Check out the size of my rocket.

Pardon me for putting on my tin-foil hat again, but I'd just like to remind everyone that NASA is a military organization; if it was solely about science, a Republican administration wouldn't fund it. If they cared about science, stem-cell research would be running full steam ahead. Going to the moon in the 1960s wasn't for scientific research; it was to get there before the Russians and put those commie bastards in their place. With the plans to weaponize space now fairly common knowledge*, and with the real advancements in space travel happening in the private sector, how else do you expect me to think about NASA?

And now that one of the frontrunners for the Senatorial title of Dickweed of the Decade has pledged full funding for useless trips to the Moon and Mars, at least he was honest about the motivation:

"If you ask anyone in this country, 'Do you believe that the United States should cede the moon to say the Chinese, Europeans, Russians, whoever?' I bet you the answer would be, 'No,' he said."

Imperialism. World dominance. Instilling fear. Swinging the collective large phallus of the United States. These are the motivations for funding NASA.

The 2006 budget for NASA is $16,456,300,000. That wad would build a lot of schools and homes, provide quality healthcare to millions, and could perfect the technology for alternative-fueled vehicles. I think DeLay should get is priorities straight.

On the other hand, the current cost of the Iraq war (at of the time of this posting) is about $173,640,350,000. Maybe I should get my priorities straight.

*Yes, I know weaponizing space is an Air Force project (and I've mentioned it before [scroll to the bottom]). However, where do you think the Air Force gets their research for going into space? The National Space and Aeronautics Administration.