Space, Space History

Five Years Ago

5 Comments

It’s hard to believe, but it’s been five years since Columbia was lost. I was up in San Bruno at the time, getting ready to drive home to LA. Here was what I blogged about it immediately upon hearing. I think that most of my initial speculation has held up pretty well. Also check though the February 2003 archives for a lot more space commentary from the time. I wrote three related pieces at Fox News (here and here) and National Review in the next few days.

Was this as traumatic and memorable as the Challenger disaster? No, for several reasons. We didn’t watch it live on television, there was no teacher aboard to traumatize the kids, and we had already lost our national innocence about the Shuttle. Still, people might want to post remembrances here.

[Update mid morning]

I’d forgotten about these. Columbia haiku that I and my commenters came up with.

[Late afternoon update]

Clark Lindsey has more anniversary links.

Space, Space and Campaign 2008, Space History

Triumph And Tragedy

1 Comment

I have some thoughts about space anniversaries, over at Pajamas Media.

[Update a few minutes later]

Alan Boyle has a more detailed and humanized history of the Explorer 1 mission. Though I should add, as I say in my own piece, that the belts weren’t “discovered” by the satellite–their theoretical existence had previously been proposed by Christofilos, so finding them was confirmation, rather than a complete surprise.

Media Criticism, Political Commentary

Get Them A Maalox

7 Comments

Andrew Ferguson has an interesting history of presidential campaigning and the relatively recent (and to me, bizarre) phenomenon of the need for “fire in the belly.”

I don’t have to wait until spring to miss Fred Thomson. His absence was quite obvious, even glaring, in the last two debates.

Thompson didn’t give off the usual political vibe: the gnawing need to please, the craving for the public’s love. A few voters and journalists found this refreshing, many more found it insulting.

I think that this is one of the reasons that reporters and pundits often acted as though he didn’t exist–they were trying to make it a self-fulfilling prophecy, and unfortunately, they succeeded. But I think that there were other reasons that the press didn’t like Fred Thompson. For one thing, unlike John McCain, he was a true straight talker, and it wasn’t the kind of centrist “liberal” “straight talk” that they liked to hear.

But I also think that they felt their livelihoods and stature threatened by him. After all, the conventional wisdom had become that the campaigns now had to start two years before the election, and if that’s the case, it gives journalists a lot more to cover for a longer period of time. By his late entry, Fred stood to potentially upset that applecart. If he could enter late, and still win, it would not only show the pundits who proclaimed the need for early campaigning to be laughably wrong, but it would also make people think twice about wasting time and money campaigning for a year before New Hampshire in the next cycle, and then what would the political reporters have to do?

Political Commentary

How To Demonstrate John McCain’s Famous Temper

Say something like this in a debate:

Will McCain, who finished 894th out of 899 at the Naval Academy and who lost five jets, return competence to the White House?

Heh. It’s funny ‘cuz it’s true.

Can’t see Romney doing it, though.

[Update in the afternoon]

Was that a cheap shot? Probably. Certainly the aircraft accident on the deck wasn’t McCain’s fault, nor was getting shot down when he ended up in the Hanoi Hilton. But as I note in comments, he’s not a very nice guy, by all accounts, and it’s the kind of thing that he’d do himself (after all, he insists on continuing to lie about Romney’s “timetable” record) so it would be poetic justice if such a thing caused him to reveal his true nature.

[Another update about 3 PM EST]

This seems relevant: Mark Levin:

Let’s get the largely unspoken part of this out the way first. McCain is an intemperate, stubborn individual, much like Hillary Clinton. These are not good qualities to have in a president. As I watched him last night, I could see his personal contempt for Mitt Romney roiling under the surface. And why? Because Romney ran campaign ads that challenged McCain’s record? Is this the first campaign in which an opponent has run ads questioning another candidate’s record? That’s par for the course. To the best of my knowledge, Romney’s ads have not been personal. He has not even mentioned the Keating-Five to counter McCain’s cheap shots. But the same cannot be said of McCain’s comments about Romney.

Last night McCain, who is the putative frontrunner, resorted to a barrage of personal assaults on Romney that reflect more on the man making them than the target of the attacks. McCain now has a habit of describing Romney as a “manager for profit” and someone who has “laid-off” people, implying that Romney is both unpatriotic and uncaring. Moreover, he complains that Romney is using his “millions” or “fortune” to underwrite his campaign. This is a crass appeal to class warfare. McCain is extremely wealthy through marriage. Romney has never denigrated McCain for his wealth or the manner in which he acquired it. Evidently Romney”s character doesn’t let him cross certain boundaries of decorum and decency, but McCain’s does. And what of managing for profit? When did free enterprise become evil? This is liberal pablum which, once again, could have been uttered by Hillary Clinton.

And there is the open secret of McCain losing control of his temper and behaving in a highly inappropriate fashion with prominent Republicans, including Thad Cochran, John Cornyn, Strom Thurmond, Donald Rumsfeld, Bradley Smith, and a list of others. Does anyone honestly believe that the Clintons or the Democrat party would give McCain a pass on this kind of behavior?

As I said, better to get this out there now, rather than wait until the nominee has been chosen.

