Herman Cain speaks out about NASA and space


Please consider donating to Behind the Black, by giving either a one-time contribution or a regular subscription, as outlined in the tip jar to the right or below. Your support will allow me to continue covering science and culture as I have for the past twenty years, independent and free from any outside influence.

Herman Cain speaks out about NASA and space:

When President Obama decided to cut, it put the United States in a position that we don’t like. We don’t like to have to thumb-ride with the Russians when we were the first ones and the leaders in space technology. It’s not just about getting to the moon and outer space. The space program inspires other technological advances to business and the economy. In the Cain presidency, it will be reversed back to where it should be.

As much as I might like Cain for some things, I could not help cringing when I read these words. They suggest a great deal of ignorance about what the Obama administration has done, a willingness on Cain’s part to pander to his audience (speaking as he was at the U.S. Space & Rocket Center in Huntsville), and a desire by this self-declared fiscal conservative to spend lots more money for a big government space program at a time when the federal government is broke.

I’d rather have Cain take a more thoughtful approach. Alas, this is a campaign. Moreover, whoever ends up as president after this election will probably be less important than the make-up of the next Congress. It is that part of the 2012 election that really counts.

Share

10 comments

  • Joe2

    “I’d rather have Cain take a more thoughtful approach.”

    Meaning, of course, one that agrees with you.

    Can anyone be allowed to disagree with you and still be considered “thoughtful”?

  • Joe,

    First of all, for someone who really dislikes almost everything I write, I wonder why you visit my webpage so often.

    Second, please don’t put words in my mouth. I never said I disagreed with Cain, only that I found his statement shallow, which bothers me. And if you read his words again, it is very clear that this is a fair description of those words. I also recognized in the very next sentence that this kind of shallow statement is par for the course for a campaign, which to me seems to give him a pass if anything.

    Finally, just because you dislike my opinions doesn’t give you call to attack me personally each time I express them. You rarely make the effort to explain why you disagree, only to attack me for daring to have such opinions. I find this distasteful and, to use that word again, not very thoughtful.

    I put no restrictions on comments to my webpage because I like it when people disagree with me and express those opinions. If you peruse the comments you will find many long and very interesting comments attacking my positions that I think are quite worthwhile to read.

    Thus, I would much prefer it if you spent some time explaining why you disagree me instead of zipping off cute one sentence personal attacks time after time that explains nothing.

    All the best.

  • Kelly Starks

    Well, he obviously hasn’t worked out a policy of program – but this is a lot better then Obama saying NASA doesn’t inspire, and should be closed down during his campaign. At least he realizes stripping us of launch capacity for most of a decade or more is a bad call.

    Hell we should be delighted he even stopped by Huntsville and said anything abut space.

  • i think Cain has taken a wishy-washy stance on this subject, while at the same time, being stern towards the subject. there. i presented My take on the presented topic. regardless of others views.

  • I would like to see the next Administration develop the a national spacefaring capability the same way government approached development of an air transport capability in the 1920’s and ’30’s: by awarding contracts to private carriers. The major airlines got their start by hauling the U.S. Mail. The federal government didn’t design, build, and operate airplanes; private companies did that. Improvements in the state-of-the-art came in response to market forces, not government mega-projects. The Feds can best help the nascent private space launch industry by providing a ‘starter’ market, establishing reasonable life-safety standards, and then getting the hell out of the way.

  • yes I’ve watched all the debates and there is hardly any talk about space , but i understand it isnt really a wedge issue , i wish more people shared a vision of humans living and working on other worlds and in space! i don’t like either party and i hate the idea of choosing lesser of two evils , but i think i’m in philosophical limbo at the moment so that makes sense maybe , +1 agree with bob, kelly, and blair … still waiting for a politician or party to inspire me

  • At least Cain is talking about space. I feel that he can be persuaded to follow a small government pathway to the stars, as opposed to a big government Apollo style moonshot. I take it as a good sign that somebody on the political scene sees an opportunity here. If he is serious, that is. Let us hope so.

  • Joe2

    “First of all, for someone who really dislikes almost everything I write, I wonder why you visit my webpage so often.”

    Two points:
    (1) I generally expend about 5 minutes on your website every couple of days, as I do several other websites (whether I agree with their point of view or not) – the reason is the links they provide to other often useful articles (you could even take that a complement).
    (2) I do not “really dislike” almost everything you write. In fact I agree with most of what you have written on the Global Climate Change issue. I did not see the point in posting a bunch of “Yeah, what he said” comments when I agreed with what you wrote. If that would have made you feel better I apologize for the oversight.

    “Second, please don’t put words in my mouth. I never said I disagreed with Cain, only that I found his statement shallow”

    I am neither a supporter nor a detractor of Mister Cain, however, you have written:
    – That he shows a “great deal of ignorance”
    – That he shows “willingness” “… “to pander to his audience”
    – That you wish he took a “more thoughtful approach”
    – And now that you found his statement “shallow”

    But no one should infer that you disagree with him. I would be enlightening to know what you would write about someone you actually do disagree with.

    “Finally, just because you dislike my opinions doesn’t give you call to attack me personally each time I express them. I put no restrictions on comments to my webpage because I like it when people disagree with me and express those opinions. If you peruse the comments you will find many long and very interesting comments attacking my positions that I think are quite worthwhile to read.”

    I have asked question, but to the best of my knowledge I have never attacked you. Other posters on your board have called me a Kool-Aid drinker and a Crack Head (for the record my hide is thicker than that, I could care less), but I have done no such thing to you or anyone else.

    My problem with what I consider to be over the top rhetoric can be better explained by an earlier column you wrote about congressional skepticism about Commercial Crew Development. The skepticism expressed at the meeting concerned the business case for the commercial companies and whether or not they would really be cheaper than developing a government provided vehicle or even continuing to buy transport services from the Russians. That is (at least in my opinion) a valid concern. Rather than refute it, you dismissed it with the statement – “Let’s be honest: it’s all about pork and only pork.”

    OK, now I have taken the time to explain myself (as best I can). Maybe you could explain why you dismiss the reservations expressed in that committee hearing as “pork and only pork”, rather than addressing the concerns.

    “All the best” to you as well.

  • i thought i would see an snl style joke in comments but here we go … he should come up with something clear and simple like a 5-5-5 plan for space exploration – send 5 rockets to 5 objects in the solar system every 5 years

  • Kelly Starks

    > I would like to see the next Administration develop the a national spacefaring capability the same way
    > government approached development of an air transport capability in the 1920′s and ’30′s: by awarding
    > contracts to private carriers. ==

    Big agree – though the type of contracts the point. After all, all the spaceflight done in the last several decades was done by contractors who developed and operated all the ships and space centers under NASA contract — just very constrained contracts, with lots of NASAburacracy layered over the top.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *