not important, beyond the fact that everyone who’s been there seems to get new respect for our own lil’ world, but I mean, hell – if we can move power generation and manufacturing into space we can do a hell of a lot to make Earth more livable… and curb climate change.
And cost? Cripes, NASA’s budget is miniscule compared to the Pentagon, regardless of the fact that NASA’s been reduced lately by warmongering shitwits to little more than a truck service for spy sattelites.
Of course that doesn’t mean I trust Chucky and Co. to have a part in it. He’s just pissed that we can’t set up nucoolar missles on the Moon and threaten everyone on the planet with them.
We owe it to mom.
You know, actor, sometimes you scare me the way we think alike.
You know, actor, sometimes you scare me the way we think alike.
You read Niven and Pournelle’s book, too, huh? 🙂
Pay any Price
Bear any Burden
Oppose any foe
The little Nuckster Troll should purchase a clue.
These verities went the way of cars with fucking fins.
he has expressed none of Kennedy’s enthusiasm for human space exploration.
Hate to break it to you, Krauty, but Kennedy only cared about space because of the space race. He wanted to best the Soviet Union, and that was the sole reason he supported NASA and the moon program. His inspiring speeches were well-designed to rouse public sentiment, but they weren’t (shock of all shocks) entirely ingenuous.
We can get way more exploration for our tax dollar with unmanned vehicles.
Yeah, exactly. We get a lot more science done with unmanned space flight, for the time being, but manned space flight captures the public’s attention better, so NASA puts too much priority on it.
You read Niven and Pournelle’s book, too, huh? 🙂
Which one? 🙂
(I used to really like Pournelle back when I was pseudo-wingnut… before I realized Kot’s Rule #1: Being smart in subject (A) does NOT imply overall wisdom.)
I can’t recall the name and for the life of me haven’t been able to find it listed among their works, but it was a real-life exploration of how science fiction could become science fact, with space elevators and dragging asteroids back to a Lagrane point to mine resources and how we could fling ores back from Mars and the moon.
You know, seriously twisted but practical shit. As I recall, they spent most of the book with Dan Forward.
Y’know, it’s been a long time since I had a really cold, refreshing glass of Tang.
Must be Obama’s fault.
Ah, Krauthammer exemplifiying the roots of the word “lunatic”.
Buzz Aldrin, second man to stamp around on the moon (and first to pee there, which I think is the important thing) disagrees with Chuck E.
http://www.guardian.co.uk/science/2009/jul/16/buzz-aldrin-moon-mars-space
Isn’t there a free market for “wonder and glory”? Couldn’t some aspiring entrepreneur make it happen more efficiently than the government? Wouldn’t it be fasci-socialist to tax you and me for national glory? Wouldn’t intellectual consistency demand that Krauthammer make that case, instead of the one he did?
I gather Rutan (of SpaceShipOne / X-Prize) fame is big on private space enterprise. So why isn’t K-dude talking to him, rather than blaming Obama?
Or is Krauthammer’s whole approach full of it?
Going back to the moon would be teh awesome, though having bots do it is way more practical as Emily and Stephen say.
But having Krapphammer lead the PR campaign for any such venture is, well, less than desirable. This armchair engineer has just spent a column calling the work of the people we’d need to mount such an effort ‘tinkertoys’.
“not a trace” – yeah, all those construction projects built into the stimulus package will disappear as soon as the checks are cashed.
because government cant’t create jobs or build stuff, remember.
Ah, c’mon Chuckie Cabbagemallet. Can’t you see Obama is busy right now with saving the economy, the American health care system and the environment while he extricates our troops from the Middle East and prevents Iran from getting nuclear weapons?
Wait until next year when he’ll have fixed these things to start nagging him about going to Mars.
yeah, all those construction projects built into the stimulus package will disappear as soon as the checks are cashed.
Well, some town in Iowa did get a check to make the world’s largest ball of cotton candy to coincide with thunderstorm season…
This is the part I liked: That is the moon. On it are exactly 12 sets of human footprints — untouched, unchanged, abandoned.
The footprints are “abandoned”?
What does he think, that they need watering?
Why does it make it less “wonderous” having gone there, just because we’re not there walking all over the footprints?
That’s Wingers for you, give them the moon and next thing they want condo development rights.
zrm – yeah, but Obama’s stimulus is nothing like the highway system Ike bequeathed us that never has to be expanded or maintained because 50s asphalt lasts forever.
why doesn’t Krapmallet like the Shuttle?
It’s the world’s kewlest SUV. Difference being, of course, that it actually gets USED to haul stuff off-road, as opposed to the weekend suburban four wheel driving that is the typical challenge for an SUV.
zrm – yeah, but Obama’s stimulus is nothing like the highway system Ike bequeathed us that never has to be expanded or maintained because 50s asphalt lasts forever.
well, that goes without saying
because in teh fifties men smoked and women cleaned and everything was perfect.
These verities went the way of cars with fucking fins.
Except in cases where shooting brown folks is involved. If a robust space program is enough to get those over-compensating war-boners to back off of invading the shit out of random countries, then a robust space program is what I’m all for. It’d be so much more comforting to hear the angry idiots discussing delta vees and launch windows then arguing about the stopping power of various ammunition calibers.
Why go back to the moon (bean there, dood that) when the hollow Earth hasn’t even been fully explored?
Well, I’d love for there to be more manned space exploration. I’d love to have proper space colonies and Bradburyesque rockets and missions to the jungles of Venus and all that. But when the economy’s in the shitter, that stuff has to go on the back burner. And Republican stooges whose advocacy helped wreck said economy don’t get to cheerlead for more whackypants ideas.
Heavens help me, I feel dirty saying this, but I actually, kind of, not really but sort of, agree with Krauty on this one.
