The Shuttle and the ISS were not meant to be hype, excitment all the time. They were meant to perform science and technology in space and to use the properties offered by vacuum, weightlessness and the high vantage point.
ISS-Discovery excite me EVERY TIME they are seen by our eyes when they pass above us.(Last night, I made everybody leave the astronomy club room just in time for a great sighting. A newcomer was quite impressed by this free opportunity).
We must think this way: what would we be thinking if there were no Shuttles and no Space Station. First, there would be nobody in space, and certainly nobody back on the Moon or back from Mars.
Second: if there were no space station, there would also be no tourist in space as there would be nobody in space anyway. Tourism in space has a great potential because there is the emulation coming from professional astronauts and NASA itself, who are already there.
Going out there, beyond LEO is what we'd like to see, but I'm sometimes wondering if it's not our lust for danger, risk, that drives this urge. A government agency cannot survive doing very dangerous, untested experiments involving human beings during every flight. Sooner or later a big problem arises, and then those who wanted so badly that agency to push the envelope a bit further, will be the first ones to jump into the opportunity to criticize and humiliate that agency.
When you don't have what you love, you've got to love what you have.
Raoul
Space/Science » in reply to NASA spolight: a thought
Taking things for granted