DonRoberto's Comments (1113)

“I agree one hundred percent that the exploration of Mars, and exploration in general, can be conducted by unmanned robotic spacecraft and landers.

But there is a big difference between, say, Columbus' voyages and those of, say, Captain Cook. Cook was an explorer; his journeys were primarily to further knowledge, much as our robotic missions do. But Columbus set forth not to explore, but to exploit; we should do no less with Mars and the asteroids.

You are still correct in your point that manned exploration is generally way too expensive and risky, when expendable unmanned robotic craft can do the same job, and I support your argument there. But as we begin to exploit the asteroids and the planets and their moons, human beings will be an integral part of the equation. Maintaining and extending our abilities in this direction should not only be encouraged, but supported by our government as a strategic capability.”

“Agreed that the exploration of the Americas, Africa, Antarctica, and the rest was about profit of some kind of another. My point was that the investors' confidence in some kind of payoff did not extend to a certain knowledge of what kind of returns they would get --- only that it would be profitable to them.

I would submit that we are now at the point where those earlier investors once were --- where but one in a hundred is willing to invest, and no one knows what kind of return we will see, only that the endeavor will mean fundamental changes in the way we see the world.

There were those who thought the patrons of those early sea voyages might better spread their largesse on pressing issues closer to home --- the forced relocation of the Moors, control of the Jews in Catalonia, etc. Oddly enough, Europe still has pressing issues, but they (and we) profited handsomely from the exploration of the Americas, and we are all immeasurably richer for it.

When the real Space Age begins, the leading powers will be those who extend their economies beyond their current terrestrial limits. If we choose mediocrity over risk then we will deserve our second-rate status.”

“Missions of exploration have always faced the same argument. Most people might agree that the discovery and settlement of the Americas was a good investment for the Europeans, but the precise returns were unknown before the fact.

The settlement of Mars, mining of the asteroids, and exploration of the Solar System will almost certainly expand our horizons and our awareness far beyond their current limits. The fact that no one can now quantify the exact nature of the return will not lessen its impact.”

“I blame Reagan. It was under Reagan the Inertial Upper Stage was defunded, thus destroying one of the shuttle's originally-intended missions.

NASA as an organization functions at cross-purposes with itself; its space operations function needs to be separated from its scientific­/engineeri­ng function, so the two can develop freely.

We can acquire have an existing heavy launch capability using the shuttle main tank and SRBs coupled to a set of shuttle main engines. Such a vehicle would not have to be man-rated; it could be restricted to unmanned launches, and smaller, private vehicles (perhaps more than one kind)could be contracted to provide transportation of personnel to LEO.

Interplanetary spacecraft for, say, Mars missions could be much larger than previously planned if they are launched using the heavy launcher envisioned above. Arbitrarily large spacecraft could be launched as separate modules, which are then joined together in orbit. Personnel would be ferried up separately to do systems checkouts before boarding for their missions.

This can all be done with existing technology; what is required is the political (and public) will to do it, and the necessary oversight to prevent the contractors from dictating the nature of NASA's mission.”

“Why not be rational, and change Congress? They make the law. The President, as per his constitutional duty, is there to *preside*.

Much of Congress and a good number of the President's supporters have abandoned him. Blame it on unrealistic expectations, or blame it on your own bad judgement in voting for Barack Obama instead of Dennis Kucinich, Ralph Nader, or Rand Paul for that matter.

If you really want change, you can't sit back and pin all your hopes on a President, then burn him alive when you are inevitably disappointed. There are 535 other people who have more legislative power than the President does; start assigning the blame where it really lies.”

“You make a lot of assertions, but you don't provide any evidence.

You say the President has abdicated his leadership? He is still the President, he still meets with the stakeholders involved, he still pressures the individuals involved, and he still communicates with his constituents. Doesn't sound like abdication.

Which campaign promises have been "betrayals"? Please list them for us.

Lastly, what evidence have I given you that you would accuse me of caring more "about the President's political career than the welfare of the American people", as you put it?

