"Mission Diversity" and the decline of NASA - A Federal Space Oydessy

[Dunedain]

In 1969, NASA landed the first men on the moon. 45 years later we are unable to duplicate the same feat. After 2010 NASA will retire the space shuttles and we will not be able to return to the International Space Station. The Russians and even the Chinese governments are beginning to take the lead on exploration. Scandal after scandal has rocked NASA, incompetence is rife, and a series of spectacular failures in recent years has shaken confidence in the once respected aeronautics organization.

Here is a supporting article
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/09/13/AR2008091302142.html

So what happened since 1969? Enter DIVERSITY...Over the last few decades NASA has added more and more diversity programs and skin color favoring policies that are discriminating against the best and the brightest. In short NASA is not longer on a quest to find the answers to the universe but is rather on a mission to find minorities for employment.

http://www.grc.nasa.gov/WWW/diversity/index.htm
http://www.nasa.gov/offices/educati...ons/NASA_Science_Technology_Institute_MI.html

Consider the following:
- NASA claims that "diversity is integral with mission success".
- at NASA minorities are given preference in hiring
- certified minority contractors are favored to win contracts with NASA
- NASA is partnering with the United Negro College Fund and other minority outreach groups to fill their staffing needs and management pipeline
- 96% of NASA employees have been trained on "anti-discrimination" practices.
- inexperienced minorities have been favored for flight missions over more seasoned non-minority astronauts (resulting in some impressive explosions over the sea).
- NASA has a Diversity office. It's sole purpose is to "ensure diversity"


The main problem with NASA appears to be this: They favor the color of someone's skin over their ability. This government institution performed incredible feats of space exploration decades ago. Now they are being overtaken by countries that embrace UNITY rather than DIVERSITY such as China and Russia.



Additional reading on NASA's mission to find diversity where no successful organization has found it before.

NASA Diversity Statement
http://www.hq.nasa.gov/office/codee/documents/NASA_Diversity_Policy.pdf

NASA diversity courses for astronauts
http://www.grc.nasa.gov/WWW/diversity/tools.htm

NASA documents their mission to diversity over the years
http://www.grc.nasa.gov/WWW/diversity/culture.htm

NASA Diversity guides for NASA management
http://www.grc.nasa.gov/WWW/diversity/leadershipguides.htm

NASA Diversity Newsletter
http://www.grc.nasa.gov/WWW/diversity/LeadershipGuideNovDec07Jan08.pdf

 

[Chaohinon]

I'm sure it couldn't have anything to do with government ineptitude, and the squandering of resources on wars of aggression

 

[American Nationalist]

In 1969, NASA landed the first men on the moon. 45 years later we are unable to duplicate the same feat. After 2010 NASA will retire the space shuttles and we will not be able to return to the International Space Station. The Russians and even the Chinese governments are beginning to take the lead on exploration. Scandal after scandal has rocked NASA, incompetence is rife, and a series of spectacular failures in recent years has shaken confidence in the once respected aeronautics organization.

Here is a supporting article
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/09/13/AR2008091302142.html

So what happened since 1969? Enter DIVERSITY...Over the last few decades NASA has added more and more diversity programs and skin color favoring policies that are discriminating against the best and the brightest. In short NASA is not longer on a quest to find the answers to the universe but is rather on a mission to find minorities for employment.

http://www.grc.nasa.gov/WWW/diversity/index.htm
http://www.nasa.gov/offices/educati...ons/NASA_Science_Technology_Institute_MI.html

Consider the following:
- NASA claims that "diversity is integral with mission success".
- at NASA minorities are given preference in hiring
- certified minority contractors are favored to win contracts with NASA
- NASA is partnering with the United Negro College Fund and other minority outreach groups to fill their staffing needs and management pipeline
- 96% of NASA employees have been trained on "anti-discrimination" practices.
- inexperienced minorities have been favored for flight missions over more seasoned non-minority astronauts (resulting in some impressive explosions over the sea).
- NASA has a Diversity office. It's sole purpose is to "ensure diversity"


The main problem with NASA appears to be this: They favor the color of someone's skin over their ability. This government institution performed incredible feats of space exploration decades ago. Now they are being overtaken by countries that embrace UNITY rather than DIVERSITY such as China and Russia.



Additional reading on NASA's mission to find diversity where no successful organization has found it before.

