You obviously don't live in the USA, but yeah, that's how we roll in 'Merica! Corporate profits above all!

That is it in a nutshell. NASA programs have always been subject to the whims of politicians. I'd bet that the next administration/congress cancels SLS after the next presidential election, and NASA will again look inept and directionless.

In case you are serious, "hot" is a euphemism for someone or something having a high degree of radioactivity. Nothing to do with temperature.

It is very likely that the Dragon capsule will carry astronauts before Orion, but SpaceX, Boeing, Sierra Nevada, et. al. are only going to LEO, Orion is being developed for long duration deep space travel. Moon, asteroids, Mars perhaps.

Does the U.S. Constitution and Bill of Rights apply to non-U.S. people? I would assume not, so a no fly list in the U.S. on foreigner travelers would still hold. True?

Sure, "gun deaths" were reduced, but overall, the murder rate was unchanged. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/G... The point is, people are going to kill, whether they have guns, knives, hammers, rocks or spears. All the hand-wringing by you anti-gun types won't change that one iota.

Right, and there would be no more murders. Ever. Do you really think banning guns will stop people from killing each other? Come on, pull you head out of your ass and think about how long humans have been killing each other compared to how long firearms have existed. Have you seen the scores of beheading videos all over the internet? Shall we ban machetes and knives too? I mean, it will keep more people alive. Oh wait, there's rocks too. Stoning is big in the bible, and continues to this day in various third world regions. Perhaps we should ban the possession of rocks to, you know, keep more people alive.

Of the multitude of reasons SpaceX can operate more cheaply I can think of, the biggies are: -NASA is a Government agency, beholden to the congress and the congress loves its pork, so only certain big-name contractors get NASA contracts. -SpaceX is not a federal agency and doesn't have to play by the same onerous, costly sets of rules as a federal agency (i.e purchasing requirements, safety requirements, etc.) -SpaceX has negotiated some sweet deals to use existing government facilities already paid for by NASA (taxpayers). -SpaceX has received a lot of seed money from NASA. There's more, but you get the idea. I'm not here to take away from what SpaceX are trying to accomplish, but they certainly have an advantage over a bloated government bureaucracy.

It's not a solar eclipse, just a falling satellite.

Can't we go anywhere without being subjected to advertisements?

The quote is "Danger Will Robinson!" There, fixed that for you.

Wow, Dude, nice rant! But why do all antagonists have penis envy?

Surprisingly enough, it is required to run training videos through a web site run by a major US government space agency who shall remain nameless.

I'll second that. I can't tell you how many pr0n movie D/L's have been interrupted by AT&T disconnects!

Mod this parent up. U.S. industry is loathe to spend money on any R&D that does not have an immediate return on investment (read:shareholder gains). That is why there are not now and never will be manned private launchers entirely from the so-called 'private sector'. Too expensive for too little return. This new plan from the Obama administration doesn't change that one bit. The U.S. Treasury will still be spending the money to design and build a man-rated launcher. Instead of ATK, Lockheed, Boeing, etc. being the recipients of this largesse, it will now be SpaceX, Orbital Sciences, and others. Basically, the money has been diverted from large government contractors that have already been in the space business for a long time, to a bunch of newcomers. Same game, different players.