Not on his framing of it, which is stupid. Or his reasoning, which is bass ackwards. I think the exact reason we should go to the moon is so that we’ll get all those neat scientific bonuses like microwave ovens and streaming video and whatnot previous completely unrelated scientific endeavors have brought us. I mean, if we send people to mars or for long terms on the moon, we’ll have to figure out how to recycle and reuse energy and biological products with an efficiency currently unheard of. Water conservation, food growing, all that stuff And we’ll have to figure out all sorts of new ways to help humans deal with limited resources. It’s not like research in those areas could have any practical implications, though, right?
And then, any “wonder and glory” or whatever stupid penis enhancer the neo-cons want is the extra bonus that comes with it. For better or for worse, that does count for something. I mean, I know we’re all cynical bastards here, but, come on. In the history of all living things of which we are aware, throughout the entirety of the known universe, we are the first group of intelligent monkeys to put another living creature on a new rock in space. First. EVER. To go out into space and have a look around, just because we fuckin’ can. That does count for something. I probably wouldn’t be nearly as interested in science as I am today if it hadn’t been for learning about the space program and the astronauts growing up, and then from there on to astronomy, and then Carl Sagan, and so on. Given how stupid our country is actively becoming, the intangible benefit of attracting a new generation to science might actually be worth something.
Improving health care, education, and the economy would make my wonder and glory cup overflow. How about we pay for that, then the smart, healthy, wealthy country we’ve become can explore Uranus like you’ve always dreamed, Mr. Hammer.
First, robots are extremely limited. They can literally only do what they are programmed to do. They are great at taking pictures of stuff you already know is there or following a trail you’ve already mapped out. Two big problems with robots. They can’t assess risks. For instance, had a robot been in charge, the Eagle would not have landed successfully. It would have crashed into a field of boulders and been destroyed. Robots also can’t take risks, for instance a robot would have aborted when the landing when it hit the 30 seconds of fuel remaining. Luckily a crazy-assed thrill seeker with NO intention of returning to the Earth without having actually landed, was at the controls.
Human being can assess and take risks a robot runs away from.
Second, fuck Mars! Why us Earthlings would want to jump from one gravity well into another is beyond me. Let’s jump onto this very convenient ledge called the Moon and see where we want to go from there. I think Aldrin is right about a more international effort to get back to the moon but I think he’s dead wrong about Mars. They planet isn’t going anywhere and it’s full of fucking rust.
Finally, to Chucky. Shut the fuck up. You’re stinking up the place every time you open your mouth.
then the smart, healthy, wealthy country we’ve become can explore Uranus like you’ve always dreamed, Mr. Hammer.
Allow me to be the first to say this:
*ahem*
Win!
Why do it? It’s not for practicality… We go for the wonder and glory of it.
Hey, nobody’s dragged a riverboat over a mountain since Werner Herzog did it decades ago. Maybe we should do that too.
Krauthammer:
Alien hunting, alien hunting!
Improving health care, education, and the economy would make my wonder and glory cup overflow.
..approximately $135 billion in 2005 dollars. Roughly the same amount that has been requisitioned for Iraq FY2010.
Hey, nobody’s dragged a riverboat over a mountain since Werner Herzog did it decades ago. Maybe we should do that too.
Plus think of all the technology spinoff that came from that too, like now you can take Missisippi wheelboat rides to the top of Mount Everest, and er, winching techniques…
I’m actually in favor of space exploration too. I think Buzz Aldrin has the right idea though, the Moon is just a useful staging ground for elsewhere.
There are other things that need doing but money for space exploration is not what’s stopping us, and never will be. Our failure to do things like provide health care to 40 million citizens has little to do with lack of money for it, in a basic sense. It has to do with Wingnuts and insurance companies opposing it.
Hey I know! Send THEM out into space! Maybe we should listen to Chuck about this, really.
Jeebus, what a truckload of Fail. Raise your hand, everybody in America who seriously believed Bush when he said we were going back to the Moon, and then Mars.
Nobody? That’s what I thought.
And yeah, “tinkertoy?” Turning the “magnificent bird” that is the Space Shuttle “into a truck”? Newsflash, Charlie: it is a truck! That’s its purpose. Why did you think they put that big open space in the back labelled a “cargo bay”?
Oh, and Charlie, you’re looking for a BIg Glorious (Ahem!) Gubbmint Project? Have you noticed that some scientists and engineers (say, half of them) are asking for a commitment, on the scale of the Manhattan Project, or the mobilization for WWII, or the Apollo landings, for something or other? Something like getting us off fossil fuels so we don’t, you know, collapse the foundation of the world economy while drowning our coastlines and turning all our farmland into desert? You might look into it.
Dragon-King Wangchuck
Excellent point. Benign Overcompensation for the white boys.
Hey, nobody’s dragged a riverboat over a mountain since Werner Herzog did it decades ago. Maybe we should do that too.
Hell yeah, although with some slight adjustments. This time, crush people on purpose and dump Mick Jagger from the project. That would make it really manly.
Excellent point.
Flattered, but it’s right there in the original post.
Then there’s the obligatory stimulus-bashing.
You mean the one the Democrats said would keep unemployeement below 8% ?
How has that worked out for you guys? I haven’t looked at the rate now; is it still below 8% ?
..approximately $135 billion in 2005 dollars. Roughly the same amount that has been requisitioned for Iraq FY2010.
Thank goodness Obama hasn’t spent near that amount… oh wait… I mixed up my “Billions” with my “Trillions”
You mean the one the Democrats said would keep unemployeement below 8% ?
How has that worked out for you guys? I haven’t looked at the rate now; is it still below 8% ?
Well, Democrats really didn’t really understand how bad George had fucked things up AND they thought Republicans might actually try to HELP fix the problems they created.
HAHA ain’t those Demoncrats gullible??
