“Mike, I don’t understand what the problem is. We are just trying to look under the hood,” Garver said.

“If you are looking under the hood, then you are calling me a liar,” Griffin replied. “Because it means you don’t trust what I say is under the hood."

After all, it's not like anyone in the Bush administration has ever told a lie, is it?

My theory is that Griffin is out as of January 21. He's done a pretty lousy job but more, Mr. Obama will use him as an example - cooperate or lose your job.

I was very pleased that he pushed the upcoming Hubble 4th upgrade mission. But this report makes him sound like a crackpot.

Instead of prolonging the inevitable, just close it down. When the Shuttle program shuts down, it will be the end of US hosted manned spaceflight for half a century or more. And a few years later the ISS will go out of service having accomplished little except for prolonging its own life. The Chinese and Indians will have some national pride projects in the pipeline. The Russians will keep their heavy lifters to LEO operational if only to generate revenue. But beyond that manned spaceflight is pretty much done. Given that, NASA could shrink massively to host only satellite programs. "Wasteful" programs like NASA go against Progressive dogma anyway.

The idea that simple due diligence implies that we think he's a liar is a lie itself.

Of course objecting to due diligence makes me think he's a liar. In fact, you can pretty much bank on it. Bush should can this guy before he does any more damage.

And we should fine the companies that lied or withheld info on his behalf.

Would you trust a used-car salesman who told you to please not look under the hood? :

...about the death-ray laser Val Kilmer perfected.

"If you are looking under the hood, then you are calling me a liar," Griffin replied. "Because it means you don’t trust what I say is under the hood."

Get a new guy and let Griffin join the ever-expanding ranks of the unemployed. He and I can look for work together (and I'll bet my rezoom is bigger and better than his, which I can say as an unemployed physicist).

Not too long ago Griffin praised Obama's response to the needs of the space program: http://thecaucus.blogs.nytimes.com/2008/10/07/obama-gets-a-thank-you-from-nasa/

These recent outbursts seem completely personal on his part. He is a Bush appointee, after all, so it shouldn't be all that surprising that he demands blind loyalty.

Aspects of the moon plan have long been controversial at NASA:

http://www.usatoday.com/tech/science/2008-07-14-3293499941_x.htm

What better way to ensure you get fired in a matter of weeks? This guy sounds almost Illinois-crazy.

Here's one of the alternatives to Constellation:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/DIRECT

... the people who most vigorously demand trust are the people who least deserve it. Griffin should be proud to show what he claims he's accomplishing.

Or at least it sounds like Mr. Griffin is afraid it is. He looks extraordinarily stupid, though, by acting the way he is. In a little over a month the people he's stonewalling will be in charge, and Griffin is giving them ample excuse to swing the budget-cutting axe around freely. I guess he never heard of Dale Carnegie.

At least if he has any designs on preserving his job. In the real world, the best way to assure that you're dismissed when a new boss moves in is to be uncooperative and insist that your way is the best and above outside evaluation. On January 21, security should be escorting him to the door. Besides, if he's in charge of NASA he's also another one of Bush's lackeys who followed orders to pull the plug on any work the agency was doing on environmental issues, such as climate change. I don't remember the details but I know that a few NASA folks at one point were accusing the agency of suppressing information that contradicted Bush's "findings." I wouldn't be surprised if Bush's team had NASA looking for Heaven. It will be nice when the adults are in charge again and these multi-billion dollar agencies (FDA, FEMA, etc.) start doing real work again.

Maybe I'm just uninformed, but can anyone tell me what useful scientific results have come out of the space program in the last fifteen years that would justify anything close to what it costs?

There are a ton of smart engineers in that place. Shut down the space shuttle and get them redirected on alternative energy technologies, quick before they spend trillions refurbishing the damned thing.

But first, fire this cranky fool Griffin. You got a new boss, dude, telling him to piss off is maybe not the best way to impress him.

That is the single most bullshit statement I have heard in the past 30 years. What is it with "progressives" that they love to keep their heads up their ass and recycle "the truth"??? You'd think they were "conservatives."

Hey, Ubercrombie and Fitch - if the manned space program was so terrible and such a waste of time, how is it you are writing your baloney on a computer like you have? Or did you not ever hear of how the "miniaturization revolution" spurred by the manned space program had "fallout effects"???

There wasn't then and there isn't now a dime spent in "space." It's all spent here. What we need is to get back to something approaching the old program. Of course, the engineering and computer sections would all be staffed with Indians, so maybe we should turn over the planet's space program to a country that still educates people in something more useful than how to get rich pushing pieces of paper around.

But thanks, Uber-bnaby, for demonstrating that being a moron is a bipartisan activity.

The problem with NASA and the moon is that, arguably, Bush's lunacy was proposed with the idea of reigniting the public's love with NASA, and yet it has been a very quiet public relations move, if so. The problem with civilian or government departments that get funding but not public scrutiny is that it gets easy, especially if they are beleaguered or have to fight for every dollar, for the heads to create fiefdoms and castles.

One can forgive NASA administrators from fearing that new administrations will balance the budget on their backs. After all, that was the Reagan and Bush way. However, where there was simply "space," there is now "unmanned vs. manned" and "planetary vs. astronomical" and "moon vs. Mars" and all sorts of other divisions that will allow administrators to create and sustain paranoia about Others, about Them, and how They will want to take Us down.

If anything, this is an argument for complete fiat for oversight and, much more, complete communication with the public. All the pretty castles must be demolished.