“Sequestration would come at ‘great cost’ to NASA.”

Another whining article about sequestration: “Sequestration would come at ‘great cost’ to NASA.”

Let’s be blunt. An 8.2 percent cut in NASA’s budget will not destroy the agency. It will hurt them, surely, but it will only bring their budget back the agency’s 2005 budget. Considering the deficit and debt, this is hardly a draconian cut.

If the Republicans are serious about getting the budget under control — as they say they are — then these automatic cuts imposed by sequestration should not give them heartburn.

As for the Democrats, no point in caring what they think or do. We already know they aren’t serious about getting the budget under control, considering the budgets Obama has proposed, all of which were rejected unanimously by both Houses of Congress, and the refusal of the Democrats in the Senate to even offer a budget for the past three years.

The squealing of a former Bush science administrator

The cries and squeals are now coming from all sides: A former undersecretary for Science in the Energy Department during the Bush administration, Raymond L. Orbach, has joined the chorus of scientists whining about the House’s proposed cuts. [His full editorial, available here as a pdf, can only be downloaded if you subscribe to Science.]

Like all the other squealers, he admits that “the budget deficit is serious.” Nonetheless, the idea of cutting his pet science programs remains unacceptable.

It is when I read stuff like this that feel the situation is most hopeless. Is there no one willing to accept the reality that if we don’t start gaining some control over the federal budget the country will go bankrupt and we will not be able to afford anything?

Instead, all I hear are cries of “Cut! Cut! But don’t cut my program!”