|
Author
|
Topic: Review of US Human Space Flight (Augustine)
|
chet
Member Posts: 1543
From: Beverly Hills, Calif.
Registered: Nov 2000
|
posted 01-27-2010 11:09 PM
   
Right now this looks to be shaping up as a waste of resources - pouring money into new designs just so we can stay pretty much where we already are (LEO) sounds counterproductive and frankly, quite uninspiring. |
328KF
Member Posts: 1388
From:
Registered: Apr 2008
|
posted 01-27-2010 11:24 PM
Another quote from the State of the Union address: "Well, I do not accept second place for the United States of America."Well, you have solidly put us on the road to second place, and maybe third or fourth, Mr. President. We will be flying around the Earth until 2020 or so (if ISS lasts that long) and then we will de-orbit the facility and our manned space program. I'm all for commercial development... the more the better. But to turn our entire space transportation system over to unproven rockets and spacecraft with no track record shows just how uninformed this administration is. And this was planned from Day 1... don't be fooled. He can't turn his back on the huge investment and the international responsibilities of ISS, so he took the cheapest way to supply it until it dies. We can thank Reagan, the Bush's, and even Clinton for keeping the project alive in past decades, or we would be out of business with the last shuttle flight. Let the sugar-coating continue... most of us know what really happened here. |
Fra Mauro
Member Posts: 1739
From: Bethpage, N.Y.
Registered: Jul 2002
|
posted 01-27-2010 11:31 PM
We need to fight this with all we have got -- emails, snail mail, phone calls to the White House, our representatives and the media. Let them know that there is a group of voters who will hold them accountable for killing manned spaceflight. Sitting back and hoping for the best will no longer work. Once again we have a President and a NASA administrator who hate the program. No President has a right to kill our space program. Many times unnamed sources say things to gauge public reaction. Remember when David Stockman wanted to turn off Voyagers 1 and 2 to save money? Why didn't it happen? Because people in the scientific community and in Congress had a fit. |
Lunatiki
Member Posts: 237
From: Amarillo, TX, USA
Registered: Dec 2006
|
posted 01-27-2010 11:35 PM
NASA will have a new job. From the Orlando Sentinel article.... In the meantime, the White House will direct NASA to concentrate on Earth-science projects — principally, researching and monitoring climate change |
Jay Chladek
Member Posts: 2272
From: Bellevue, NE, USA
Registered: Aug 2007
|
posted 01-27-2010 11:44 PM
quote:
Originally posted by Mercury7:
I don't know the details but I am pretty sure Congress has passed some legislation extending the umbrella of litigation protection to companies like Space X.
That is still no guarantee that one wouldn't try to litigate as it just boils down to having a lawyer willing to try it. There could still be irreparable damage caused by public scrutiny from those who would put it on trial in the court of "public opinion" and the only people who would likely get rich off of it would be the legal teams. |
bobzz
Member Posts: 100
From: Batavia, Illinois
Registered: Aug 2007
|
posted 01-27-2010 11:44 PM
This is the end of the line for US manned spaceflight for at least a decade, maybe more. Soyuz will be the Model T into LEO for the ISS. In political circles there will no real tears shed as the ongoing recession will dominate all talk of expenditures. Except for those whose districts are impacted by the loss of aerospace jobs, no congressman is going to go to bat for NASA while this financial crisis continues. I don't like saying this but I believe it is the political reality we face. |
cspg
Member Posts: 6347
From: Geneva, Switzerland
Registered: May 2006
|
posted 01-28-2010 12:31 AM
quote:
Originally posted by 328KF:
Well, you have solidly put us on the road to second place, and maybe third or fourth, Mr. President. We will be flying around the Earth until 2020 or so (if ISS lasts that long) and then we will de-orbit the facility and our manned space program.
That's an interesting point. With the increase of orbital debris, what would happen to the space program if the ISS had to be evacuated and rendered useless? quote:
I'm all for commercial development...
