--- In Scipolicy-L@yahoogroups.com, "Norman Levitt" <njlevitt@h...>
wrote:

> I'm sure that NASA will gamely attempt to salvage a manned space
program
as
> its centerpiece, proably predicated on an even more expensive piece
of
junk
> than the shuttle. I think they'll have a harder time of it this
time round,
> despite all the sentimental crap pouring out of the media at the
moment.
> The cost of the Space Station has been enormous, and replacing or
> drastically modifying the shuttle will probably involve additional
costs
> that will bring the whole thing crashing down. Personally, I
certainly hope
> NASA will fail miserably. We'll see.

I followed, and mostly agreed with, what Norman Levitt wrote up to
this point
in his original message. Here I think you got it wrong. NASA and
manned
spaceflight are two closely related but different entities. NASA is a
technocratic culture; manned spaceflight has primarily been a
paramilitary
organization steeped in Southern culture. One is the dog, the other
the tail of
the dog. Which is which?

(This is an unfortunate aspect of Lyndon Johnson's legacy.)

Manned spaceflight is no longer essential to national prestige, but
is essential
to Southern prestige.

To call the response to the loss of the Columbia "sentimental crap"
really
misses the point. Of course it is sentimental. It is Southern
sentiment.

And unless our government begins to speak with other than a
hegemonically
Southern accent sometime soon, you can bet the STSs will fly again,
the
space station will be completed, and there will be an expensive
replacement.

Mark Hineline