Political Commentary

How To Demonstrate John McCain’s Famous Temper

Say something like this in a debate:

Will McCain, who finished 894th out of 899 at the Naval Academy and who lost five jets, return competence to the White House?

Heh. It’s funny ‘cuz it’s true.

Can’t see Romney doing it, though.

[Update in the afternoon]

Was that a cheap shot? Probably. Certainly the aircraft accident on the deck wasn’t McCain’s fault, nor was getting shot down when he ended up in the Hanoi Hilton. But as I note in comments, he’s not a very nice guy, by all accounts, and it’s the kind of thing that he’d do himself (after all, he insists on continuing to lie about Romney’s “timetable” record) so it would be poetic justice if such a thing caused him to reveal his true nature.

[Another update about 3 PM EST]

This seems relevant: Mark Levin:

Let’s get the largely unspoken part of this out the way first. McCain is an intemperate, stubborn individual, much like Hillary Clinton. These are not good qualities to have in a president. As I watched him last night, I could see his personal contempt for Mitt Romney roiling under the surface. And why? Because Romney ran campaign ads that challenged McCain’s record? Is this the first campaign in which an opponent has run ads questioning another candidate’s record? That’s par for the course. To the best of my knowledge, Romney’s ads have not been personal. He has not even mentioned the Keating-Five to counter McCain’s cheap shots. But the same cannot be said of McCain’s comments about Romney.

Last night McCain, who is the putative frontrunner, resorted to a barrage of personal assaults on Romney that reflect more on the man making them than the target of the attacks. McCain now has a habit of describing Romney as a “manager for profit” and someone who has “laid-off” people, implying that Romney is both unpatriotic and uncaring. Moreover, he complains that Romney is using his “millions” or “fortune” to underwrite his campaign. This is a crass appeal to class warfare. McCain is extremely wealthy through marriage. Romney has never denigrated McCain for his wealth or the manner in which he acquired it. Evidently Romney”s character doesn’t let him cross certain boundaries of decorum and decency, but McCain’s does. And what of managing for profit? When did free enterprise become evil? This is liberal pablum which, once again, could have been uttered by Hillary Clinton.

And there is the open secret of McCain losing control of his temper and behaving in a highly inappropriate fashion with prominent Republicans, including Thad Cochran, John Cornyn, Strom Thurmond, Donald Rumsfeld, Bradley Smith, and a list of others. Does anyone honestly believe that the Clintons or the Democrat party would give McCain a pass on this kind of behavior?

As I said, better to get this out there now, rather than wait until the nominee has been chosen.

Political Commentary

How To Demonstrate John McCain’s Famous Temper

13 Comments

Say something like this in a debate:

Will McCain, who finished 894th out of 899 at the Naval Academy and who lost five jets, return competence to the White House?

Heh. It’s funny ‘cuz it’s true.

Can’t see Romney doing it, though.

[Update in the afternoon]

Was that a cheap shot? Probably. Certainly the aircraft accident on the deck wasn’t McCain’s fault, nor was getting shot down when he ended up in the Hanoi Hilton. But as I note in comments, he’s not a very nice guy, by all accounts, and it’s the kind of thing that he’d do himself (after all, he insists on continuing to lie about Romney’s “timetable” record) so it would be poetic justice if such a thing caused him to reveal his true nature.

[Another update about 3 PM EST]

This seems relevant: Mark Levin:

Let’s get the largely unspoken part of this out the way first. McCain is an intemperate, stubborn individual, much like Hillary Clinton. These are not good qualities to have in a president. As I watched him last night, I could see his personal contempt for Mitt Romney roiling under the surface. And why? Because Romney ran campaign ads that challenged McCain’s record? Is this the first campaign in which an opponent has run ads questioning another candidate’s record? That’s par for the course. To the best of my knowledge, Romney’s ads have not been personal. He has not even mentioned the Keating-Five to counter McCain’s cheap shots. But the same cannot be said of McCain’s comments about Romney.

Last night McCain, who is the putative frontrunner, resorted to a barrage of personal assaults on Romney that reflect more on the man making them than the target of the attacks. McCain now has a habit of describing Romney as a “manager for profit” and someone who has “laid-off” people, implying that Romney is both unpatriotic and uncaring. Moreover, he complains that Romney is using his “millions” or “fortune” to underwrite his campaign. This is a crass appeal to class warfare. McCain is extremely wealthy through marriage. Romney has never denigrated McCain for his wealth or the manner in which he acquired it. Evidently Romney”s character doesn’t let him cross certain boundaries of decorum and decency, but McCain’s does. And what of managing for profit? When did free enterprise become evil? This is liberal pablum which, once again, could have been uttered by Hillary Clinton.

And there is the open secret of McCain losing control of his temper and behaving in a highly inappropriate fashion with prominent Republicans, including Thad Cochran, John Cornyn, Strom Thurmond, Donald Rumsfeld, Bradley Smith, and a list of others. Does anyone honestly believe that the Clintons or the Democrat party would give McCain a pass on this kind of behavior?

As I said, better to get this out there now, rather than wait until the nominee has been chosen.

Biting Commentary about Infinity…and Beyond!