I still don't understand this "commercial (ie.private?) development" thing. It's going to be a Government-funded (your tax dollars) privately-developed program. But that's not really different from what's happening now. To me commercial means privately funded programs (launch complex, rocket, spacecraft-not SpaceShip Two, recovery etc) which need to make a buck at the end of the fiscal year. I don't see this happening soon. There is no market for it, and the infrastructure is too expensive to be financed completely by private capital.
|
cspg
Member Posts: 6347
From: Geneva, Switzerland
Registered: May 2006
|
posted 01-28-2010 12:38 AM
The Orlando Sentinel and Florida Today got some confirmation late today about the White House's plans for NASA. Do I see contradictions in these articles? The additional $1.3 billion/year corresponds to the $6 billion "commercial" crew transportation. Why upgrade the KSC if there are no new launchers to take off from there? Is this a way to see that tax dollars will be used to fund the infrastructure those pseudo "commercial" companies will use? And the last sentence from Florida Today is rather curious: "Kennedy Space Center would receive hundreds of new jobs from unspecified improvements to its facilities, with a faster pace of launches to keep the workforce more engaged." Faster pace of launches? What launches? Which vehicles? What programs?  |
cspg
Member Posts: 6347
From: Geneva, Switzerland
Registered: May 2006
|
posted 01-28-2010 01:09 AM
quote:
Originally posted by Mercury7:
Fox News has added the moon cancellation chatter to their news cast, however the Apple iPad is getting more coverage.
People prefer to look down (at the iPad) than to look up (at the stars)!  |
issman1
Member Posts: 1106
From: UK
Registered: Apr 2005
|
posted 01-28-2010 01:45 AM
If (as some suggest) Obama is anti-NASA let us see if there wil be mass protests in Washington, or 'tea parties', demanding Ares be reprieved?Somehow, I doubt it. Austerity means cutting back on those programmes with little or no public support. When was the last time the American people rallied around NASA anyway? |
jimsz
Member Posts: 644
From:
Registered: Aug 2006
|
posted 01-28-2010 06:35 AM
quote:
Originally posted by cspg:
People prefer to look down (at the iPad) than to look up (at the stars)!
The iPad brings more excitement to people than NASA has for the last 25 years!If the US Government/NASA extend the ISS until 2020 and that is the thrust of US manned space exploration, NASA and the US lead in space is doomed. That would be 30+ years of a space shuttle program and 10 or so years going to the ISS by other means. Could NASA possibly get more uninspired? We had better enjoy the Space Pioneers from Mercury, Gemini and Apollo (and Skylab) while we can because once they are gone their are no explorers left to take their place. |
issman1
Member Posts: 1106
From: UK
Registered: Apr 2005
|
posted 01-28-2010 07:06 AM
As everyone knows, this past summer was the 40th anniversary of Apollo 11.Where was the vast public reminiscing? I don't recall any pop songs recognising the achievement of Apollo 11. Or any other cultural acknowledgement. The American people were too busy to care less because of all they see, hear and read about is unemployment and homes being repossessed. Some of the nostaglia I'm reading on here is not something dear to most Americans hearts. Fact is human spaceflight is not an important factor in their lives anymore. The days of Apollo are over. The Shuttle lost its sparkle long ago. The opportunity to send astronauts to other destinations beyong LEO were squandered decades ago. Ask your politicians really hard questions, if you can, such as why the NASA budget isn't even a fraction of the Pentagon's budget? |
Go4Launch
Member Posts: 562
From: Seminole, Fla.
Registered: Jul 2003
|
posted 01-28-2010 08:11 AM
EerieJanuary 27: Apollo 1
January 28: Challenger
February 1: Columbia
January 27: Constellation |
Mercury7
Member Posts: 360
From: Greenville, SC, USA
Registered: Aug 2006
|
posted 01-28-2010 08:21 AM
quote:
Originally posted by issman1:
If (as some suggest) Obama is anti-NASA let us see if there wil be mass protests in Washington, or 'tea parties', demanding Ares be reprieved?
I would love it if organizers across the country would hold protest but we don't really have a national organization that this falls under. I know some people might think we do but seriously we don't, perhaps Robert should start one... I nominate myself as president of the Greenville SC chapter. LOL. |
Robert Pearlman
Editor Posts: 50516
From: Houston, TX
Registered: Nov 1999
|
posted 01-28-2010 08:35 AM
quote:
Originally posted by Mercury7:
I would love it if organizers across the country would hold protest but we don't really have a national organization that this falls under.