WE NEED TO GO BACK TO TEH MOON DAMMIT BEFORE THE NORTH KOERANS LINK UP WITH AL QAEDIA AND TAKE IT OVER BUT NO YOU LIBERASL WOULD BE OKAY WITH THEM RENAMING IT SUN YOUNG MOON OF ALLAH AND THEN BLOWING IT UP LIKE IN THAT MARVIN TEH MARTIAN CARTOON WHERE NOTHING WAS LEFT BUT A MUSLIM CRESSENT
Krauthammer is actually Two-Face in disguise. When he flips the coin, will NASA have a bigger budget, or be forced to go to the moon on the unfunded No Shuttle Left Behind program?
The suspense!
Then there’s the obligatory stimulus-bashing.
You mean the one the Democrats said would keep unemployeement below 8% ?
How has that worked out for you guys? I haven’t looked at the rate now; is it still below 8% ?
It didn’t succeed.
Now, the Republican Stimulus Sabotage Program, well, that worked gangbusters!
Hopefully, Obama and Co. have learned their lesson: you don’t “compromise” with snakes.
You know, I’m on the pro-space exploration side – primarily because in the space-age future, all chicks are going to be smokingly hawt and wearing super-tight jumpsuits. It’s troo, I sees it on the teevees!
Anyways, my profound addiction to answering “rhetorical” questions posed by morans can not be controlled:
Ummm, because there were no moon-ragheads to shoot? Seriously, the call was to place a man on the moon “before the decade is out”. Mission accomplished – and not in the “peace and democracy spreading throughout the Middle East” sense either. And when we got there, there were no hawt space babes in mini-skirts and go-go boots waiting. No giant buckets of phat lunar lewts like a +5 moon artifact of disease eradication. So we went home and built a global fucking communications network so vast that eyewitness accounts of wide-spread popular protests against Iranian election fraud is considered trivial and banal. But hey, it’s not elevating a dozen white guys with extensive military backgrounds miles above the unwashed rabble – so I can see how you might not like it.
Yeah, remember how Bush, when he wasn’t presiding over unemployment’s reaching 8%, opposed all stimulus spending?
Wait, I’m sorry. All [oversight over] stimulus spending.
zombie rotten mcdonald said,
July 17, 2009 at 16:16
“not a trace” – yeah, all those construction projects built into the stimulus package will disappear as soon as …
Let’s be fair -maybe he was referring to the (almost) half of the stim that was tax cuts.
And when we got there, there were no hawt space babes in mini-skirts and go-go boots waiting.
Sure there were! They were just hiding from your mortals.
Billions for ill planned wars of invasion and pointless manned missions to the Moon, not one cent for health care or infrastructure! They just love that government spending as long as it doesn’t actually do anything to make peoples lives better. Because that sort of thing won’t give Charles a boner, which is the very definition of Classical Fascism.
Bullshit space exploration has no value. Bullshit bullshit bullshit. It’s just that it’s something of a luxury item and we can’t afford those. Don’t shit on space exploration, it makes you look a right cunt.
Newsflash, Charlie: it is a truck!
Actually, it’s a series of tubes.
I thought neocons and repigs said gov’t can’t do anything right. So let some Free Market genius spend the cash.
The repig pundits and wingnut welfare writers are just using a spinning wheel to pick topics right now. They are biding their time until they can start blaming the economy on Obama.
I thought neocons and repigs said gov’t can’t do anything right.
True, but for some reason the military isn’t the government. I think they consider NASA military, when it’s convenient to, like somebody said up there.
Or else they just really hate the troops and I have to ask, with a single tear welling in my eye, Why?
Sure there were!
WTF?!? What the hell are we doing on this sad rock then. Space babes, here we come(pun non-intended, if you can believe that)!!1953!!!one
So what, you say?
I didn’t say anything.
Don’t we have problems here on Earth?
I didn’t say that. YOU said that.
Oh, please.
Don’t “Oh, please” me, asshole.
To clarify: Krauthammer advocates spending vast sums of public money to go to the moon as a matter of principle in the service of an abstraction (“the wonder and glory of it”), but not as a matter of principle in the service of the concrete reality of, e.g., improving people’s health, so as to lift the US up from its middling position on the life expectancy list.
They really are–is “amoral monsters” too harsh? It is. Rather, they’re unredeemable assholes. The only time they acknowledge principle is to violate it in the service of their teenage-boy fantasies.
Krauthammer plagiarizing Jebus! Maybe he’s been converted like Bork and Kudlow.
Yeah, remember how Bush, when he wasn’t presiding over unemployment’s reaching 8%, opposed all stimulus spending?
Hrmm, I don’t remember supporting Bush’s stimulus either, oh that’s right, because I thought it was stupid then, just as I think Obama’s stimulus is now.
If Democrats came out tomorrow and supported eating babies, would you be onboard with that, too, or is disagreeing with your party too much individual thought for you to handle?
Alternate shorter Jerrycudgel:
Goodnight, Moon.
Goodnight, neunundneunzig Luftballoons.
I think Obama’s stimulus is now
So you ascribe to Herbert Hoover’s do-nothing attitude?
Nice! Glad to see your pharmacy business is bulletproof.
I can’t recall the name and for the life of me haven’t been able to find it listed among their works, but it was a real-life exploration of how science fiction could become science fact, with space elevators and dragging asteroids back to a Lagrane point to mine resources and how we could fling ores back from Mars and the moon.
Cripes, I think I know the one you’re talking about but I can’t recall the name either. Something like “The Road Forward” or “Looking Forward” or something like that.
If a robust space program is enough to get those over-compensating war-boners to back off of invading the shit out of random countries, then a robust space program is what I’m all for.
Ay-men, Bubba.
Torture is a noble effort because Obama favors choice!!!
Cripes, I think I know the one you’re talking about but I can’t recall the name either. Something like “The Road Forward” or “Looking Forward” or something like that.
IIRC, “A Step Farther Out.”.
IIRC, “A Step Farther Out.”.
That’s the one. Altho Pournelle has sole authorship, my recollection was a lot of the trips he made to places like Livermore and Lamont Doherty were with Niven.
The “Space Program” is a euphemism for the militarization of near-Earth space. Check out the US Space Command.