NASA Diversity Statement
http://www.hq.nasa.gov/office/codee/documents/NASA_Diversity_Policy.pdf

NASA diversity courses for astronauts
http://www.grc.nasa.gov/WWW/diversity/tools.htm

NASA documents their mission to diversity over the years
http://www.grc.nasa.gov/WWW/diversity/culture.htm

NASA Diversity guides for NASA management
http://www.grc.nasa.gov/WWW/diversity/leadershipguides.htm

NASA Diversity Newsletter
http://www.grc.nasa.gov/WWW/diversity/LeadershipGuideNovDec07Jan08.pdf

If we are in the post racial age, why does affirmative action still exist? The reason is because it isn't the post racial age, it is an anti white age. Quite frankly, I don't give a damn if an Astronaut is white or black or asian. I just want the best guy out there. If this guy happens to be white, so be it, if he is black, so be it. America should have a system based on meritocracy; best man for the job. This affirmative action crap is part of an agenda.

 

[Dunedain]

I'm sure it couldn't have anything to do with government ineptitude, and the squandering of resources on wars of aggression

Never stopped us before.

And for anyone else who is wondering...yes, I attempted to fix the typo in the heading and it was not possible.

 

[bobbyw24]

If we are in the post racial age, why does affirmative action still exist? The reason is because it isn't the post racial age, it is an anti white age. Quite frankly, I don't give a damn if an Astronaut is white or black or asian. I just want the best guy out there. If this guy happens to be white, so be it, if he is black, so be it. America should have a system based on meritocracy; best man for the job. This affirmative action crap is part of an agenda.

I have a client who grew up South Africa and is white. He visited the RSA over Thanksgiving as was shocked to learn that South Africa--which is 95% non-white--has Affirmative Action policies to favor non-whites. He tells me that the law there is that all companies in the RSA must have a non-white CEO.

Diversity for diversity's is a problem when it discriminates against those in unprotected classes.

 

[American Nationalist]

I have a client who grew up South Africa and is white. He visited the RSA over Thanksgiving as was shocked to learn that South Africa--which is 95% non-white--has Affirmative Action policies to favor non-whites. He tells me that the law there is that all companies in the RSA must have a non-white CEO.

Diversity for diversity's is a problem when it discriminates against those in unprotected classes.

I know several South Africans who left after Apartheid ended, they didn't want to deal with the anti white communist ANC. The place has decayed to third world status. I think America needs to take notice. America simply cannot sustain economically with an open borders immigration policy and an increasing welfare state(ie. medicaid expansion and subsidies to buy private insurance). We will be crippled by high taxes and high inflation. Though I don't think we will become communist. We are on the road to becoming a full fledged corporate socialist state.

 

[Dunedain]

I have a client who grew up South Africa and is white. He visited the RSA over Thanksgiving as was shocked to learn that South Africa--which is 95% non-white--has Affirmative Action policies to favor non-whites. He tells me that the law there is that all companies in the RSA must have a non-white CEO.

This explains South Africa's decent from one of the wealthiest societies in Africa to the rape / crime capital of earth.

NASA went the same way. As organizations and countries diversify they de-evolve into 3rd world cesspools with no future. America is on the same course as NASA and South Africa.

 

[bobbyw24]

Ron Paul in his own words: Diversity is Racism

By encouraging Americans to adopt a group mentality, the advocates of so-called "diversity" actually perpetuate racism. Their intense focus on race is inherently racist, because it views individuals only as members of racial groups.

http://www.lewrockwell.com/paul/paul68.html

 

[Zippyjuan]

Ethnicity has nothing to do with the state of NASA. The trip to the moon was seen as a cold war competition between not just the US but the West and capitalism against communist Soviet Union. That got everybody behind the program. Now there are no major goals people can get excited about aside from the scientists so there is less public interest and the budget is shrinking. Having been alive then, the space race was very dramstic and exciting. But that has become commonplace and old news now. Even a manned mission to Mars could not generate the excitement that putting a man on the moon created.

 

[Dunedain]

Ethnicity has nothing to do with the state of NASA. The trip to the moon was seen as a cold war competition between not just the US but the West and capitalism against communist Soviet Union. That got everybody behind the program. Now there are no major goals people can get excited about aside from the scientists so there is less public interest and the budget is shrinking. Having been alive then, the space race was very dramstic and exciting. But that has become commonplace and old news now. Even a manned mission to Mars could not generate the excitement that putting a man on the moon created.

Do you deny that the minorities that are hired under the diversity programs are less qualified?

 

[Zippyjuan]

Do you deny that the minorities that are hired under the diversity programs are less qualified?

