I think the NASA as a bogeyman to private enterprise concept is baloney. The true bogeyman to private space access is economics/high costs.

Speaking as someone involved in raising money for private space endeavors, I can tell you that NASA was a major impediment in trying to get private space off the ground.

Not so much deliberately, but as a consequence of the NASA worldview. Unfortunately, many investors, unfamiliar with tech issues, would run to NASA to ask them if something was feasible. The answer was often along the lines of "technologically, of course, yes, but we can tell you that it takes thousands of people and billions of dollars to build a launch vehicle." Not many investors will look much further than this, and ask "why?"

As Lee points out, it begins to look a little suspicious when a Space Station, essentially a series of pressurized cannisters, costs twenty times as much as an atomic-powered aircraft carrier, built by the military (which doesn't exactly do things cheaply either.)

In point of fact, NASA's major job is keeping NASA's bureaucracy, thousands of personnel, and many centers afloat. A solution for space transport that requires fifty million dollars and only a couple of hundred people is not going to accomplish that, and they're not going to be interested.

There were other issues, too, not all NASA's fault. Subsidized small payloads on the Shuttle eliminated a market. The collapse of the small low-orbit comsat industry eliminated a major market. Geo comsats were so incredibly expensive and profitable, launch costs on conventional vehicles were almost lost in the noise, and it was hard to make inroads there using lower prices.

My personal opinion is that tourism may be, not the killer app, but at least an app. I think there's some possibilities there. I think a lot of the current private launch endeavors recognize this.