It is my profoundest wish that there would be an interstellar pest control organization which has parked an exterminator vehicle out beyond the Van Allen Belt, waiting to blow up the first human foray away from Earth, unless we have cleaned up Earth first.
So what, you say?
YOU HAVE NO CHANCE TO SURVIVE MAKE YOUR TIME .
HA HA HA HA ….
I have to disagree with Buzz Aldrin. I think we need to establish a permanent presence on the moon before sending a manned expedition to Mars. A moon base could serve as a platform for launching the Mars craft. Plus, the act of going back to the moon would serve as a dress rehearsal for a Mars mission. Interestingly, in a recent issue of Scientific American, there is an article by one of the astronauts who flew on Apollo 17, the last to go to the moon. He said that if the Apollo program had not been cut, we would have already had manned missions to Mars. So, sadly, we are making up for a lot of lost time.
There’s Earth, and there’s a space station. There isn’t a need to re-engineer for a third place.
you know, I bet with just a little bit of encouragement and a drink or two, Bubba could be enticed to animate that propeller…
Especially considering that for the foreseeable future everything that would take off from the Moon would have to take off from the Earth first. How does that make sense?
RB, it’s too expensive to always climb out of Earth’s gravity and ISS is too damn fragile for more than 6 people.
With the Moon, we get a stable step ladder to the Solar System.
Because it will never get cheaper until we actually get back to the Moon.
But everything always has to climb out of Earth’s gravity anyway. The way station needn’t be anything out of orbit. Why make the stuff land again?
The ISS may or may not be a help, but I don’t think the moon is either.
As Woody said @18:05.
That stupid bastard (CK) doesn’t realize that the shuttle was built for exactly one reason: to lift and service KH-14 photoreconnaissance satellites and related paraphernalia. Any ensuing civilian uses were purely icing on the cake, and cover for classified work.
With the Moon, we get a stable step ladder to the Solar System.
I think the idea is that you can bulk lift various modules and crap, store them on the moon until you’re ready, assemble and go. But here’s the question I think RB asked – why bother with the moon?
Once you’re in orbit, you’re stable. Going to the moon is actually a step down the ladder, and provides only one advantage – a small gravity well. But if we’re at the point where having a definable up/down axis is a significant advantage in space craft assembly, we probably shouldn’t be sending manned missions to Mars.
Check, one other possible advantage is that the near side serves as a good place for storing shit, as it won’t get murdalized by mini-meteors. Still, moon base doesn’t seem worth the effort until the mini-skirted space babes come out of hiding.
The idea RB is to make it so everything doesn’t have to leave Earth. It leaves the Moon instead. The Moon is life less not devoid of resources. It may even have it’s own water supply.
For our lifetimes, yes everything will have to be shipped up to the moon. The same will be not true of our great-grandchildren. They’ll be debating whether to snag a comet for the fresh water or an Asteroid for Nickel.
Once you’re in orbit, you’re stable.
Uhmm, … no.
@ Mars enthusiasts: I can haz kozmik rayz?
Humans get sick in free fall.
The Moon is life less not devoid of resources.
But they are fuck hell hard to extract. Ever try smelting in an oxygen-free environment?
I can think of only two potential resources that a permanent lunar colony could exploit.
1. Chips/semi-conductors. Silicon is available in regolith – solar power is available in massive quantities half the time – reduced gravity and vacuum atmosphere actual aid in the processing.
2. Low gravity pr0n. ‘cuz everything would be slightly floaty, but you could still brace yourself well enough to thrust okay.
as in loss of bone mass.
Not to mention the radiation…
Uhmm, … no.
Perhaps your definition of orbit is different than mine.
I will be more enthusiastic about the space babes in miniskirts if they are in zero gravity.
Ever try smelting in an oxygen-free environment?
Can’t say that I have but I imagine a contained-smelter but with a big oxygen tank next it might be feasible.
Hell, dropping raw ore is a possibility.
…only two potential resources…
Check. Number three is tourism. Especially if the space-babes stop being so damned shy.
But other than those three (and the micro-meteor thing), I don’t see any why anything done on the moon couldn’t be done on a space station.
Applications on Earth of technology needed for space flight have produced thousands of “spinoffs” that contribute to improving national security, the economy, productivity and lifestyle. It is almost impossible to find an area of everyday life that has not been improved by these spinoffs. Collectively, these secondary applications represent a substantial return on the national investment in aerospace research.
http://www.thespaceplace.com/nasa/spinoffs.html
Well, Dk what is your definition of “in Orbit”?
If it is lower that 23,000 miles you’re going to need a constant influx of fuel to maintain it.
I am sure the space babes will be appreciative that the brutes ogling them will be 83% less saggy.
Those are all maybes. We’ve sent things to Mars before, and no way-station on the moon has been necessary.
Well, Dk what is your definition of “in Orbit”?
A stable and predictable path.
Geez, we throw mirrors for communcations signals up there and they stay spinning for decades without delta vee. Plus we’re talking about some sort of location that would be regularly receiving new spaceship parts and whatnot.
Can’t say that I have but I imagine a contained-smelter but with a big oxygen tank next it might be feasible.
And the advantage of building this on the moon as opposed to just in the middle of space is?
We’ve sent things to Mars before,
We also had no intention of bringing them back alive either.
Smelt night!
To Earth? From Mars?
And the advantage of building this on the moon as opposed to just in the middle of space is
Radiation shielding is plentiful, meteorites can’t blow hole in the moon, A small amount of gravity makes things a lot easier, A truck can carry the minerala to the smelter, It has ~3,793,000,000 square kilometer of usable space.
Lots of reasons.
Radiation shielding is plentiful, meteorites can’t blow hole in the moon, A small amount of gravity makes things a lot easier, A truck can carry the minerala to the smelter, It has ~3,793,000,000 square kilometer of usable space.
Radiation shielding – if we haven’t figured out a solution to this, then we ain’t packing folks into a can to send to Mars. That’s what a three-year minimum round trip?
