In article <79094630.0410181636.464f3b37@posting.google.com>, double-a@hush.com (Double-A) writes:

Victor <Victor@com.com> wrote in message news:<cl0gv6$t2d$1@ctb-nnrp2.saix.net>...

Pierre wrote:

Don't forget Bush wants the end of Hubble and want s to deicde what's 
good in science...

Actually it is NASA Administrator Sean O'Keefe who decided that fixing 
Hubble is not worth an astronaut's life or losing another shuttle.  A 
board of investigation was set up to determine the risks involved.  I 
personally think the risk is not that high and that a human service 
mission should go ahead as planned.

[snipped compaign rhetoric]


So it is not worth risking human life for an important scientific
mission!

Over 1,100 soldiers lives have been sacrificed so far in the
subjugation of Iraq.  They were expendable!  The "backdoor draft" has
sucked many back into the army that do not want to be there and put
them in harms way in Iraq.  Yet we are unwilling to allow a few
willing astronauts to take a calculated risk in flying a mission
vastly important for the advancement of science!

NASA is not flying astronauts for the advancement of science.  NASA is 
flying them as PR.  Since when they are getting fried it is not a good 
PR, .... well.

A quote I came across couple years ago (sorry, don't know the source):

"Many agencies have a PR department.  NASA is a PR department that has 
an agency".

Mati Meron                      | "When you argue with a fool,
meron@cars.uchicago.edu         |  chances are he is doing just the same"