Yea, we failed to put up a space station in low orbit at a reasonable cost with reasonable reliability so we should do other things at outrageous cost that are even more complex. The credibility of these folks is zero for me.

Lets catalogue some of the mistakes:
1) We didn't improve our launching system before attempting an ambitions space station--it really appears we used the space station to justify a space shuttle when neither was justified, based on cost and track record.
2) We've never bothered to get appropriate communication satellites in orbit to blanket the space station with high bandwidth continuous communications capability. I believe there was some plan for this at one time, but as usual there was launch failure and acceptance of lessor capability.
3) We've continued to limp along, extending the time to build the space station for several years, while parts of the station age and fail or become unreliable (we can never catch up, cause our launch capability has been so poor for so long)
4) It is true that the space station has been worthless as a research vessel while being undermanned, because 95% of the time of crew people is used to maintain the space station and their own survival instead of research. Is the answer to somehow get more people on the space station? It certainly is for the big aerospace companies that want to continue their cost plus windfalls of supporiting these white elephants of space station and space shuttle.
5) So, now we should continue to throw good money after bad, because this is the only space station in town? Yes, lets add to our previous mistakes.

If and only if NASA can get a contractor to absolutely commit launch requirements (including reliability, payload, and cost) and such a launcher is built and verified should we consider manned space efforts like large space stations, and moon and mars missions. Why must we continue to put the chicken before the egg? Demonstrate launch capability and then we'll talk. The contractor should be the one to eat virtually all of the cost overruns--that is only way to get real cost estimates. And NASA should not commit to long term use of that launch vehicle until its reliability and cost effectiveness have been verified. What a concept (full payment and delivery acceptance does not occur until requirements have been fulfilled).