Micro-meteors – yup. I’d say this is the number one advantage.
Small amount of gravity – I’m not sure how this helps. Sure it’s required for phase-separation in classic bath smelting – but at g/6, you’re going to get a lot of entrained slag. You’d probably do get better results with some sort of centrifugal separation approach – which would be easier not on the moon.
Lunar trucking only helps with materials that are already on the moon. The “big advantage” of the moon is it’s shallow well – the cost of lifting from the moon to orbit is small.
3,793,000,000 square kilometers is helluva lot less than “close enough to Earth to follow it around the sun, but not so close as to fall in”.
Also, (I believe) we’re now talking about asteroid mining. I’m not convinced that this is necessarily going to be less resource intensive than lifting finished products out of Terra’s deep well. Distances and delta vees to known asteroids are not small. Perhaps it could work, the asteroid itself could provide for propellant. It just seems to me that it would be easier to make a free-floating smelter, stuck some engines on it, and smelt your asteroids in situ.
Krauthammer fixed:
“Poverty and disease and social ills will always be with us…God willing“
???
But they can blow a hole in your stuff…
An argument for orbit.
Assume truck. Assume minerals. Assume smelter.
Sentimentally I want flights to and fro the moon all the time. I’d listen to the radio traffic. And I guess if we assume people get a handle on regular space travel some kind of facility on the moon is going to be inevitable anyway. I just don’t think it’s necessary for sending people to Mars.
Dk a free-falling platform will always be dependent on external support.
The best reason of all to build up the Moon, is survival of the species.
A back up hard-drive, off-site storage; whatever you want to call it, until we have it, human beings are just ‘walking fossils’.
Sorry for all the pooh-pooh ing. I’m also pro-moon base. Even if it is just for the low-g pr0n. I’m just trying to say that going to the moon is a trivial bit of whatever. Getting off the planet is the big deal.
Any moon base is going to have all the same requirements as a space station – there’s no advantage to building on the fixed rock. Well other than that micro-meteor thing. Fucking micro-meteors, they gotta be the classic margherita pizza of liberal fascism.
Dk a free-falling platform will always be dependent on external support.
Oh great. I’m back to pooh-poohing again. Seriously, what is it about the moon that makes it easier to colonize? Here’s an exercise – imagine a fully self-sufficient moon base. Picture it in your mind, with whatever bits it requires to keep the colonists alive and content.
Now subtract the moon.
Apparently, no one here has heard of a sky hook.
Skyhook
Effectively, it’s low energy transfer system to get materiel and craft up to space (altho Livermore is working on an actual gun to shoot small craft up, too, which holds some promise lately).
You can build a bigger space platform at the L7 point, which would be both stable and out of earth’s gravity well. Indeed, you can build a honkin’ big factory to manufacture shit you can’t build on earth.
RB, empty space is full of radiation. Lots of it. Dangerous stuff that takes stuff like lead or gold to stop. All of the Rock and Regolith (that is what the soil on the Moon is called.) make excellent shielding material. You inflate a structure, encase it cement (made from Regolith) and bury it further.
All that Regolith means the station gets a hole in it but is not destroyed. Remember you’re living in concrete not tin foil.
I’m not in expert in smelting but isn’t it necessary for the minerals to ‘settle out’ or ‘rise to the top’? That isn’t possible in free-fall.
RB, we know there are all kinds of mineral resources on the moon. That isn’t an assumption. The ‘Truck’ has been around for decades. Again not an assumption. Smelters have been around for thousands of years. I’m surprised you’ve never heard of them.
You know RB, your questions and points of contention hint that you really don’t understand the problems.
Apparently, no one here has heard of a sky hook.
From Earth?!? Wow.
Personally, I’m against the nanotubule elevator. Failure mode is shockingly catastrophic – and the numbers don’t show much of a safety margin. I’m mor in favor of a GIANT GUN. Some electric catapult that runs the entire length of the Sahara desert, or longer if necessary. You’d still need rockets for personnel – well personnel other than Kraut and other war-boners. They’re so manly, they’d laugh at the three minutes of 50 g acceleration.
I like the space elevator as a concept, but there isn’t one and we can already get things to Mars.
Subtract the moon and you have a tin can that has to have and continues to need everything manufactured elsewhere and shipped to it.
Some electric catapult that runs the entire length of the Sahara desert
Covered in the aforementioned Pournelle book 😀
I don’t think you understand that “We just make stuff out of this’n’that on the moon” is still not a requirement for getting things to Mars.
I love you people!
The Hammer of the Krauts will drive
our ships to new landsus to the moon!Turning the “magnificent bird” that is the Space Shuttle “into a truck”?
Well, it was Reagan’s “magnificent bird” until TEH CLENIS done debased it.
While I agree that CK’s primary motivation (besides Obamabashing) is turning the moon into a nucular missile platform, I also think he’s itching to get some sort of exoskeleton that would allow him to perform all sorts of terpsichorean maneuvers on the lunar surface. After all, gravity has been unkind to chuckles.
Go here and download a surprisingly fun book that envisions a ramp for launching moons made of brick into orbit.
Blockquoting that link was very important.
Dk, how many free-fall space stations do you think we would need to “exploit the Solar System”?
You all should have a better grasp of wingnuttery by now. C.K. What is not really advocating spending taxpayer dollars to go to the moon. He’s just saying Obama is a lousy president because he’s not doing it. If Obama were to start spending taxpayer money to go to the moon he would of course be all over Obama for spending taxpayer money so foolishly. You see, the “perfect” president is the one who proclaims that we will do something big, like go to the moon and mars or leave no child behind while at the same time not spending any taxpayer money to accomplish that. That’s good Presidentin’!! It doesn’t matter if nothing actually gets accomplished. Also it only works if you are Republican.
After all, gravity has been unkind to chuckles.
We could drop him to the bottom of the ocean in a NEWTsuit. He can stand up to his heart’s content…until he realizes we pulled up the sea hook.
