Make America The 50's again.:(

Everyone should watch the film Hidden figures

or just the Flintstones (or Popeye)

“… We look forward to learning more from [and] about the Trump administration's plans for our agency and expanding exploration at the Moon and Mars for the benefit of all.”

Every day seems to be one step closer to pretty much every American institution and businesses grovelling and toadying to the insane whim of the Almightily Radiant Super Excellent Holy Orange Loony Emperor.

I read yesterday about some law firm throwing away its moral compass to appease the Great Orange Fuckwit. “Lack of integrity” doesn’t come within a million miles of describing them.

I think the Americans have a phrase for what’s going on - “Going to Hell on a Handcart”?

I always knew the Americans were nuts but this is getting to be well beyond what I thought was possible

"I always knew the Americans were nuts but this is getting to be well beyond what I thought was possible"

Not ALL Americans...

According to https://www.cfr.org/article/2024-election-numbers:

"... voter turnout nationally in [the] 2024 [Presidential elections] was 63.9 percent"

"More than 155 million Americans voted in 2024: 156,302,318 to be exact."

(Pulls out Calculator) Based on the above numbers there are around 244,604,566 voters in America and around 88,302,248 eligible voters didn't vote...

"Trump won 77,284,118 votes, or 49.8 percent of the votes cast for president."

"Kamala Harris won 74,999,166 votes or 48.3 percent of the votes cast.

Which means around 4,019,034 who DID vote DIDN'T vote for Trump or Harris as President...

Which means that, of eligible voters who actually voted, 79,018,200 (or 50.5%) DID NOT vote for Trump as President

Add in the 36.1% of eligible voters who didn't vote and it means that 68.4% of eligible voters DID NOT vote for Trump as President

So NOT ALL Americans...

(Bet that many who didn't vote now wish they had!)

Doesn't make them not nuts. They still live there for a start.

"Doesn't make them not nuts. They still live there for a start. "

One must be grateful for small mercies.

You wouldn't want boatloads of the ever so slightly not quite so nuts coming to the shores of the UK and signing up for Faredge's Reform Lunacy? And bringing their anti-vax, creationism, guns crazy ideas to boot.

Leave the blighters to the Hell they have created for themselves.

While this argument often gets rehearsed (and often for causes that I'm in favour of, for example the 28% who didn't bother to vote on Brexit is often touted as indicating that only about 37% were actually in favour of Leave), unless it can be shown that the majority of those not voting didn't because of voter suppression, then my view is that sadly you can only make conclusions based on those that actually did vote and that those who didn't vote didn't care enough one way or the other.

You could equally add in the eligible voters to argue the other way, and say 69%-ish of eligible voters (can't be arsed to do the exact maths) didn't mind if Trump became president.

I read yesterday about some law firm throwing away its moral compass

I think that expecting law firms to have a moral compass is probably optimistic, but Columbia University, of which you might have higher hopes, appears to have [1]caved, too . Trump's also [2]ordered the AG to find ways of punishing other law firms that file law suits to which he objects, presumably to make it harder for people to have recourse to the law without the president's sign-off.

However, it's hardly suprising: Trump has a long history of throwing his weight about and he knows that people with mortgages and families are ultimately unlikely to put their livelihoods at risk. And, given that Trump himself has the comfort of being officially above the law, why wouldn't he?

Despite the bold, but empty, words of the commentariat, the defence of the US constitution is ultimately going to be down to those with nothing to lose, because everyone else is going to be keeping their heads below the parapet. Assuming that Keir Starmer isn't hogging all the space.

[1] https://apnews.com/article/columbia-university-funding-trump-fa70143c715df8fd4ef337c0e1ccf872

[2] https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/justice-department/trump-targets-lawyers-frivolous-lawsuits-administration-rcna197698

It isn't as if there wasn't a campaign to get any Trump supporting lawyer disbarred or anything under President Autopen.

Oh sorry, my bad, there WAS!

This is not a campaign to disbar them - lawyers disbar lawyers after due process and clear evidence of professional misconduct.

This is a campaign to intimidate them by threatening to arbitrarily remove their security clearances for purely political motives to stop the administration losing cases in court.

You know that.

I take your point re lawyers and morals.

As for Keir Starmer, he’s on very thin ice. I get that he’s trying to keep the US on-board with Ukraine but he’s in very severe danger of being seen (with some strong justification) as a scared wimp with his handling of Trump.

Trump is so horrendously vindictive that, although I find it slightly sickening, I can't deny that the smart approach is to say publicly what he wants to hear. Whether that translates into any sort of actionable policy is a different matter. Regrettably, for so many american corporations, it has - the jury is out on Starmer, but I agree it's hard not to be discouraged.

I can't deny that the smart approach is to say publicly what he wants to hear

I think the flaw with that approach is that it assumes that there is a limit to how far Trump will go and that somehow if he can be publicly appeased the worst can be averted. However, it seems just as likely that Trump will treat each concession as permission to make a further demand.

