Did she really get a letter saying “no girls allowed”?
There’s no evidence of it, other than her repetition of the story (which doesn’t hold much weight with me, considering the source). As Jim Oberg points out, she certainly could have been part of the first class in 1978 that admitted women, had she applied herself. But her degrees were in political science and law, which certainly weren’t indicative of someone who desired a career in spaceflight. I wouldn’t be shocked to learn that she couldn’t handle technical subjects, or math.
Is this like the disembarking under sniper fire in the Balkans?
Well who knows really. When I was a kid I wanted to go into a non-technical field but my math and physics grades and economics (plus several nudges by many people along the way) pushed me to computer science. I have not regretted going into the computer science field but I could have ended up in something totally unrelated.
When calling someone a liar, the burden of proof is on you.
Unless, of course, she has previously shown herself to be a self promoting liar. There is a point to Reputation, and is Hillary’s Everest, yes?
Another piece of evidence related to the existence of such a NASA letter is in negative form. With thousands of people writing to NASA about becoming astronauts in the 1961–2 period, and presumably many of them being females, not one other written example of an official “we-don’t-take-girls” put-down response has ever surfaced, to the best of my knowledge and that of other space historians with whom I’ve conferred.
Occam’s Razor: She’s lying.
Plus, it’s Hillary Clinton. She’s lying.
Then why bother writing an article about it?
I really don’t think there’s any harm in giving her the benefit of the doubt. Her point is perfectly reasonable, and the fact that I still have to explain to people why “human spaceflight” is more appropriate than “manned spaceflight” means it’s still relevant.
If you want to just make shit up, why not start the rumor that the real reason she was rejected was because she was a lesbian. We can dig up comments about Sally Ride, talk about how Hillary can relate and have a big cry fest. It’ll be great.
Or we could try to be civil. Overcome evil with good.
Giving politicians the benefit of the doubt is how we get tyranny and genocide.
The problem with giving her the “benefit of the doubt” is that, alas, policy for the whole country is written to deal with these tales of martyrdom and oppression. Her lies sends more money to “Women’s Studies”, billions of dollars wasted, money that could have been used advancing spaceflight. And, again, the only one proven to “make shit up” in this discussion is Old Mount Everest, Hillary……..
I’m willing to give anyone the benefit of the doubt until they start lying to me. Hillary has a long history of lying so no benefit for her.
I’d cut her a little slack on this one. The claim is that this happened in ’60 or ’61, and I could well imagine someone writing her back to this effect at that time. It may not have included the exact words “no girls”, but the meaning could well have been clear.
Steve: Except that other extant letters from that time period do NOT say “no girls.” As Mike Borgelt references above, we also know she’s a liar, so she hasn’t really earned slack here.
Rick, the word is pronounced “liar” but spelled “lawyer.”
This is a common mistake.
Wouldn’t it be something if her kid made a birthday wish? 24 hrs would not be enough however.
She “can’t recall” anything about a host of things, like how she turned $1000 into $100,000 in cattle futures, but can remember the exact wording of this letter.
Okay, whatever.
…or where the Vince Foster folders were……
I give people the benefit of the doubt when they haven’t burned the veracity bridge. The Lioness of Tusla knocked that bridge down, pulled the logs ashore, burned them, put the ashes in the same containers as the radioactive waste stored at Yucca Flats and sank them to the bottom of the Marianas Trench.
This is one of the reasons the nation is in such a bad state:
people keep giving them the benefit of the doubt, second through 15th chances, or just plain choose not to look.
They do not understand the value of virtue, or the damage that can occur where there is no virtue.
They vote in congenital liars, prevaricators, dissemblers and thieves….just so long as they vote correctly. And they get IRS cabals, Justice Department snoops, Benghazi deaths.
…and they simply do not care.
What difference, at this point, does it make?
Sadly, those words are true. Do we go out with a whimper or a bang?
So I take it no one here wants to see Lori Graver become NASA Administration in 2017?
I’d be fine with that, as long as Hillary isn’t president.
Rand,
So what are her chances of being administrator with a Republican president? Or even another Democrat?
The only way she becomes administrator, probably, is if Charlie resigns and she is acting for a while. I doubt that she’d be confirmed by the Senate.
I dimly recalled a set of women undergoing the same tests for being astronauts in the early 60’s as the Merc 7 did – but then being told they would not be astronauts. So I did a little searching:
As is usual, there’s a little bit left out of the story:
“Vice President Lyndon Johnson wrote, “Let’s stop this now” on a memo to NASA.”
“This” being women in space.
http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-18563_162-57588836/pioneer-pilot-led-the-way-for-american-women-in-space/
So if Hillary has a beef it’s with a Democrat – LBJ.
From Wiki:
“NASA representatives George Low and Astronauts John Glenn and Scott Carpenter testified that under NASA’s selection criteria women could not qualify as astronaut candidates. They correctly stated that NASA required all astronauts to be graduates of military jet test piloting programs and have engineering degrees, although John Glenn conceded that he had been assigned to NASA’s Mercury Project without having earned the required college degree.[2] In 1962, women were still barred from Air Force training schools, so no American women could become test pilots of military jets. Despite the fact that several of the Mercury 13 had been employed as civilian test pilots, and many had considerably more propeller aircraft flying time than the male astronaut candidates (although not in high-performance jets, like the men), NASA refused to consider granting an equivalency for their hours in propeller airplanes.[3] Although some members of the Subcommittee were sympathetic to the women’s arguments, because of this disparity in experience no action resulted.”
The test program that the women underwent was privately funded and was not a part of NASA expenditure, as far as I can make out.