Blockquoting provides gravitas.
RB, I agree we don’t need a moon installation to get anything to Mars. I think if we want to get Humans there and back alive we improve their chances tremendously by launching the ship to Mars from our base on the Moon rather than sending it piecemeal spread out over 5 years. Which is the plan now.
But I also say, Fuck Mars! It’s a waste of time.
Covered in the aforementioned Pournelle book
Cool. I should check it out. It’s not the floating ribbon spinning at thousands of metres per second is it? That’s just crazy nuts.
Dk, how many free-fall space stations do you think we would need to “exploit the Solar System”?
I don’t know what you mean. I’d say as many as you want, it’s scalable – OR perhaps the answer is “just the one”. Where “one” has a different meaning in space (i.e. thousands of modules that all have some sort of standardized interconnection interface). It’s space. You can leave shit anywhere you want – it’s not like some hobo’s going to squat.
Anybody here read Zubrin’s book?
I think we must invade Mars because Tars Tarkas is stockpiling weapons of mass destruction.
I just got an image of a sword large enough to bisect the North American continent.
Lots of science and technology is a waste of time. Being a big commie I can justify it as a subsidy to eggheads – that and a moonbase too.
I think we must invade Mars because Tars Tarkas is stockpiling weapons of mass destruction.
We must invade Mars to stop the Mecha Monkeys from invading Earth!
He people if we colonize Mars it’s gonna be nothing but problems. Not only will we have to deal with rioters we’re also going to have to figure out what to do about PsyCorp. Do we really want to go down that path?
I just got an image of a sword large enough to bisect the North American continent.
That is HOT!
Still a bunch of fragile tin cans Dk.
😉
That is HOT!
Hey, baby, ever make it with a green dude?
Still a bunch of fragile tin cans Dk.
Yup. That’s the problem with space – everything’s gotta be wrapped in fragile shells of metal or several kilometers of gas. Still not that different from a moon base. Even the near side gets a pretty good pelting – and you l00se out on more than half your solar. Plus, you can’t move the whole works when Govenor LePetomaine wants to run a railroad through and sends all them assorted banditos.
Aw shit, forgot about the fucking banditos.
We must invade Mars to stop the Mecha Monkeys from invading Earth!
Ricky Ricotta, I served with Jimmy Sparks: I knew Jimmy Sparks; Jimmy Sparks was a friend of mine. Ricky Ricotta, you’re no Jimmy Sparks.
Aw shit, forgot about the fucking banditos.
They are some pretty dangerous customers.
Hey, baby, ever make it with a green dude?
Well, there was that picnic with the wonky potato salad…
While I don’t think the current project is the right way to do it, it is the cheap way.
Putting a base on the moon is objectively easier than mars. You’re closer, so if things go wrong, it will cost less and be quicker to fix. We can get the kinks out of having homes in a high cosmic radiation and dusty environment before we have a twenty-to-forty minute ping times.
That’s why we should do the moon first, because it’s easier.
Yes, eventually people on Mars can self-sustain more easily, as opposed to people on the moon. But if we can self-sustain on the moon, Mars is cake.
I’m willing to sacrifice my life to be a cog in that machine.
I’m not getting behind a moon base until we have rocket packs and jet cars.
Priorities, people.
Besides, didn’t the moon get blown out of orbit back in ’99?
And the advantage of building this on the moon as opposed to just in the middle of space is
According to this documentary, no protective gear is needed on the moon.
Maybe some cocoa butter…
Actually, if I was Grand Poobah of Space Exploramatories – I’d skip the moon and Mars. Step one would be more thorough investigation of Mercury. If it does indeed have PEL’s near to water ice then that’s the place to be. Under”ground” base located at the poles. Solar power is almost an order of magnitude more available, although a stable shut-down approach for flares would be required. It’d be an awesome solar observatory. Communications with Earth would be intermittent and strained – but that’s true for Mars as well. Plus Mercury was the brainy one of the Sailor scouts.
Man, I’d map as completely as possible non-planetary solar system objects and their trajectories first. Then satellites and rovers all over the damn place.
She has water powers, therefore there’s water on Mercury. Simple.
Then they come together to form a giant robot.
A giant robot with a sword large enough to bisect the North American continent.
“Water ice?”
“No, frozen!”
(sorry – painfully obscure in-joke; be a miracle if anyone here got it. Still, I must trot it out on the occasion of any mention of “water ice”, if only for personal amusement.)
The bisectual girl robots I’m okay with, but I strongly condemn male bisectual robots. At least in public.
If the bisectual robots are in zero G and there are lots of cameras the government wont need to fund the space program after the initial Voltronification.
FUCK: THE SPACE PROGRAM
Any human being who tried to live permanently on another planet would go insane/suicidal/homicidal in a matter of months. Therefore we can only send people who are already nuts.
I think I got your joke, King Kot!
IF WE DON’T FIND WATER ON MARS, HOW WILL WE BE ABLE TO TORTURE THE ALIENS? WAKE UP SHEEPLE !!!
I think I got your joke, King Kot!
Yes, but the question is do you know the context? ‘Cause it’d be the aforementioned happy miracle if you did.
And we don’t want to go to Mars for water – we want to go there for the beer!
Wow, Mars has a PENIS worm, which proves that liberalism must be an universal constant or something.
ALL THESE JOKES ARE YOURS EXCEPT PENIS. ATTEMPT NO LANDINGS THERE
After all, gravity has been unkind to chuckles.
Dimly I recalls one of Arthur Clark’s juvenile novels where the paraplegics are the L33T of space exploration because they has their useless legs amputated and they flies around the space station with so much more maneuverability than their leg-bearing ilk. Perhaps CK read the same book.
Some electric catapult that runs the entire length of the Sahara desert
If the Pournelle book involves mass drivers than I says BULLSHIT BULLSHIT BULLSHIT.
Mass drivers are a neat idea that cause great excitement among each new generation of newbies that read about them and each new generation never wonders why previous generations did not succeed in scaling them up.
