A horror story from Canada. And of course, it if weren’t for the fact that they can fall back on their friends south of the border, it would be even worse.
But don’t worry, when it comes to socialism, now that The One is in charge, we’ll make the Canadians look like pikers.
The New York Times has a story on yesterday’s Augustine hearing, and this jumped out at me:
In an interview, Steve Cook, manager of the Ares Project at the Marshall Space Flight Center in Huntsville, Ala., said that the cost estimate for developing the Ares I and seeing it through its first manned flight was $35 billion. Contrary to the claims of critics, he said, costs have not spiraled out of control.
Let’s ignore the tragic hilarity of that last statement, when we consider what the original cost estimate was when it was “simple, safe, soon.” He is admitting that the development cost, for Ares I alone, through first crewed flight, is thirty-five millibaracks. So how can that be reconciled with the Aerospace study which seems to imply that the total life cycle cost for fourteen flights is nineteen billion? If development alone is thirty-five, then using the assumptions I used in that other post, the LCC for fourteen flights would be over forty billion (almost three billion dollars per flight, for people who know how to divide). That compares to a cost of sixteen billion for the Delta option, or a little over a billion a flight (still ridiculous, of course). Why is it that we accept these kinds of numbers as though they’re perfectly reasonable, perfectly affordable? Particularly in light of the fact that SpaceX has gone a long way toward developing both the Dragon capsule and Falcon 9 for (at a guess) a percent or so of forty billion?
Anyway, I find that the most interesting thing about the Times reporting is that there is no mention of SpaceX or commercial alternatives. I guess they’re not worth covering. As for the “dueling power points,” my vote is “none of the above.”
[Update a while later]
OK, I was digging around to try to find what the original promises were for Ares I development costs, and I stumbled on to this. “Safe, Simple, Soon” is still up! And apparently being maintained and updated by someone (no doubt funded by ATK).
And it’s hilarious. It’s like reading Pravda in 1988.
Comrades! All is well!
The potato and beet crops were a record this year! Steel production is exceeding the Gorbachev five-year plan!
I’m going to save that page for posterity.
Anyway, does anyone have a link to an initial Ares I cost estimate, circa late 2005?
[Friday morning update]
“Rocket Man” has the numbers:
“In September 2005, NASA authorized the Ares I project to proceed with the development of a new human-rated crew launch vehicle with a 24.5-metric ton lift capability and a total budget of $14.4 billion for design, development, test, and evaluation (DDT&E), and production.” (GAO-08-51)
So the development cost estimates (including production? Of how many vehicles?) have more than doubled in less than four years. But the program is “under control.” And now the Aerospace numbers make sense. They were using the original DDT&E estimate for their trade, which (as usual) puts a NASA thumb on the scale in favor of Ares. The Aerospace study is now either worthless, or makes Ares look even worse; it does nothing to aid its cause.
Ignorance is strength. And firing an Inspector General who was exposing the corruption of your good bud is an “act of political courage.”
Ah, the audacity of audacity.
A lot of snark in comments over the Secretary of State’s mishap over at Althouse’s place. Here’s hoping for a quick recovery, anyway.
Can you spare a little rage and scorn for someone who is actually oppressing people?
The Iranians just had an election stolen from them by their government. Remember how angry you were when you pretended the election was stolen in 2000? Why, you whined about it for years and years. Some of you still even whine about it today. Again, you guys were only pretending an election was stolen. Now think if the election were actually stolen, and Bush declared himself winner by 63 percent of the vote. You’d be so angry you might actually do something more than whine about it. Well, that is what’s happening with the Iranians, and they’re taking to the streets. If you miss the pretend anger about 2000, maybe you can direct some real anger at what’s happened in Iran.
I think it’s a hopeless cause.
[Early evening update]
Two reactions: (1) I doubt such supportive arguments would be now advanced should a President McCain have urged similar realpolitik; (2) Should Obama have come out a few days ago with ringing endorsements for those who wish free and fair elections, and had he given a Reaganesque embrace of the dissidents’ bravery and idealism, I doubt we would be reading any of what we read today.
So do I.
Indefinite holding of detainees under Bush — Evil, the end of the Constitution. Indefinite holding of detainees under Obama: a well-considered, and in the end, wise and calm decision.
It’s starting to look that way:
In a detailed conversation Wednesday morning, Walpin said the White House is “grasping at nonexistent straws” to justify his termination as watchdog for one of the Obama White House’s favorite federal programs.
Walpin described an atmosphere in which his investigations into fraudulent and inefficient use of federal dollars were often the cause of conflict with the board and top management of the Corporation. “The fact that the board doesn’t like what I was doing in order to perform my duties as an IG is not a reason for removing me,” Walpin said. “In fact, the more diligent an IG is in reporting criticisms of the board and the running of the corporation, the more the board doesn’t want the IG there. But that’s exactly why the IG position was created.”
In this case, the board and top management were unhappy with Walpin’s aggressive investigation of the misuse of federal AmeriCorps funds by Sacramento, California mayor — and prominent Obama supporter — Kevin Johnson. The board was also unhappy with Walpin’s probe into the waste of AmeriCorps money at the City University of New York.