It's easy to make accusations and engage in angry rhetoric; the trolls here do it all the time. If you're different, act differently. Talk about events, numbers, facts. Most of the folks here would rather discuss facts and ideas rather than shrill, ever-escalating hyperbole.”

“First, no matter how progressive the President may or may not be, *Congress* makes the laws in the United States; the President can either sign them, or veto them.

Second, a good President uses his persuasion to achieve the bill he accurately judges to be the best achievable; if he really cares about the object of the legislation, he knows an imperfect compromise that actually passes is superior to a perfect bill that doesn't. A good President must understand the ideal, yet remain a pragmatist, and never let the perfect become the enemy of the good.

Third, no matter how fervently you may believe in a cause, vilifying those who have common goals is counterproductive. Progressives are more vocal now than in years, and our fortunes may be on the rise, but good legislation is an incremental process; very few pieces of significant legislation were fully achieved in their initial form.

If you still think President Obama is an unreconstructed conservative or corporatist, remember the alternative if we hamstring this President now, at this time. There are still some serious choices to be made, even if your considered view is that the choice isn't quite the one you thought you were making last November. There are far worse things awaiting us if we abandon this President, no matter how frustrated you may feel at the moment.”

“Because Fox News isn't really about news --- it's about what Orwell called the Two Minute Hate.

Fox News supplies a shape and direction for the hate of white males, blue-collar workers, the lower middle class, and anyone else who feels displaced by the modern world, but doesn't otherwise know how to identify or articulate those feelings. Instead of a vague unease over their declining fortunes, they now have a narrative that reassures them that nothing is their fault; it's all the fault of those *other* people, over *there*.

The conservative establishment picks those targets, of course, in order to further their anti-reform, anti-regulation, laissez-faire capitalism agenda.”

“I like to remind them that Number Theory (i.e., the idea that the little squiggles on paper and the associated concept of "numbers" has some kind of correspondence with the real world) is also just a theory, and has never been proven.

Perhaps the evangelicals don't believe in Number Theory. That might go a long way toward explaining the economic mess the last Administration left us with.”

“Sure. Self-hatred can be racial in nature, too. Just like the white racists who try just a little too hard to make racist points --- their self-hatred shows thru.”

“Sad but true”

“LOL....

Essentially, yes ---- but smarter.”

“A good article.

This is where I think the Obama Administration has made one of their only two mistakes: they tried to take healthcare reform on as a massive, monolithic piece of legislation, when the only thing they should have attempted up front was to create a limited public option. This public option could have a sunset provision, and would not affect anybody's existing healthcare plans, but it would have established a public option as a non-threatening fact in the public's mind, and since it would initially only apply to those who had no insurance, even the insurance industry might have let it slide.

Success of a limited public option would have positioned the Obama camp for further reforms, and the momentum of having a previous win under their belt wouldn't have hurt, either. Additionally, all those receiving healthcare courtesy of the plan would have been appreciative and vocal (not to mention happy to vote for the side that brought them the plan!).

It's always easy to second guess, but I think too many inside the administration bought into the post-election hype of the punditry, that a "new age" in American politics was beginning. Instead, it's still the same old game, and any legislative progress requires the skills of a chessmaster, and not so much those of the marketing gurus and policy wonks who win the elections.”

“Typing on a pocket device of any kind will always be problematic.

What we need is a generic, Bluetooth-enabled device that wraps around the wrist, and detects either the motions or the electrical activity of the tendons that control the fingers. Users could then operate any device thru hand motions alone. Want to dial a number? Make a dial motion with your index finger. Want to punch in the numbers? It's easy to imagine ten finger positions that correspond to punching numbers on a keypad.

Typing could be done in midair, using an imagined QWERTY keyboard, or a simple gestural alphabet could be devised --- or even borrowed from Ameslan.”

“Frankly, I could care less about their sex lives, and wish them all luck with it.

But Senator Ensign, whose entire career has been based largely on his sanctimony and arrogant pose of moral superiority while judging others, should either step down or be forcibly removed by his colleagues in the Senate.