While I obviously disagree that a protest is necessary (I still think some here are being premature in their comments based on what is coming on Monday), there are many pro-space exploration advocacy organizations. The National Space Society, Space Frontier Foundation and ProSpace have all organized marches on Congress. The Planetary Society and Mars Society have each lobbied for their platforms. The Space Foundation and Coalition for Space Exploration have united the U.S. space industry to campaign for a strong space program. |
issman1
Member Posts: 1106
From: UK
Registered: Apr 2005
|
posted 01-28-2010 09:05 AM
I don't think it's fair to equate Constellation with NASA's three tragedies. The demise of Constellation (as it currently exists) is probably a Greek tragedy.Nor do I think it was right for Fra Mauro to suggest the present NASA administrator is someone "who hate(s) the program". Mr. Bolden is an ex-astronaut who risked his life on four shuttle missions after all. |
fireflyer21
Member Posts: 35
From: Evansville, IN
Registered: Jul 2004
|
posted 01-28-2010 09:21 AM
quote:
Originally posted by Go4Launch:
January 27: Constellation
I think this is an unfortunate and misguided post. No bureaucratic decision, no matter how strong the emotions such decision produces, comes anywhere near the sense of loss I feel for the crews of Apollo 1, Challenger, and Columbia. No comparison, in my opinion.
|
moorouge
Member Posts: 2486
From: U.K.
Registered: Jul 2009
|
posted 01-28-2010 10:29 AM
quote:
Originally posted by Robert Pearlman:
We have the technology, but the political conditions that enabled the Apollo program may never exist again: not only were were racing the Soviets, but we were fulfilling the legacy of a fallen president.
Yes Robert - the 'beat the Russians' was a factor in Kennedy's announcement to go to the Moon, but it wasn't the main one. Neither was it fulfilling the legacy of a fallen President. Kennedy took the Apollo option because he was persuaded by Lyndon Johnson that this was a viable way of spending his way out of a financial crisis and setting America on its way to the kind of society he wished to see. For Kennedy, going to the Moon was incidental as he was not a space enthusiast.In many respects the situation today bears many similarities with those present in 1960. Obama, like Kennedy, needs a goal to focus the American public; Obama has the Augustine Report, Kennedy had the Wiesner Report; Obama has social projects to finance as did Kennedy. However, there is one huge difference between 1960 and now. Kennedy had a Lyndon Johnson. Obama does not. Neither, regrettably, does NASA. |
Mercury7
Member Posts: 360
From: Greenville, SC, USA
Registered: Aug 2006
|
posted 01-28-2010 10:31 AM
Robert, do you at least think we have lost the moon? That is primarily what most of us are upset about, I mean it does not matter if Obama is giving six or 60 billion to NASA. The tree that I cannot see the forest through is a big one, everything else that NASA does is fine but does not inspire me and will not inspire the children of the world. I concede we are all jumping the gun here and I am fine with reading every news article I can between now and Monday, but let me say once more...It's all about the moon, if they take it away I will not be happy. |
Mercury7
Member Posts: 360
From: Greenville, SC, USA
Registered: Aug 2006
|
posted 01-28-2010 10:36 AM
collectSPACE is a good example of inspiration vs. 'oh, that's pretty cool.' I would speculate that without the moon landings this website would not even exist. |
Robert Pearlman
Editor Posts: 50516
From: Houston, TX
Registered: Nov 1999
|
posted 01-28-2010 10:42 AM
Believe me when I say I would like nothing more to see us return to the Moon -- of all the proposed destinations, it's the one I personally favor the most -- but I disagree that it is the only destination that can inspire. Take, for example, Phobos... not that I am saying that is what is coming on Monday, but certainly we can agree that such a mission would serve to inspire? The same goes for near Earth orbit asteroids. quote:
Originally posted by Mercury7:
I would speculate that without the moon landings this website would not even exist.
If you are referring specifically to my own inspiration, then you would be wrong.The IMAX film "The Dream of Alive" served as a great inspiration for me growing up, and it was all about low Earth orbit satellite repair. The Solar Max repair to this day is one of my favorite space missions. Ox van Hoften and Pinky Nelson rank next to Neil and Buzz in my book. The same can be said for the crews of the more recent Hubble Space Telescope servicing missions. But I digress. My advice: wait the weekend and see what Bolden announces on Monday... |
Rick Boos
Member Posts: 851
From: Celina, Ohio
Registered: Feb 2000
|
posted 01-28-2010 10:48 AM
quote:
Originally posted by Go4Launch:
January 27: Constellation
Yesterday afternoon I received an e-mail from Gus Grissom's brother Lowell. He attached a copy of the Orlando Sentinel article referencing axing the moon program and added a note that said "This makes Jan. 27 an even sadder day". I also talked to Guenter Wendt and he was a bit more optimistic and and said that he has had talks with NASA Administrator Charles Bolden about the direction and future of our space program and as I said he was a bit more optimistic. Let us hope that we don't have to add another date to this sad two month time frame to mark the ending of our dreams of manned exploration of the Moon and Mars within our lifetime. Let us never forget those who gave their lives so we could reach for the stars! |
chet
Member Posts: 1543
From: Beverly Hills, Calif.
