"SH" == Steve Hix writes:

SH NASA hasn't done all that well no matter what party has been
SH calling the shots since the early 1970s, it's not nothing
SH whatsoever to do with "the Republican 'government-sux' crowd".

Let me make clear I'm not going to defend the current NASA. Their
decline clearly occurred with the cutoff of the Apollo program (under
Nixon BTW though probably Congress had as much or more responsibility
for their cutback). They never really regained the competence and
prestige they had in the '60s.

SH And Rutan (along with a host of others) is quite correct in
SH stating that NASA has become badly risk-averse bureaucracy
SH that seems more interested in its own maintenance than in
SH doing really new things, particularly in regard to manned
SH spaceflight.

Again, not defending current NASA, but the above is overly harsh. They
have achieved some very good unmanned interplanetary missions,
notwithstanding blunders betwee SI and English units. And they have
to avoid obvious risks.

My gripe with Rutan is several, but his utterly over-the-top criticism
of anything government is absurd and childish. It speaks more to his
insecurity than anything.

--
I did not know how to say goodbye. It was harder still, when I refused
to say it.
~ Native American saying