I admit that the (former) US allies are in a weak position right now, but that position is not likely to change materially for 5-10 years even with a following wind. That's a lot of time to continue conceding. The alternative view is that a failure to push back strongly now will simply make the position worse. If ultimately Starmer thinks he doesn't have to make a choice between the US and Europe he'll find himself shunned by both of them.

Excellent acronym, have one on me ->

This pathetic small-willy-waving (for that is what it is) is absolutely ridiculous. Many different people, from all kinds of backgrounds, have all made important contributions to the successes of NASA (and of course also in other space agencies around the world) over many years, and, as long as they are a suitable person for the job, they absolutely should continue to do so. Everyone deserves to have at least one role model that they can look up to and think "that could also be me". It was and is "For All Mankind", after all.

Do we need to ask Margaret Hamilton to knock some sense into some people by [1]standing next to Apollo program code print-outs once again, this time not very well balanced on a balcony railing above a certain someone's head?

[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Margaret_Hamilton_(software_engineer)#/media/File:Margaret_Hamilton_-_restoration.jpg

"The purge of DEI language from US federal websites has claimed another victim. This time, it is NASA's pledge to land the first woman and the first person of color on the Moon as part of the Artemis program."

One small step for man, one giant leap for mankind. I am sure some groups would like to see some representation they identify with do something for them to quickly forget about. Most just appreciate the achievements without any of the divisions or ists being imposed. Of course the ists and those pushing the divide will be upset and I expect a few will downvote me too.

"do something for them to quickly forget about"

The Artemis crew will be quickly forgotten?

In the afterglow of Trump's WW3, maybe.

The proof will be if the woman slated for the trip stays on the Artemis II team.

PS I've not down voted you. The Commentard previously known as dangerous race.

@Pussifer

"The proof will be if the woman slated for the trip stays on the Artemis II team."

If she is the best one for the job I hope so too. How insulting is it to work hard to qualify for something only for people to debate if the success was based on skill or divisive politics.

Imagine codejunky's envisioned distant future, when a spaceship filled entirely with white men heads to the stars to propagate humanity throughout the galaxy...

> Imagine codejunky's envisioned distant future, when a spaceship filled entirely with white men heads to the stars to propagate humanity throughout the galaxy...

Or just "the best person for the job" without getting hung up about something as childishly facile as what shade their skin is?

@Androgynous Cupboard

"Imagine codejunky's envisioned distant future, when a spaceship filled entirely with white men heads to the stars to propagate humanity throughout the galaxy..."

You sound very racist and sexist. What has that to do with my comment? At what point do I discriminate? You also sound pretty stupid as if its only men how can they propagate?

"You sound very racist and sexist."

Have you gone all woke, Madam? A newly minted member of the DEI Warriors? Well that's a real turn up for the books. A veritable plot twist.

Astonishing!

@ChodeMonkey

"Have you gone all woke, Madam? A newly minted member of the DEI Warriors? Well that's a real turn up for the books. A veritable plot twist."

In your trolling you do seem to realise the DEI rubbish being woke rubbish and through your mocking seem to realise it is discrimination and various isms. At least I am hoping you understand

Is woke rubbish like non-racist garbage? Or non-sexist trash?

spaceship filled entirely with white men heads to the stars to propagate humanity throughout the galaxy...

I pissed myself with the picture of an armada of incel filled spaceships being hurled into the void with the promise of an inexhaustible supply of scantily clad alienesses (all bearing a remarkable resemblance to Leia Organa) with whom they might freely propagate themselves. ( "To boldly go where no man has gone before!" Come? :)

The Golgafrinchan solution?

I'm happy to see that race and sex do not decide who gets to be an astronaut.

No you just have to be a square jawed Marine test pilot. The air force and navy had already had their turn in return for cooperation in Apollo. The USMC are the only ones left with square jawed test pilots.

You can even be a women or black (as long as you are Christian)

Being a Marine test pilot really does help in the complexities of space though, especially since much of this equipment is made by companies specializing in flight hardware and processes.

As for a square jaw, aren't they exactly removing arbitrary requirements like that (and gender and skin color) from the list?

55 years after the first moon landing we don't seem to have made much progress in automated flight control systems that we still need a Neal Armstrong to pilot the craft

Obviously we have run out of Nazi rocket scientists. Perhaps we should recruit some of those Japanese chaps that landed a space probe on an asteroid and returned it safely.

I hear SpaceX has a few.

Unfortunately their Nazi is not a rocket scientist and their rocket scientists aren't Nazis

I imagine the NASA chaps † who chose the name knew the other 300 million largely lacking a credible education, let alone a classical one, knew if that unwashed thought at all, they would believe it was Artemus a bloke's name (like Artemus Gordon, James West's sidekick form The Wild Wild West .)

Probably why they didn't opt for the Roman Dianna.

† meant inclusively.

passed by Congress starts

Sec. 101. This act may be cited as the “National Aeronautics and Space Act of 1958”.

DECLARATION OF POLICY AND PURPOSE

Sec. 102. (a) The Congress hereby declares that it is the policy of the United States that activities in space should be devoted to peaceful purposes for the benefit of all mankind.

and amended in 2010 to devoted to peaceful purposes for the benefit of all humankind

Maybe NASA should be reminded of the 'all' in there.