11 thoughts on “No, Donald”

  1. The Donald is not a man to get lost in the weeds of the details. Like other aspects of this administration, when the underlings get it straight, you’ll know what he meant. When they screw it up, you misinterpreted what he said. Alternative facts!

  2. The most obvious response to such a comment is to laugh. NASA has never closed, of course.

    He didn’t say NASA was closed. Why is Berger intentionally twisting Trump’s statement into something it clearly isn’t? Trump didn’t say NASA was closed down as an agency and ceased operations and Berger knows this. Is it too hard for journolists to be honest?

    Trump said reopening, which goes along with his changing of NASA’s direction and efforts to commercialize space. Its a common colloquial term for reopening a business that never closed but is seeking to get some buzz about changing their operations.

    The sad part about Trump’s remarks is that, beyond this rhetoric, his administration has taken spaceflight seriously.

    The rhetoric matches and describes his policies.

    All of these seeds were planted in earlier administrations, which chose not to politicize the cosmos.

    Trump didn’t take credit for everything done in the past and he isn’t the only one to mention his plans for NASA at a political event.

    I think what we are seeing here is that Trump’s policies might be successful and the far left is afraid that people will see through their BS media campaign and realize he isn’t the Demon he is portrayed as and that they like his policies. A successful Trump is bad for Democrats so their media has to attack him and when he is successful will pin the success on anyone but Trump. Can’t have those space nerds voting GOP because they like the idea of a space force and having moon bases.

  3. Oh look, another Trumpbash by ARS and it’s eurotrassh fellators.

    Trump speaks in hyperbole and metaphor. Figuratively, not literally is how you take him.

    So far, his NASA and space policy has been decent.

    I wish Berger would stick to reporting the news and not interpret it.

    Gotta get those eurotrash clicks.

    1. “Trump speaks in hyperbole and metaphor. Figuratively, not literally is how you take him.”

      Indeed, continuing to make that mistake this long after the election might be an indication of not being as smart as you think.

  4. One of the first things that Trump did was to speak by video to astronauts on the ISS. Of course Trump knows that NASA was not closed as an organization. My guess is that he felt that it wasn’t going anywhere and he has his typical uber confidence in his adminustration’s ability to break out NASA to the greatest future ever! Or something like that.

    1. That was some sly snark and pretty funny.

      You do hit on something though. Trump likes to go big and it has been reported that he has chosen big things to do like the tax cuts, peace with NK, peace in the Holy Land, ect. Opening up space to American economic development should appeal to his ego. How ambitious will this lunar prospecting be?

      Space advocates with any influence and NASA should be using this grand idea as a way to persuade the administration. But maybe they already have.

  5. but that’s not your base

    Whose base is? Republicans are just as into NASA and science as anyone else, despite the stereotype pushed by Democrats. But NASA isn’t something anyone follows in any detail except for a small number of people.

    Picking apart the carefully crafted deceit at the link, we see Republicans framed in a derogatory light. They are anti-science. They don’t know anything about NASA. They think NASA and the Space Force are the same thing. Its just horrible how they cheer for America’s efforts in space under Trump’s direction. None of these are true except the last part where people did actually cheer.

    Is that cheering horrible as portrayed? If you really believe the stereotypes, wouldn’t it be a good thing that they cheer for NASA and are becoming more interested in NASA and science?

    Instead we get commentary that Trump’s policies are good but he is too stupid to have come up with them and ruins them with (insert fabricated attack of the day here – Oops! Trump dumped all the fish food in at once and ruined everything. It doesn’t matter what Trump does because the journolist will pick any random thing and says Trump ruined a good thing he did.) and that people who like those polices are just idiots who don’t understand the policies or know why they are cheering.

    Wouldn’t a good journalist see the reaction to Trump’s proposed policies for space and then question the stereotypes the author has for the audience? Wouldn’t the audience having similar positive views as the author be a good thing? What is the purpose behind a theme, “These people agree with me on something and let me tell you how horrible it is and why they don’t really understand why they agree with me.”

  6. Remember a few weeks back when Berger complained that he didn’t get a link? Notice that he didn’t link to a transcript or video of Trump’s speech. I can see two reasons for this.

    1) The transcript wouldn’t show what he said it did. He characterizes Trump as conflating NASA and the Space Force concept. I’m certain this isn’t the case just as his other characterizations won’t hold up to looking at the actual speech.

    2) He is afraid part of his audience will like what Trump has to say and wont expose them to the source material for his op-ed lest part of his audience be tempted to leave the party or to look less hatefully at Trump.

    1. I agree, Mr. Berger’s façade is starting to wear thin.

      ARS even is pushing Bloomberg/MDA press releases reworked into articles with regard to gun control now too.

      As much as I like their SpaceX stuff when they leave out the Trumpbash, they are abut to lose a 19 year reader.

  7. So it doesn’t bother anybody here that the president who promised to drain the swamp has doubled down on the Orion/SLS boondoggle?

Comments are closed.