Ever try smelting in an oxygen-free environment?
I think you will find that smelting by definition requires a reducing rather than an oxidising environment.
OT, but Spanish beer is really shite, but in a large enough dose it does the job.
What did you try–Mahou, Cruzcampo, San Miguel, something else?
smelting by definition requires a reducing rather than an oxidising environment.
Yes and no. Every form of conventional smelting uses oxygen and some fuel (be it sulphide ore or coked coal) and oxygen. The reducing atmosphere for, say iron and steelmaking, is produced by the CO/CO2 ratio.
Space smelting – I have no idea how this would work. Perhaps electric heating to melt, and then the use of vacuum atmosphere to coax oxygen out of the system. Or maybe it’d be some sort of electro-chemical approach, not withstanding the value of water in space. I really dunno.
Perhaps the hawt space babes could help explain.
So limiting elements are (a) lack of mature vacuum-smelting technology and
(b) lack of iron oxides. Though we are free to postulate iron-rich asteroids being shoved out of orbit with ion drives (or vice versa) until they land on the moon close to our smelter, but not too close.
Unfortunately we are too busy postulating hawt space babes, as the kids these days are apparently saying.
Unfortunately we are too busy postulating hawt space babes
Gotta keep your priorities straight.
RB is deep in the gravitas well.
We’ll just get in trouble with the fucking Time Lords or someone.
lack of mature vacuum-smelting technology
This was all spelled out years ago in the Whole Earth special on space colonies, by John Holt if memory serves, though my copy is on the other side of the world at the moment, not that this is any barrier to drunken argumentation.
Cruel.
Barrage of fish puns in 3…2…1…
Don’t get me started on cigarette companies and their abuses of puffer fish.
Fish puns totally blow.
…fish.
RB is deep in the gravitas well.
I am surprised that RB has not yet been taken hostage by Somalian Gravitas Pirates.
You speak the trout.
Oh Cod , herring we go again
Elvers have left the building.
Yeah, I personally think establishing a permanent presence in orbit is more important than establishing a permanent presence on the moon (plus doing the former first would make the latter far easier). We need to build a frikken space elevator.
Resultados 1 – 5 de un total de 5 en el dominio http://www.sadlyno.com que contienen “salmon chanted evening”. (0,39 segundos)
Fish punsters: piscine in the gene pool.
“piscine in the gene pool.”
Walleye really don’t think you need to get all huffy about it. A damsel like you should be able to handle a grouper like this.
OT, but Spanish beer is really shite, but in a large enough dose it does the job.
But what about the morcilla?
Gadzooks, man, what about the morcilla?
While I agree that CK’s primary motivation (besides Obamabashing) is turning the moon into a nucular missile platform,
See, yet more evidence that CK is not the sharpest sandwich at the pic-a-nic.
Why bother with nukes?
Ya gotta get them up there first, and mistakes would be messy.
And uranium is not an especially common element in the first place.
Just dig a 50 mile tunnel that points toward earth, set yourself up some magnets and wrap some rocks(some assembly may be required) in steel, and start tossing.
At 20,000 mph. Yay, vacuum!
Much cleaner than anything you can do with trans-uranics, and you get the flash and everything.
That’s actually one of the reasons I’m kind of agin’ the whole concept of a moon base.
The management.
Alas, OneMan, I already roe having said something so hoki. I shad be back.
Fixed.
Do you suppose you’d need a tank for fish, in zero gravity?
What, you have no ray gun handy and they clog up the space toilet?
“I shad be back.”
Iris?
Cod, I can’t believe you’d flounder around in this thread that way. I think there’s blenny of blame to go around.
…fucking Time Lords
Dibs on Romana.
I think it would actually be a swell idea to invest in a space elevator. If it turns out to be feasible (early studies say yes, but it may not be in the long run), it will dramatically reduce the cost of access to space for both manned and unmanned missions. In fact it could really open space up to private investment and bring really rich economic rewards. This is space not just for national prestige or for feel-good flag-and-boots stunts, but as an investment in our future. The price of a starter space elevator would be about $10 billion, and it would reduce the cost of space access from about $10,000/lb to perhaps about $100/lb. Building the elevator itself would be a good economic stimulus, and it could open up enormous economic benefits down the road as companies and governments find their cost to access space dramatically reduced. Of course all this is nothing until we have the materials to build the elevator with, so I also support modest research investment in materials science to figure out how to make the damn thing. Am I a wingnut?
Talk about your out-of-order priorities…Astonishing.
Any space program that’s launched from Earth is going to have to work around or find a way to mitigate a serious & steadily worsening problem: pollution.
Devo was right!!!
Goddam t00bz gotz no video for “Space Junk”, except for the “E-Z listening” version.
oh, yes. we will return to the moon — and soon.
Bush started the push when He3 was discovered there. Helium 3 will make it possible to develop nuclear fusion. the earth doesn’t have HE3. But it has been building up on the moon for eons.
just the thing the oil companies are searching for: an expensive form of energy.
wind power, solar power, thermal power are all too cheap to make huge profits. they can be created in your home and sold back to the power company. nuclear fusion will only be produced in a power plant and sold to the customer.
thar’s money on that thar moon!
1. The total NASA budget is about $18 billion (~0.6% of the total US budget) of which 1/6 to 1/4 goes to the Constellation program which is the main program setup to return to the moon. Some of NASA’s budget goes to climate research, which has been one of the major buttresses in getting acceptance for the concept of global climate change.
2. There are at least two ways developed to turn regolith into oxygen for breathing and liquid propellant. One is basically similar to molten salt electrolysis on earth — melt the regolith and hit with much energy, break bonds make oxygen. The other is hydrogen reduction of specific minerals on the moon surface. This is called in situ resource utilization (isru) and is one of the major initial research areas of the program. I do not where the energy would come from, although I assume there are people working on this
3. The LRO/LCROSS (lunar reconnaissance orbiter/lunar crater observation sensing system) mission that went up last month is beginning it’s mission — just having sent back it’s first pictures last week. LCROSS is designed to determine if there is water in permanently shadowed craters at the South (I believe) pole. This should give results in October (IIRC)
4. The effort is already somewhat international, working with some closeness to Canada, Germany, Japan and possibly South Korea
5. IMO, robots in space work about as well as robots in military service. Good for certain initial jobs, but not that useful for many of the final needs.