There are boundaries, and those who act to police and enforce those boundaries --- in whatever capacity --- cannot ignore the boundaries themselves.”

“We used to learn in civics class about the separation of powers in our government. One of the things we learned is that the President cannot change or enact law; that power is reserved for the legislative branch (i.e., the Congress).

As to proposals, he *did* propose real healthcare reform --- but Congress decided not to take him up on it. And people like you, instead of holding your Congressmen responsible, blame it on the President.

As to bringing the troops home, he is already doing so in Iraq, and he will let us all know the plan for Afghanistan within the week.

Again, there is only so much that can be done with executive orders, and anything done with an executive order can be undone by Congress if they don't agree with it.

I know it is easier to remember the name of one man (the President) and make him the focus of all your hopes and the object of all your frustrations. But the fact is, he is the one person who is actually doing what he should be. Bottom line, if you want real change, start leaning on your Congressmen, voting in the midterms, and donating your money or your time to the causes you espouse. The President can't do it alone.”

“Funny --- most folks don't have any trouble articulating why they are *against* Ms. Palin.”

“I am often in agreement with your columns, Arianna, but have to strongly disagree with you here. What specific actions did you think the President should have taken which he has not?

A President's power is sharply circumscribed; executive orders can only do so much, and have no power over budget allocation. Because of this, real change must be effected thru Congress. The President realizes this and is working with Congress to find an answer to the unemployment issue that is politically acceptable.

With even his ostensible supporters cutting him off at the knees every other news cycle, it's a miracle this President has accomplished what he has. He gets no political credit for his rescue of the American economy from the credit crisis of earlier this year; similarly, his focus on reform of healthcare costs, possibly the biggest single systemic threat to the US economy, is derided by many in his own party.

Bottom line, we picked this President to champion our values and causes. By all means, we should let him know our concerns, but backbiting and recrimination not only don't advance our cause, they actively assist those who got us to this pass in the first place. Let's show Congress that we support and encourage this President, and let them know that cooperation and agreement are politically advisable. We can criticize when necessary, but need to remember that President Obama is still our best hope. There is no viable alternative and may not be again for years.”

“My comment was that Apple's products are shiny, trendy, and pricey. Which of those statements do you object to?

I myself no longer own a Mac, so I have nothing to complain about.”

“LOL”

“Might as well give up, Amanda. Apple folks are, for the most part, True Believers; if they cared about facts, they wouldn't be Apple folks.”

“Did you even read the article?

Personally, I think we should pull our troops home, and enroll anyone who wants it in a jobs program that pays the employed a wage as they learn on the job. Call it a massive works program, if you want to, but there is a lot of work to be done, much of which was going to be parceled out to the states for spending. Use the remaining 50% of that money that hasn't been spent, and administer it directly from the federal government instead of thru the individual states. Divert money from the planned Afghanistan buildup to help pay for it.

Bottom line, don't spend the money unless it directly educates the unemployed or builds/repairs our essential infrastructure. As long as our people have places to work, the big banks can collapse. I won't cry for them.”

“Don't be so defensive. The commentor made a comment --- that's what the site is here for.

BTW, the article was about a leaked ad, and not about the inherent superiority , real or imagined, of Apple Computers and their shiny, trendy, and pricey products.”

“I'm sorry, but cutting checks to the states won't do the job. It's absolutely essential those who benefit are one hundred percent aware that their jobs are a direct result of action by the federal government.

Self-promotion isn't all bad. If we really think our solutions are superior to the GOP's, and if we really believe more years of GOP negligence and ineptitude will damage our nation, then we have a responsibility to not only rescue the economy, but also see that the public understands and appreciates *why* they have jobs, *why* the banks are still open, and *why* people are shopping again. A direct, federal jobs or jobs/training program would fill the bill nicely.”

“The sad part is, I guess this makes us (you, me, and the Founders) just what the Republicans keep calling us --- elitists.

I guess even a broken clock is right twice a day.....”