The current administration seems to redefine "conflict of interest" on a daily basis:

Salon.com News | Scalia-Cheney hunting trip continues to draw fire

  Sorry to sound like a broken record:

NASA Firm on Hubble Decision but Would Listen to Options

  Hubble Update

It looks like the demise of the Hubble Space Telescope might not be a done deal:

Scientists Clamor to Save Hubble

Apparently NASA has agreed to review their decision. It's unclear whether they'll actually change it, but it's a step in the right direction. One thing I learned from reading this article is that when it comes to complaining about science, nobody does it like the pros. One great point is made by Michael Polucci, president of astronomy Internet site Slooh.com:

There's no political risk in saying you'll put a man on Mars in 30 years. It's so bold-sounding, but at the same time we're afraid to fly 350 miles to the Hubble to fix it? I won't use the word cowardly, but we're stepping away, we're retreating.

Bush says that the space shuttle should be dismantled because of safety concerns, but the fact is that space travel is inherently unsafe. The safety issue is a dodge. Bush is using it as an excuse to make wholesale changes to the space program for political gain. Polucci is actually being charitable by suggesting that Bush is acting like a coward. The truth is that he's acting like a politician, which is far worse.

Less diplomatic is Mars Society president Robert Zubrin. He's a staunch advocate of manned Mars missions, and even he thinks that we shouldn't dismantle Hubble:

What's happening is that a bunch of bureaucrats are wanting to feel decisive, to show they can make the tough calls to support the president's moon and Mars program. They'll say: 'Much as it might rend our hearts, we're willing to give this up.' That's all a crock. If the first thing this new space policy does is murder Hubble, then it's born with the mark of Cain on it.

Wow, "the mark of Cain". This guy doesn't mince words. Colorful language aside, Zubrin does get to the real point:

[Maintaining Hubble] was the most important thing the shuttle would do in its remaining lifetime. Most of its other missions are science-fair stuff. The Hubble is a milestone in human intellectual history, and this decision is a crime against science.

Let's hope that NASA comes to its senses. Slooh.com has an online petition to save Hubble, if you're interested in that sort of thing.