Someone named
Major General Scott Gration, someone whose name and space was hitherto never mentioned in connection with space is now being mentioned as NASA administrator. This possibility has Rand Simberg in a
blind panic, which may or may not be a recommendation. General Gration seems to think that Obama is America's Nelson Mandela, which does not speak with of his temperament or judgment.
Addendum: Nevertheless, according to Space.Com, General Gration has been
offered the job as NASA Administrator. This should be interesting.
Since everyone else is doing ill informed speculation, I might as well join it. General Gration would seem to be a better pick for something having to do with Africa, where he has some considerable experience, than as head of NASA. The two assets he has are some experience running large organizations and close ties to the President to be. But he has almost zero space experience, which is not necessarily a disadvantage (see Jim Webb and Sean O'Keefe). His opinions on the exploration initiative, commercial space, and other space issues are unknown.
One suspects, though, that space policy will be made above General Gration's pay grade and his job will be to salute and implement whatever is decreed.
Addendum 2: Then there is
this.
The most mystical believer in Obamaism whom I met was Scott Gration, the retired Air Force major-general—a burly, friendly, artifice-less guy who assured me that he had only recently begun to wear a tie regularly. I went to see him over the summer at his house in Nutley, New Jersey. An American flag flies from a flagpole on the lawn. Gration, who grew up in Africa as the son of American missionaries, and who flew two hundred and seventy-four combat missions over Iraq, used to be a registered Republican, but he became a Democrat after spending time with Obama, especially during a trip to Africa in 2006. Perhaps because his background isn’t conventionally liberal, he is more open than the other top Obama advisers in expressing a soaring optimism about the possibility of a less arrogant, more coöperative, more empathetic America leading the world in confronting its most intractable problems. “We’ve screwed up,” he told me. “We don’t really fix these things.” He mentioned the humanitarian crisis in Darfur, the Israel-Palestine dispute, and the tension between Russia and Georgia. “What I’d hope we learn from that is: ‘Yep, we’ve got to fix the basic issues here.’ ” He went on, “What doesn’t work, in Gration’s mind, is forcing a solution. Create an environment, give people the opportunity to air their differences, and see if they can come together. We don’t tell them what the solution is, but we do have an obligation—let’s get people in here, find out the needs, see if you can come up with a plan. Don’t try to freeze conflicts!”
Gration was impatient with the idea that conflict is the natural state of the world, to be managed rather than resolved. “People are more alike than their cultures and religions,” he said. “When Obama talks about global citizens, it’s the same framework. You see, religion and culture—they’re the way people communicate their values. They want stability, order, education. This is just humanness. Then you add on your religion, your culture—that’s how you execute it.” His implication was that if we can get past the religious and cultural identities that serve as host organisms for conflict, and deal with people at the level of their humanity and their basic needs, then we can make real progress—especially if Obama personally holds an office that permits him to set the tone and lead the effort.
One can see why this guy may not be suited for a State Department post. This kind of Utopianism can spill a lot of blood if given a position of trust.