6. I have spent more or less all my time this sumer working at a NASA facility on some of these issues, so a) I do know something about this and b) may be biased toward a return to the moon, but I don’t see that as being involved in what I wrote above.
7. I do not what methods of getting to Mars were considered in addition to the moon base. From what I have read (in the newspapers, press releases etc., not in any secret documents [which they don’t let me have anyway]), Obama was more reconsidering the current rocket system versus other systems that were initially not selected, as the current rocket system (of getting to the moon) has been overbudget. Also, Obama is likely to financially prioritize terrestrial science (like the climate science) over the space science, but is still likely to fund space science sufficiently to continue the Constellation program. In the end much of NASA funding goes to jobs too (over half a million in 2004).
8. NASA funding payback is typically about 5-7:1, much better than military payback (1.7:1)
I have no tolerance for Krauthammer; but I completely fail to understand the logic of “progressives” who oppose space exploration and colonization as an occasion for the furthering of the human race and the expansion of human knowledge. (Not to mention a marvelous chance for genuine international cooperation.)
The “liberal” anti-space bastards like Amitai Etzioni collaborated with the Nixons and Proxmires of the world to discard four decades of opportunities for my generation; now some of them are determined to deny it to my daughter’s generation as well.
I think people focus too much on the wrong end of the space elevator problem.
The real question to me is: where the fuck are you going to PUT it? It would have to be fairly equatorial to be useful, and there’s really not a whole lot of landmass at the equator. But even if it doesn’t, there’s still the issue of where you’re going to build a mile-diameter structure that is in no particular danger of earthquakes or hurricanes/gusty weather in general, and has a land composure that could support the several million-ton structure.
Basically, I think you’re only real hope is somewhere in Africa, and we all know THAT’S not going to happen. If noting else, this thing will take decades to build, so in addition to strict atmospheric and geographic requirements, the geo-political stability required to oversee the structure’s construction and administration even FURTHER limit the potential zones.
But on the other hand, Star Trek is awesome…
Skyhooks! (I’ve been waiting for that chance for ages).
And here’s another one I’ve been waiting for for ages, and I can’t be bothered waiting any more: Smut. This band provided the soundtrack for my teen years, which probably answers a great many questions as to why I am like I am.
Back on topic:
Sirius Lunacy said,
You see, the “perfect” president is the one who proclaims that we will do something big, like go to the moon and mars or leave no child behind while at the same time not spending any taxpayer money to accomplish that. That’s good Presidentin’!!
Sums up Kraphammer pretty well – tain’t the doin’ of the thing, it’s the tellin’ us so we can start wanking about it! (See Smut above).
I admit I’ve always been a big space groupie, and have been extremely disappointed that we haven’t been carvorting about in space for decades (although not for the reasons of mini-skirted lunar babes as mentioned by some). Space is groovy, it’s exciting, and it produces boggins of useful technological spinoffs.
And space travel provides the option for a Kornbluthian solution – let’s start with Kraphammer.
The real question to me is: where the fuck are you going to PUT it?
That’s certainly been considered, and the issue of the political and geographical problems with the equator are very much in the minds of the people advocating the space elevator.
The good news is, there’s no reason you have to put the space elevator on land at all. Mounting it to a sea-based platform has multiple advantages: you don’t need another government’s permission, you don’t have unstable regions around you, and it potentially makes the elevator mobile, which is useful if you need to avoid some floating space debris or something.
These kinds of things are discussed in the Edwards report, which you must, must read if you have any interest at all in the space elevator. It also discusses the best construction material (hint: it’s carbon nanotubes).
Edwards report
OT, but Spanish beer is really shite, but in a large enough dose it does the job.
Gadzooks, man, what about the morcilla?
On account of my bewilderment by Spanish cuisine I intend to eat only in McDonalds.
I think we should continue to be spacefaring nation and we should have a fleet of space vehicles. Letting the shuttle program die is a bad move and we should have not abandoned this program.
There’s talk of letting the space station die in 2015. Oh c’mon – that thing was damn expensive to build. It’s worth keeping it going.
Wait a minnit! I thought conservatives were standing athwart history crying “stop!” No fair changing mottos!
Dude.
I don’t know if anyone has squared the circle this way–’cause,, shit, that’s a lot of comments–but….wait for it–Poor People As Fuel!
C’mon, we can reach lightspeed by rendering down hate objects into combustible briquettes.
Where’s MY wingnut welfare check?
I don’t know if anyone has squared the circle this way.
Yes, butin another thread.
but hey, there’s not as much wingnut welfare to go around anymore. Get in line behind Doughbob.
Krauthammer is correct.
When it comes to the moon, Obama is not in Kennedy’s league let alone Guy Whitey Corngood’s:
I see that the Mr. Show sketch I posted here has already been posted in the thread above.
Yeah, I bring nothing to the table.
I, for one, am all for vastly increasing funding for NASA. I would love to see humans land on the moon once again and also Mars before my life ends. Wouldn’t conservatives be the ones moaning about the cost of such a public venture? Shouldn’t space be conquered by the magical private sector fairies?
If the money was there, we could be on the moon in five years and be there a hell of a lot more safely than in the 60s.
This really pisses me off. On the one hand, conservatives are going out of their way to bemoan government spending. Then on the other hand, they complain that we aren’t spending money on flying to the moon!
Fucker! Maybe if your boy king hadn’t flushed the economy down the toilet, started so many wars, and EATED the budget surplus left by Clinton, we might have some extra change to give to NASA so they can do some cool ass stuff again.