If it were a Republican president (and especially George Bush) who had fired an IG with no apparent cause because he was getting too close to a buddy, the New York Times would be pounding its spoon on its high dudgeon on a daily basis. But this is just hope. And change.
[Update a couple minutes later]
More from Moe Lane:
As Ed Morrissey noted, believing that this was the White House’s primary motive requires that you believe that the administration’s instinctive, immediate reaction to seeing an employee come down with a debilitating disease is to fire them. Yes. That is precisely the thing that one does when one wishes to maintain a reputation for empathy and tolerance. I can’t say that I have as much difficulty as Michelle Malkin reconciling the allegation of Walpin’s mental diminished capacity with his public appearances (see the video above), mostly because neither I nor Ms. Malkin can take it at all seriously…
First you fire him, then you try to smear him. It’s right out of the old Clinton playbook. I wonder if Rahm is calling the shots here? I guess that he should be thankful that, unlike Travelgate, they didn’t get the FBI to trump up some charges and try him.
Yet.
[Update mid afternoon]
He’s not taking it lying down:
“I am now the target of the most powerful man in this country, with an army of aides whose major responsibility today seems to be to attack me and get rid of me,” Walpin said.
Facing bipartisan criticism for the firing, Obama sought to allay congressional concerns with a letter to Senate leaders Tuesday evening explaining his decision. In the letter, White House Special Counsel Norman Eisen wrote that Walpin was “confused” and “disoriented” at a May board meeting, was “unduly disruptive,” and exhibited a “lack of candor” in providing information to decision makers.
“That’s a total lie,” Walpin said of the latter charge. And he said the accusation that he was dazed and confused at one meeting out of many was not only false, but poor rationale for his ouster.
“It appears to suggest that I was removed because I was disabled — based on one occasion out of hundreds,” he said.
“I would never say President Obama doesn’t have the capacity to continue to serve because of his (statement) that there are 56 states,” Walpin said, adding that the same holds for Vice President Biden and his “many express confusions that have been highlighted by the media.” Obama mistakenly said once on the campaign trail that he had traveled to 57 states.
I hope he sues.
[Thursday morning update]
Gee, this is starting to sorta look like a pattern:
…no fewer than three IG’s have recently been fired, all while investigating so-called sensitive issues.
A Chicago politician covering up corruption? Who could have imagined such a thing?
[Bumped]
Iowahawk steals my team’s fight song as the title of the president’s inspiring speech to the Iranian people.
It’s OK, with the new coach, the Wolverines won’t be using it much this year anyway.
Also, here are some more “expressions of concern” down the ages:
On the Sack of Rome: “Any time a major urban area is plundered so quickly, it is concerning to us. We are sure the Gauls and Chieftain Brennus understand Roman worries about the utter devastation of their city.”
On Cambodia: “Though intellectuals ourselves, we will not take sides or meddle in the sovereignty of another nation. We expect all slaughter of civilians and intellectuals in the killing fields to be performed in accordance with the norms of international law, and hope that as little blood as possible is shed by both sides in the ongoing massacre. We are eager for this crisis to come to a rapid end so that we may reengage with the Pol Pot regime without preconditions.”
The fear and unending two-minute hate against Sarah Palin (and Republican women in general) is a wonder to behold.
They can rebuild guard rails on dry lakes in Oklahoma, but they’re cutting money for missile defense.
He gets a letter from an astronaut in response to his anti-manned-space piece. Of course, it should be noted that it was anti-NASA manned space, not anti-manned space in general.
He remains unrepentant:
I would give everything I have, ten times over, to have been where Greg has been and see what he has seen. I don’t see any reason why U.S. taxpayers should fund my enthusiasm, though.
Neither do I.
He is obviously not opposed to human space flight. I think that he might think differently had the taxpayers’ money done more (and a lot more) to allow him to go. And, to forestall the usual trolls, that doesn’t mean paying for his trip. It just means doing the kinds of things that made aviation successful.
[Wednesday afternoon update]
Mark Whittington imagines that I am “misreading” Derb’s attitude:
He is obviously not opposed to human space flight. I think that he might think differently had the taxpayers’ money done more (and a lot more) to allow him to go.
Actually Derbyshire makes it clear that he is opposed to all government funded pace exploration, such as Apollo.
So sayeth the Derb today (though not in response to Mark’s own misreading — I’m quite confident that he never reads Mark’s scribblings):
…even if I grant your argument, the role of government remains to be decided. Stuck as I am with the rooted conviction that government does everything badly and in a spirit of financial irresponsibility, I’d keep government involvement to a mimimum, with just perhaps a modest subsidy here or there to encourage entrepreneurs. Shuttle missions at half a billion dollars per, though? No thanks. Not unless I’m on board!
I’m a little more principled than Derb — I’d object to billion-dollar shuttle flights (just as I object to billion-and-a half-dollar Ares I flights) as a national policy even if I were on board.
I’m sure that Mark will continue to misread it, though. It’s what he does.
[Bumped]