Admin, one does not have to be a tree to understand death of the forests
Being an NASA admin means being a puppet. I provided a few views of Michael Griffin, which of course you and a lot of others don't like just I did not like as well not too long ago. But as a NASA admin you can't actually do anything. Those who tell you what to do are warming their chairs in Washington. And if they don't like you being in the office, you are no longer in the office. You have to present what those in Washington want you to present. The views of Griffin were good for the retiring the Shuttle agenda (which in fact was and still is rather necessary) and to keep propagating Constellation. But Obama entered his office on January 20th 2009. Griffin left his office on January 20th 2009 (by that time Constellation inofficially was known to be death already btw.). Obama nominated Bolden who has amongst other things the inofficial assignment to improve relations with the Muslim world. So please don't give anybody the advice to apply for the NASA admin job
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/science/space/7875584/Barack-Obama-Nasa-must-try-to-make-Muslims-feel-good.html
You'd be surprised how critical of NASA I am - about a lot of things. And of course, I posted quite a few times about my "disappointment" about the reckless and obscene use of NASA as a political tool, or statement - your link is only one example of that. I am not a NASA fanboy as you're trying to put it, but I'm not a NASA basher either, because i believe that NASA did and still does a lot of good things, and for now the balance is still positive. It is easier to fix NASA than to go radical and close it down.
It is evident however that you can't seem to find anything good about NASA, and are happy at anything bad that seems to be happening there. One only needs to read your posts here to realize that the only tree can you see in the big forest is SpaceX or better said, "not NASA". It is rarely that I can find a person who is so constantly against NASA as yourself, and not always for a good reason.
Accusing anybody who doesn't fully agree with your points of being a NASA fanboy, or blind, or incapable of seeing the grand picture, doesn't make your points more valid. Manipulating and distorting facts to fit your agenda, and posting unresearched or unfounded "facts" to glorify your claims have quite a contrary effect: it keeps people off the thread, even people who might generally, but not fully, agree with some, or with many of your claims. This has nothing to do with NASA - it's more a matter of style. It's obvious that you've ticked the "Notify me of replies" checkbox on this thread so that you don't miss any opportunity of having the last word at telling everybody how bad NASA is, or how good the others are. That itself proves how intent you are in smearing NASA and preventing otheres from voicing a more balanced, or opposing opinion. Several forum members PM-ed and emailed the Admins asking to lock the thread - you've obviously hit a nerve by not allowing others to get through. But as you see, the thread is still open and it will stay open, hoping that eventually you'll get the message (not that I believe that that will ever happen). Besides, one's legitimate opinion is not grounds for policing.
My suggestion to you to apply for those jobs was a joke of course, trying to tell you that talking is cheap, while doing requires more effort and responsibility. So, along the same line, I stand by my suggestion: it is easy to criticize from outside than actually DOING something about it. If you think that you have figured out what needs to be done so well, and are so intent on telling everybody about it, prepare a nice document and publish it, mail it to the White House, promote it through politicians and lobby, send it to NASA etc. DO something about it! Like the grand philosopher Danny De Vito said once: "money talks and bullshit walks"
But I forgot that your grand plan would be to "kill NASA" and handing over space exploration to a handful of emerging, purely commercial entities like SpaceX, or Virgin Galactic, hoping that they will adjust their business plans so that they can operate with ROIs of 2-3, or more generations.
/Admin