Registered: Nov 2000
|
posted 01-28-2010 12:22 PM
Wonder if Tom Hanks put in a conference call to Kevin Bacon and Bill Paxton this morning telling them "we just lost the moon". |
Robert Pearlman
Editor Posts: 50516
From: Houston, TX
Registered: Nov 1999
|
posted 01-28-2010 02:44 PM
Space.com spoke with Leroy Chiao, a former astronaut and Augustine committee member, as well as John Logsdon, a space policy expert and professor emeritus at George Washington University, about the recent reports from the Orlando Sentinel and Florida Today. "I think it would be premature to say that Constellation is going to end," Chiao told SPACE.com. "What I think would be more probable is that there would be some variation on current plans."But others take a dimmer view. "Constellation is dead," Logsdon said. Yet he emphasized that that doesn't mean America won't go back to the moon. It just won't go back on the schedule and vision laid out by President Bush in 2004. |
328KF
Member Posts: 1388
From:
Registered: Apr 2008
|
posted 01-28-2010 02:48 PM
quote:
Originally posted by cspg:
I still don't understand this "commercial (i.e. private?) development" thing. It's going to be a Government-funded (your tax dollars) privately-developed program.
You are absolutely correct. I think the more appropriate term being bounced around is "outsourced."I didn't want to expand too much on the "if ISS lasts that long" thing last night, as it was slightly off topic of my post, but it is a real possibility that it won't go out to 2020. We are relying on Russian and "outsourced" transportation vehicles, all of which dock automatically with manual back-up, some of which have yet to be tested. If we have a repeat of the Mir collision, which occurred during a test of the manual back-up system, or anything remotely similar, the station is at extreme risk of being lost. It won't necessarily be a complete loss, but any damage to a module, solar array, cooling loop, etc. could reduce its' capability down to something that is not economically or technically feasible to maintain. There will be no shuttle to mount a major repair mission or bring up large replacement parts. IF this were to happen, that's the end of the ballgame, folks. With no parallel development of an exploration program, there will be no destination for the outsourced vehicles and not too much demand to fly them on individual research missions. I haven't heard anything about private companies building Saturn-class rockets, and they have no economic incentive to do so. We all talked about how international partnerships were the only affordable way to leave the planet going forward... it's that expensive. One country could never justify the cost, so why would one think that outsourced transportation could do it? Manned spaceflight is something America has always led in; it is part of our culture. But if this shakes out the way we're hearing, that legacy is about to come to an end. I certainly hope something changes and there is something stunning in that budget, but... There I go again..."Hope" and "Change". |
jimsz
Member Posts: 644
From:
Registered: Aug 2006
|
posted 01-28-2010 03:03 PM
quote:
Originally posted by 328KF:
There I go again..."Hope" and "Change".
Hopefully the hope and change NASA needs will be better than the hope and change currently being shoved down the throat of America. |
Robert Pearlman
Editor Posts: 50516
From: Houston, TX
Registered: Nov 1999
|
posted 01-28-2010 03:24 PM
quote:
Originally posted by 328KF:
...all of which dock automatically with manual back-up
JAXA's HTV is captured by robotic arm and berthed. quote:
If we have a repeat of the Mir collision, which occurred during a test of the manual back-up system, or anything remotely similar, the station is at extreme risk of being lost.
I believe this to be incorrect, or at least over-generalized, as the ISS was designed to survive a collision. Modules can be sealed off, power can be rerouted and repair materials are already on-orbit. quote:
I haven't heard anything about private companies building Saturn-class rockets...
And because you haven't heard about it (yet), it means it cannot occur? quote:
There I go again..."Hope" and "Change".
