Now, I'm all for increasing the focus and budget of our space exploration program, manned or un-manned, but is something like this really qualified to be called space "exploration?"
It sounds like the equivalent of some lazy couch potato filling a cooler full of beer and plopping said cooler next to his seat in prepping for an afternoon of watching the game on TV. Rather than go out to the fridge in the kitchen and "explore" that environment for his shallow needs, he brings the source to him.
Sounds like exploitation, not exploration.
You know some fucking corporate interests are behind this. They probably already have drawn up plans on how best to mine the fuck out of this lifeless rock which, according to the article, will be parked somewhere next to the moon.
Maybe in 100 years we could have a whole array of asteroids orbiting earth, easily plucked clean of any commercially-viable minerals. Oh, and since they'd be visible from Earth (with simple telescopes) let's have them emblazoned with corporate logos or advertisements!
And would you feel comfortable with big chunks of iron and stone hurtling around in orbit? If one came barreling inward for a close encounter, how would they stop it? We'd be toast.
I'm pretty sure JFK didn't have hair-brained schemes like this in mind when he challenged the scientific community to step up their quest to expand the possibilities of manned space exploration.
Obama has other more grounded goals in mind for his legacy. He's already shown he has little patience for the decidedly delayed gratification timetable of manned space exploration. This week's declaration only earmarks a pitiful $100 million per year increase to achieve this farce, even though it would take many billions to actually pull off.
Yet another "small step for Man, and an even smaller step for Man's future."