Charles Gaines September 15, 2011 09:47 AM It\'s beyond bullshit that 18 billion over five years is politically controversial. That is nothing as far as government spending goes. VoiceofReason September 15, 2011 10:58 AM This will create jobs as well as push science. Better that than another useless stimulus package. Nelson September 15, 2011 02:04 PM America has better things to spend its money on like fixing our infastructure. Gabe Ets-Hokin September 15, 2011 02:23 PM They would save a bunch of money if they lifted 40 small sedans instead. No need to thank me, America. donwine September 15, 2011 02:30 PM Charles is right - all US government spending adds up to a billion in spending every 2 hours. However when it comes to knowledge I would like to know: Why do we know far more about space than we know about the oceans? We live here and not in space so why couldn\'t we clean up our planet home before cluttering up more space with junk? All the problems on earth are getting worse so how is space travel going to help? Is this showing the world that hunger, jobs, health care for all etc.... are of no concern? To illustrate - could I fix up my home by leaving it and moving elsewhere? Will man be allowed to escape from his responsibilities and care for his home planet? bgstrong September 15, 2011 02:34 PM This is nothing but a political smokescreen by Obama to cover the fact that he has spent all of NASA\'s money and does not want it to be another black mark against him in the 2012 election....NASA has become just another bloated obsolete Govt. bureaucracy / labor union and needs to be completely redirected as a non-union entity.. roger_rethinker September 15, 2011 02:39 PM I believe it is true that accelerating the entire rocket assembly on an appropriate launch trajectory improves the energy efficiency of launch significantly. Is anyone out there interested enough to calculate how much more efficient the launch would be if the entire rocket was accelerated to say 400 km per hour, and released at 8000 feet, pointed in the right direction, prior to firing the rockets? I think it is true that by putting a \"zeroth\" stage under the rocket based on high speed electric train technology taKING IT UP TO 300-500 km/hour and the correct trajectorty, that the mass delivered to orbit would increase greatly. alcalde September 15, 2011 02:45 PM \"Better that than another useless stimulus package. \" Government spending that creates jobs IS a stimulus package. This approach still seems like a step backwards from the shuttle program. Michael Mantion September 15, 2011 03:14 PM First he cancels the constellation program which was years into progress saying that going to the moon and beyond is not in the budget. He wastes all that time and money and then starts this?? Really? liquid hydrogen? that was the main flaw with the space shuttle. Liquid rockets have some value, but solid fuel is definitely the way to go. He wastes 10\'s of billions of dollars and a decade of progress. saying it was behind schedule and over budget. Then he creates a new program that cost 10x as much and will take 10 years longer??? WHY oh WHY. Its like going to a restaurant. Paying for your food, get annoyed its taking too long, walk out, then walk right back in stand in line order food, pay extra money for it and tell them to wait a bit before they make it. solutions4circuits September 15, 2011 04:45 PM A much better spend than the spend on infrastructure. A paved road does nothing to make us competitive with the Chinese, who are our economic enemy. The USA needs to put an end to any stimulus that cannot show a return on investment in terms of revenue or in terms of tech superiority over China and India. This heavy lifter\'s components also allow the US to lob a \"big one\" at China - a threat that will keep that military dog muzzled.