Friday, December 12, 2008

NASA Bristles as Obama Transition Team Asks Tough Questions

An Orlando Sentinel article just released makes it clear that tensions are running high between NASA Director Mike Griffin and Obama transition team leader Lori Garver, with the defensive Griffin going so far as to accuse Garver as being “unqualified” to lead the Obama team.

According to the Sentinel, the issues arose when Garver and her team members began to question the wisdom of the overall Constellation program for returning to the Moon and then going to Mars. More specifically, Griffin got testy when the question of NASA’s new and hopelessly flawed Ares 1 rocket came up. As most readers of our blog know, the Direct 2.0 alternative, proposed by a consortium of industry engineers and ex-NASA managers, is a much cheaper and more proven concept, and pretty much superior in every way to Ares 1. Griffin is portrayed as a staunch advocate of Ares 1, and he’s apparently trying to defend the underpowered and overpriced program from budget cuts in the incoming administration.

While it’s unlikely Constellation will be scrapped in its entirety, the Obama administration can be expected to behave pretty much as all liberal administrations do; they will suppress dissent, slash defense and space budgets, and instigate new social dependencies in an attempt to consolidate power. Looking at the underperforming Ares 1 and the viable alternative of Direct II, it would seem to be an easy target for the incoming Obama team.

But one wonders if there isn’t something more to this than simply the politics of left and right. Griffin’s resistance doesn’t make a whole lot of sense politically. He seems to be overacting to the inquiries of the Obama team at a time when he should be looking to smooth things over and keep the broader Constellation program going. It’s almost as if there is something bigger and potentially much darker that he’s trying to protect. Why would he be so threatened by a simple accounting of the state of NASA’s biggest current space imitative? Unless perhaps he’s worried that the Obama team may find the real, occult agenda behind the Constellation program…

As Garver was overheard to say to Griffin, “Mike, I don’t understand what the problem is. We are just trying to look under the hood.”

Given what we all know is “under the hood,” maybe that in itself is the real problem.

UPDATE: Richard made an interesting observation in a recent phone call. His take is that Griffin is causing all this strife because he needs a direct meeting with Obama in order to tell him privately what he can't let Garver find under the hood.



  1. Direct II makes a lot more sense. One question though, why do we need a moon lander separate from the Orion? Why can't we just design a single vehicle that can go into space and land on the moon, then blast back off into space again?


  2. Because we've forgotton how to build big rockets, evidently.

  3. We NEED Obama to CRACK the DARPA wall...the secret DOD SPACE programs have the know-how and are already on the Moon n Mars...imho...and in images I see and look for.


  4. Perhaps they're afraid they will find all the Nazi symbols inside the vehicle?

  5. "Trust me, long before that happens, you
    will find yourself reading the latest copy of
    National Geographic with the front-cover
    story about the team of archaeologists who
    dug up the frozen corpse of Satan...."

    Oh, thats funny.

    Well soon their hand will be forced, they are a huge part of the reason they are at where they are, I would love to say sole reason, but we all know about their budget problems.

    They had such innovation at the beginning and then for decades they just creeped along. They have to change or be left behind.

    I do agree with what Hoagland says though, they always talk about the past and the future being good, but never the present.

    There are so many things they could have pushed for in the last couple decades...except apparently all they have been pushing are pencils. ha(hopefully thats not too much)

  6. Speaking of "the frozen corpse of Satan," Las Vegas ("Sin City") is experiencing 3 inches (~7.5 cm) of snow on the Strip, and I hear their airport has no snowplows.


  7. questions:

    Dave Bara December 12, 2008 2:56 PM said...
    Direct II makes a lot more sense. One question though, why do we need a moon lander separate from the Orion? Why can't we just design a single vehicle that can go into space and land on the moon, then blast back off into space again?

    Mike Bara December 12, 2008 3:37 PM said...
    Because we've forgotton how to build big rockets, evidently.


    The rationale behind building a Lunar Module for the specific landing was worked out and justified in about 1962-3. If you both have forgotten, or never understood it, I'd be happy to provide some links.

  8. My comment has nothing to do with LOR. I believe the reader was asking why we can't build a rocket big enough to put both Altair and Orion on instead of launching them seperately.

  9. As I said Gort...break down the walls between DARPA, "TOP" n "SWORD" and get Griffen out of NASA asap.

  10. Direct II is the way to go and your assessment of the fear the Mr. Steamy Griffith has of 'looking under the hood' is most true to point. But why do you have this ongoing anti-Obabma theme in your threads? Especially after eight years of anthropoid insanity? It seems your calling to degrade the 'liberal' is pure ignorant bias...coming from a pure ancient familial prejudice. Hard to fathom when it comes from someone so correct in other observations.

    I would assume the grain of the wood can never be regrown with the.... least of an.. 'open mind'.

  11. Saying he got 'his knob polished' and that's ALL your focused many others of your ilk.
    Again, after 8 years of Anthropoid insanity, I would take any day of the week a president who's 'knob' gets polished, once and awhile.

    Your inane response only proved my point.


Note: Only a member of this blog may post a comment.