Will NASA become candle in the wind?

It was with sadness, and complete agreement, that I read Charles Krauthammer's Feb. 15 article on lack of funding for NASA in the nation's 2011 budget.

I remember attending an aerospace lecture series way back at the beginning where the scientists thought a space station was an important goal, but they felt the truly more difficult endeavor was a shuttle that could carry astronauts and equipment back and forth, and actually service that space station.

NASA chose to create that shuttle. Where would the world's space programs be today without it? Doesn't anyone remember Kennedy's insistence on supporting the space program ... and the collective national pride we felt with each space milestone? I do - especially the first moon landing. We cheered and everyone on earth cheered along with us.

At this time we are cooperating with other countries and it's working out well, but should we really be totally out of the picture, with nothing to contribute and no one needing us? Sounds like a dangerous economic move to me. There's never enough money in any budget to do everything we need to. But shortchanging NASA would be a big mistake.

Since no one knows what's in store for our little planet, I feel it's shortchanging the future, too. The day after the article was printed, a drawing on the editorial page depicted a NASA candle, lit with the space shuttle, bringing glorious light to the darkness of space. The caption read, "Burning out..."

Alas, I fear that NASA, the bright candle in the darkness, will indeed become "a candle in the wind."

Diane Cozzi

Addison