I hope that @BretBaier asks something along these lines:
So, Governor, if you want to talk space policy, let’s talk space policy. How about answering some serious questions, instead of pretending that it’s an unserious subject, of no value except to mock your opponent?
In 2008, you said that you supported President Bush’s Vision for Space Exploration, a fundamental part of which was a manned lunar base. Now you criticize Newt Gingrich for the same thing, and imply that it is a frivolity. What happened in the interim to make you change your opinion?
How much do you think that a “lunar colony” would cost? How do you think that Speaker Gingrich would propose to bring one about? Do you think that he would agree with your characterization of his plans? If you don’t know the answers to these questions, on what basis are you criticizing him?
If we are not going to settle the moon and other locations in the solar system, what in your mind is the purpose of having a human spaceflight program? Why are we doing it?
In 2009, when President Obama came out with a new space policy that emphasized competitive commercial services for crew delivery to orbit, and the development of new technologies that would make human spaceflight beyond earth orbit much more affordable, Newt Gingrich was one of the few Republicans to come out in support of it (Bob Walker and Dana Rohrabacher were others). Do you agree with Speaker Gingrich that this is a more promising and cost-effective direction for the program, or do you support the Congress in its demand that NASA spend billions on a giant rocket that won’t fly for many years, and for which no payloads are defined or funded? Or do you have some other proposal?
What would a Romney space policy look like? Given that you’ve elevated the topic in the campaign, I think that those of us to whom space is important deserve to know.
And Bret, if you’re looking for a “gotcha,” probably the second one works best.
Not to nitpick, but the VSE only called for a extended return to the Moon on the way to Mars. The size of the return was left open and a fairly small lunar base focused on ISRU research would have satisfied it. In short it was not quite up to the level of a lunar colony, so it would be a easy one for him to distinguish between if he was up on space policy.
“If we are not going to settle the moon and other locations in the solar system, what in your mind is the purpose of having a human spaceflight program? Why are we doing it?”
Those are the best two questions of all, if you ask me…and the two our government can’t answer honestly.
you said that you supported President Bush’s Vision for Space Exploration, a fundamental part of which was a manned lunar base.
You’re misremembering the Bush Vision.
What Bush called for was not a manned lunar base but “extended human missions to the moon as early as 2015, with the goal of living and working there for increasingly extended periods of time.” Also described as an “extended human presence on the moon.”
“Extended” compared to what? The only obvious point of comparison is Project Apollo. The longest Apollo missions stayed on the Moon for about three days, so any stay of four days or longer could be considered “extended.”
Giddy optimists assumed NASA was going to build a permanent lunar base but Bush never stated that. I believe it was Mike Griffin who first made a permanent base an explicit goal, but an Administrator’s preferences carry less weight than a Presidential statement.
Edward,
The exact words from his speech.
http://history.nasa.gov/Bush%20SEP.htm
[[[Returning to the moon is an important step for our space program. Establishing an extended human presence on the moon could vastly reduce the costs of further space exploration, making possible ever more ambitious missions. Lifting heavy spacecraft and fuel out of the Earth’s gravity is expensive. Spacecraft assembled and provisioned on the moon could escape its far lower gravity using far less energy, and thus, far less cost. Also, the moon is home to abundant resources. Its soil contains raw materials that might be harvested and processed into rocket fuel or breathable air. We can use our time on the moon to develop and test new approaches and technologies and systems that will allow us to function in other, more challenging environments. The moon is a logical step toward further progress and achievement. ]]]
This implies more then just staying for a couple days at a time, but its still not a lunar colony, just a base.
Again, giddy optimism. Bush used political weasel words like “could” and “might,” but you heard “will” and “shall” because that’s what you wanted to believe.
The Jedi Mind Trick can have a powerful effect on unwary voters.
Edward,
I am glad you fully agree with me that Gov. Romney’s support of VSE is not the same as Newt Gingrich’s call for a lunar colony as a space goal.
I haven’t watched any of the debates, but I’d be mighty surprised if space policy came up at all.
ahem. Newt Gingrich is excellent on space policy. As I may have mentioned before.
I learned what little I may understand about space policy and what might constitute desirable space policy here at the illustrious Transterrestrial musings blog.
So I was interested, when watching newt’s speeches during the past year to see it I could support his candidacy, to realize that Newt’s understanding is along the same lines of what I have read here.
I am happy to say that, as of today, 17 of Newt’s speeches have links at this link: http://newtgingrich360.com/profiles/blogs/2012-victory-or-death-newt-s-speeches-links-to-17-speeches
The speech “STRONG AMERICA NOW” is very science, engineering and manufacturing-oriented. “2012: VICTORY OR DEATH” has a lot about American history, including about George Washington and his small army of Americans crossing the Delaware and how their password that night was “victory or death,” and why.
This election is the opportunity of a lifetime IMHO. I am tired of Mr. Potter running this country as if we are Pottersville.
I want to return to the limitations of the Constitution for the federal government, make the judges understand that they are part of one of the CO-EQUAL branches of government, and are not the boss of us, and return to low Tax RATES and high Tax REVENUEs, a la Reagan.
This is possible. This is what the American people can do.
If you care about space policy, manufacturing, education, engineering, why not find out for yourself.