This is the group that's trying to find common ground between NASA's desire for a Shuttle replacement (by 2012) and some political pressure for the military to develop a space plane.

Bottom line: there isn't much commonality between what NASA wants (a crewed Shuttle replacement with a 40,000 pound payload) and what might be useful to the military (probably an unmanned vehicle with a 15,000 pound payload and very rapid turn-around time on the order of hours to days). The military went into One Team due to political pressure, not operational need. The "Military Space Plane" is a vehicle in search of a mission.

It seems obvious to me that NASA is pursuing another boondoggle. It just doesn't make much technical or economic sense right now to develop a reusable vehicle big enough to carry ISS modules. Big payloads can be carried on expendable boosters like the EELV or Proton, just as we and the Russians have done for decades. Crews and logistics supplies can be carried in a much smaller vehicle. Weight snowballs, and aerospace vehicles cost by the pound. NASA's proposal will cost billions more to develop and operate than a smaller vehicle. It'd take a very long time to recoup those extra R&D and O&M costs over using already developed expendable boosters like the EELV or Proton.