Forget about the President for a moment. Do you honestly believe that Charlie Bolden would continue serving as NASA Administrator if he didn't believe in the plan he is going to announce on Monday? |
SpaceAholic
Member Posts: 5246
From: Sierra Vista, Arizona
Registered: Nov 1999
|
posted 01-28-2010 03:51 PM
quote:
Originally posted by Robert Pearlman:
I believe this to be incorrect, or at least over-generalized, as the ISS was designed to survive a collision. Modules can be sealed off, power can be rerouted and repair materials are already on-orbit.
The relative fragility of the ISS to impact and stress, even during relatively low energetic events was highlighted early last year during a scheduled reboost; the engine firing cut off abruptly (rather then gradually) and there was some concern the imparted structural oscillations induced immediate damage and also may have decreased the overall life expectancy (due to fatigue) of the space station. There are many (impact parameter dependent) scenarios which can render the ISS permanently non-inhabitable or degrade its utility to the point where it no longer remains a useful scientific platform. |
Robert Pearlman
Editor Posts: 50516
From: Houston, TX
Registered: Nov 1999
|
posted 01-28-2010 03:54 PM
quote:
Originally posted by SpaceAholic:
...also may have decreased the overall life expectancy (due to fatigue) of the space station.
Yes, but that life expectancy is projected to outwards of 2030 and that event, which resulted in no damage, demonstrated to station managers that the ISS was sturdier than their models predicted. |
SpaceAholic
Member Posts: 5246
From: Sierra Vista, Arizona
Registered: Nov 1999
|
posted 01-28-2010 04:25 PM
It was a low impulse event, many orders of magnitude below what would be experienced from an errant spacecraft or debris (total ISP of the two thrusters 6K newtons/1400 pounds). |
Aztecdoug
Member Posts: 1405
From: Huntington Beach
Registered: Feb 2000
|
posted 01-28-2010 04:49 PM
"Constellation is dead," Logsdon said. Yet he emphasized that that doesn't mean America won't go back to the moon. It just won't go back on the schedule and vision laid out by President Bush in 2004. This aligns with my working theory that President Barack "I am not George Bush" Obama is going to throw out anything so grand as returning to the Moon initiated by George Bush.I suspect the last thing Obama or his close advisors would want is to let Bush have any kind of positive legacy similar to JFK in regards to returning to the Moon. Hopefully my read on the political climate is all wrong on this subject. We will see soon enough... |
mjanovec
Member Posts: 3811
From: Midwest, USA
Registered: Jul 2005
|
posted 01-28-2010 05:16 PM
Before the Obama bashing gets too thick around here, let's keep in mind that the president is not likely hearing much support from most Americans to return to the moon (or go to Mars)... whether it be from Democrats or Republicans. Those of us on cS are in the minority right now. And while the public, when polled, might show general support for NASA as a whole, it's not a program that weighs heavily on most people's minds (especially following the economic disaster that began in the previous administration). As much as I hate to say it, maybe the American public needs to lose their space program before they can fully start to appreciate it. Perhaps when the Chinese are walking on the moon and setting up their lunar base will the larger American public start asking "why aren't we doing that?" Until then, don't expect a lot of people to stand up and raise a fuss. And, in retrospect, it's too bad the Russian moon program couldn't have followed America to the moon. If the Russians had made a manned landing in 1970 or 1971, I suspect the space program of the past 35 years would have taken a much different path. |
328KF
Member Posts: 1388
From:
Registered: Apr 2008
|
posted 01-28-2010 06:16 PM
Congressman Bill Posey release President's NASA "Plan" Is A Giant Leap Backwards and Would Be Devastating to America's Space Program and the Space CoastCongressman Bill Posey (R-Rockledge) released the following statement in reaction to news reports that the Obama Administration is preparing to eliminate America's next generation space vehicle to invest in earth sciences: "Although Congress awaits the President's official budget request next week, I am deeply concerned over news reports citing Administration officials that the President seems determined to abdicate America's leadership in human space exploration. Just weeks before the 2008 election, then-Senator Obama came though Central Florida promising the nation and the residents of Brevard County that if elected President, he would close the space gap and keep America first in space. If this news report is even half right, this plan, if you can call it a plan, would be a devastating reversal of that commitment. "This Administration has thrown hundreds of billions of dollars into a failed stimulus bill, but when it comes to keeping America first