Are you asuming that minorities are inherently inferrior to white men? I have not reviewed the quailfications of any of our astronauts or scientists. Have you? What I can tell you is that my alma mater the University of Colorado has produced more astronauts (white or minority) than any other school in the country as far as I know.

 

[Dunedain]

Are you asuming that minorities are inherently inferrior to white men? I have not reviewed the quailfications of any of our astronauts or scientists. Have you? What I can tell you is that my alma mater the University of Colorado has produced more astronauts (white or minority) than any other school in the country as far as I know.

Enforced diversity would not be needed at NASA if all the minorities were well qualified. So yes, the minority applicants are not as qualified. Don't blame me, blame reality.

 

[erowe1]

NASA shouldn't exist at all. If anyone here thinks the problem with stealing money from people to pay for sending other people to the Moon is that the agency doing it is too diverse, then they're in the wrong forum.

 

[Dunedain]

NASA shouldn't exist at all. If anyone here thinks the problem with stealing money from people to pay for sending other people to the Moon is that the agency doing it is too diverse, then they're in the wrong forum.

I would agree that NASA is not a useful organization, although a debate could be made whether it has a basis for its existence considering the allowances to regulate navigation and foreign commerce in the constitution.

Given a choice between spending their billions on exploring the universe or politically correct social engineering programs I would elect the former.

 

[aclove]

Given a choice between spending their billions on exploring the universe or politically correct social engineering programs I would elect the former.

I think that as liberty activists, our main drive should be to reject the notion that our only choices are spending billions coerced from taxpayers to either explore the universe or operate politically correct social engineering programs. We should be working to educate others and present options that don't include the coercive extraction of billions for any reason. The explosion in private firms engaged in aerospace research and development, such as Virgin Galactic's Spaceships One and Two, almost does our job for us.

Yes, government programs that favor one group of individuals over another are wrong. No one denies that. However, we shouldn't fool ourselves into thinking that spewing vitriol about affirmative action programs won't be misunderstood by people who might otherwise have been supportive of the cause of liberty (to say nothing of being deliberately twisted by people who benefit from those programs and have a vested interest in them).

Why alienate potential allies and put a rhetorical weapon in the hands of our opponents?

 

[Dunedain]

Yes, government programs that favor one group of individuals over another are wrong. No one denies that. However, we shouldn't fool ourselves into thinking that spewing vitriol about affirmative action programs won't be misunderstood by people who might otherwise have been supportive of the cause of liberty (to say nothing of being deliberately twisted by people who benefit from those programs and have a vested interest in them).

Why alienate potential allies and put a rhetorical weapon in the hands of our opponents?

Good question. Why not try to drawn in EVERYONE? Maybe even BlackTerrel will get some of his NAACP buddies to join up we'll be so compromising.

If someone is turned off by discussing the negative impacts of FEDERALLY SPONSORED RACISM (affirmative action) they shouldn't be in the liberty movement. The last thing we need is to be the "big tent" people that try to cater to everyone. There are plenty of organizations that do that. Like the democrats and republicans.

 

[erowe1]

I would agree that NASA is not a useful organization, although a debate could be made whether it has a basis for its existence considering the allowances to regulate navigation and foreign commerce in the constitution.

Given a choice between spending their billions on exploring the universe or politically correct social engineering programs I would elect the former.

I would elect the latter. If the government is going to use our money for evil purposes, the least I can hope for is that it do so as inefficiently as possible.

 

[aclove]

Hey, I got news for you pal...regardless of how well Rand Paul is doing in Kentucky, our movement is nowhere near large enough or influential enough to be turning away people who are curious about us or open-minded enough to listen to what we have to say, provided we take a moment to understand where they're coming from and why they might be interested in us. One of the first rules of politics (and human nature in general) is that if you have a message you're trying to sell, you don't get that job done by telling someone what their problem is and how your solution is going to fix that problem. Rather, you find out what issue concerns that person the most, and then tell them how your solution can fix that problem.

Bashing someone who is just starting the process of "waking up" over the head with your personal axe to grind doesn't grow this movement. And if this movement doesn't grow, it won't accomplish much.

 

[Dunedain]

I would elect the latter. If the government is going to use our money for evil purposes, the least I can hope for is that it do so as inefficiently as possible.

I can see your heart is in the right place, even though I struggle to find points of agreement with this.

 

[Ethek]

I think there is not enough evidence ruling out government buracracy in all aspects of the agencies policies... It used to be they could go out and get something done without a mile of red tape. This also applies to candidate selection im sure.

Dont assume malice when it can be explained by ineptness.