Some idiot talk-show host posted an ignorant article blaming the Columbia disaster on Bill Clinton, and most Freepers are appropriately ridiculing it.

While the charges made by the talk show host are somewhat overwrought, the basic point is valid.

The Clinton administration both squeezed NASA financially and meddled with technical decisions (remember GoreSat ?) , to the long term detriment of the agency and the space program. The Bush administration needs to dig out of that hole.

Space Station Freedom was certainly not perfect, but it was a mature design that (believe it or not) provided the best scientific capability possible within the budget and political constraints we were given. In particular, the design was optimized for microgravity science by placing the Lab module as close to the CG as possible and by ensuring that 45 kW of power would be available for science at all times - two core requirements abandoned in the current ISS.

The 1994 Clinton (Gore/Goldin actually) decision to turn the Station into a foreign aid project and put the Russians in the critical path (both financially and physically) caused at least four years of delay (at $2.2 Billion/yr) , drastically reduced the science capability of the vehicle and delayed assembly (Freedom required 17 flights to complete, ISS will require around 100, due to the inclination change and logistics requirements). The Russian hardware now (literally) at the core of the vehicle don't meet safety, habitability or maintenance requirements.

The cost growth following from these ISS decisions, in the context of a flat/declining NASA budget, squeezed every program, including Shuttle. At the same time, it was made clear that internal dissent was not welcomed by Goldin.

The Bush administration was presented with a difficult situation - the wrong design in the wrong orbit and budget problems that the previous administration kicked down the road until they could no longer be ignored. Fixing ISS to regain that lost capability would be very expensive. Then September 11 hit, and they were occupied with the urgent business of keeping us all alive.

So, while it's true that Clinton did not directly cause this disaster, the changes imposed at his behest have left behind a damaged agency.

I'm not saying that the Clinton administration was good for space--in many ways it was a disaster--just that it's nonsense to try to blame Columbia's loss on the Clinton administration.

Firstly, this guy's facts seem somewhat dubious. Chinese superlasers?

Secondly, as I understand it, Gore not Clinton was the one calling the shots at NASA during the Clinton years. He made some bad decisions, like not developing Shuttle-C, and backing X-33, that are certainly contributors to the bind NASA finds itself in now. But it's pointless blaming him now: he was voted out of office, and it's not like he has much of a legacy to stain.

Moreover, even if NASA did have its budget cut to below the operational safe point and this led to some avoidable technical issue with Columbia, the buck still stops with NASA's administration first. It would have been incumbent on them to cease operations no matter what their bosses said.

How dare you criticize Al Gore don't you know he is a Rocket Scientist. (NOT!)
He invented the internet and the lock box etc.....