in space his 'plan' is to cancel the development of America's next human space vehicle, outsource our good-paying Shuttle jobs to the Russians, rush/force the transition to yet unproven commercial alternatives, and shifts money from human space flight to global warming research. "Until we have a clearer plan for the future, the only realistic and reasonable way to preserve America's leadership in space is too provide for a temporary extension of the Shuttle. To terminate the Shuttle later this year with no plan, but rather a vain hope, is ill advised. "My biggest fear is that this amounts to a slow death of our nation's human space flight program; a retreat from America's decades of leadership in space, ending the economic advantages that our space program has brought to the U.S., and ceding space to the Russians, Chinese and others. I will do all that I can to stop this ill-advised plan. "The President's U-turn on this issue is both bizarre and misguided. I will continue to work with my House colleagues from both parties and from across the country to keep America first in space. This issue is far from over." |
Robert Pearlman
Editor Posts: 50516
From: Houston, TX
Registered: Nov 1999
|
posted 01-28-2010 06:24 PM
According to Space News, congressional staff briefings on the President's FY2011 budget request are to begin tomorrow (Friday). |
SRB
Member Posts: 258
From:
Registered: Jan 2001
|
posted 01-28-2010 07:04 PM
I have said on these posts for the last few years that the U.S. will have no real commitment to going to Mars (now, even back to the moon) until people from other nations are up there walking around and exploring these new worlds. My bet has been on China, and it looks like a safer and safer bet each year. I think I'll begin collecting more Chinese memorabilia because they are the future of human space exploration. I dearly want to see men and women walk on Mars in my lifetime, so I am rooting for the Chinese to do it. The U.S. program is past. |
Robert Pearlman
Editor Posts: 50516
From: Houston, TX
Registered: Nov 1999
|
posted 01-28-2010 08:05 PM
The New York Times provides the first comments by NASA Administrator Charlie Bolden, as well further remarks by Sally Ride. Speaking at a news conference in Israel on Wednesday, Gen. Charles F. Bolden Jr., the NASA administrator, gave hints of the new direction. "What NASA will focus on is facilitating the success of -- I like to use the term 'entrepreneurial interests,' " General Bolden said....Sally K. Ride, a former astronaut who served on the blue-ribbon panel, said she was encouraged by the budget increase for NASA in light of the planned freeze on domestic spending over all. "They plan to be sending people beyond low-Earth orbit, and they have a good formulation," Dr. Ride said. "I think the way to evaluate this plan when it's rolled out is to ask whether the administration has given NASA the funds for what it's asked to do." "It appears to me the answer is yes," Dr. Ride said, based on briefings she had received on the plans. |
Mercury7
Member Posts: 360
From: Greenville, SC, USA
Registered: Aug 2006
|
posted 01-28-2010 08:13 PM
quote:
Originally posted by SRB:
My bet has been on China...
I have been trying to make people understand that China will be going to the moon but you are right that the general public will not care til they start getting close at which point it will be to late for America... |
Mercury7
Member Posts: 360
From: Greenville, SC, USA
Registered: Aug 2006
|
posted 01-28-2010 08:23 PM
"They plan to be sending people beyond low-Earth orbit, and they have a good formulation," Dr. Ride said. Did Sally actually say "they will be sending people beyond LEO"? That is the first I heard that. I guess the next question would be in what? Are they going to outsource that too? I wish it were Monday already so I could understand how fleshed out this plan really is. Something tells me they better have lots of details ready because they will definitely get grilled over the next month. Although I will always support NASA and space exploration I have to say I will hold Obama accountable, no matter how you slice it he did lie about support for Constellation. If he did not mean it he should not have said it. I informed him of that tonight, I am afraid he already lost my vote in 2012 over this, but don't worry too much, I am from South Carolina and a vote for a democrat in this state does not mean anything anyway. |
Robert Pearlman
Editor Posts: 50516
From: Houston, TX
Registered: Nov 1999
|
posted 01-28-2010 08:30 PM
quote:
Originally posted by Mercury7:
...no matter how you slice it he did lie about support for Constellation.
For years, I have told people I support Constellation. But if I change my mind on Monday (for example) and support what I think might be a better plan, I've lied? |
Mercury7
Member Posts: 360
From: Greenville, SC, USA
Registered: Aug 2006
|
posted 01-28-2010 08:35 PM
Yes, if you told me you support it to get my vote Robert. Big difference. |
Topic Closed
advertisement