If so, are we having an influence? It may seem like a large amount of wishful thinking sprinkled with delusions of grandeur, but Bush's plan seems to have a lot in common with this thread from August. The New Space Exploration Vision appears to be calling for the small but steady baby steps that I was calling for. Also notice how Bush's plan mirrors my own ideas here and here.

This quote from Robert:

""If we architect a space system, we can starting thinking in terms of modularization and standardization. Propulsion and habitation requirements are different for short- and long-term missions, but we can define broad categories. We can apply what we already know about space vehicle cabins to design a generic short-haul habitation module for the Earth-Moon system; and what we've learned from ISS and the others to design a long-haul module for planetary missions. Then propulsion: Chemical engines for short-duration missions, maybe ion or other "advanced" technologies for long-duration. We might continue to get by with solar power in the inner solar system, but we'll need nuclear generators eventually. Fasten the habitation modules for a given mission type to a generic "keel", plug in the reactor or solar panels, and strap on as many of the type of engines required for the mass. The electronics could be as standardized as today's avionics."

and from me:

"The reactor and engines will be on one end with a long truss for a keel, and the habitation section on the other end. The long truss would be used to store the equipment needed for a particular mission, whether it be landing craft and modules for the Moon or Mars, sections for a Lagrange point station, extra crew modules for a deep space mission, or whatever else is required."

sound a lot like the current concepts for the CEV

So who knows, maybe our discussions are having a positive impact on future of space exploration.