Pundit_Sidebar

June 23, 2008

President Kennedy Challenging America to Go to the Moon (Brent Budowsky)

@ 4:53 pm

As promised in my Tuesday column, the following is the text of JFK's "moon shot" speech:

President Pitzer, Mr. Vice President, Governor, Congressman Thomas, Senator Wiley, and Congressman Miller, Mr. Webb, Mr. Bell, scientists, distinguished guests, and ladies and gentlemen:

I appreciate your president having made me an honorary visiting professor, and I will assure you that my first lecture will be very brief. I am delighted to be here and I'm particularly delighted to be here on this occasion.

We meet at a college noted for knowledge, in a city noted for progress, in a state noted for strength, and we stand in need of all three, for we meet in an hour of change and challenge, in a decade of hope and fear, in an age of both knowledge and ignorance. The greater our knowledge increases, the greater our ignorance unfolds.

Despite the striking fact that most of the scientists that the world has ever known are alive and working today, despite the fact that this Nation's own scientific manpower is doubling every 12 years in a rate of growth more than three times that of our population as a whole, despite that, the vast stretches of the unknown and the unanswered and the unfinished still far outstrip our collective comprehension.

No man can fully grasp how far and how fast we have come, but condense, if you will, the 50,000 years of man's recorded history in a time span of but a half-century. Stated in these terms, we know very little about the first 40 years, except at the end of them advanced man had learned to use the skins of animals to cover them.

Then about 10 years ago, under this standard, man emerged from his caves to construct other kinds of shelter. Only five years ago man learned to write and use a cart with wheels. Christianity began less than two years ago. The printing press came this year, and then less than two months ago, during this whole 50-year span of human history, the steam engine provided a new source of power. Newton explored the meaning of gravity. Last month electric lights and telephones and automobiles and airplanes became available.

Only last week did we develop penicillin and television and nuclear power, and now if America's new spacecraft succeeds in reaching Venus, we will have literally reached the stars before midnight tonight.

This is a breathtaking pace, and such a pace cannot help but create new ills as it dispels old, new ignorance, new problems, new dangers. Surely the opening vistas of space promise high costs and hardships, as well as high reward.

So it is not surprising that some would have us stay where we are a little longer to rest, to wait. But this city of Houston, this state of Texas, this country of the United States was not built by those who waited and rested and wished to look behind them. This country was conquered by those who moved forward — and so will space.

William Bradford, speaking in 1630 of the founding of the Plymouth Bay Colony, said that all great and honorable actions are accompanied with great difficulties, and both must be enterprised and overcome with answerable courage.

If this capsule history of our progress teaches us anything, it is that man, in his quest for knowledge and progress, is determined and cannot be deterred. The exploration of space will go ahead, whether we join in it or not, and it is one of the great adventures of all time, and no nation which expects to be the leader of other nations can expect to stay behind in this race for space.

Those who came before us made certain that this country rode the first waves of the industrial revolution, the first waves of modern invention, and the first wave of nuclear power, and this generation does not intend to founder in the backwash of the coming age of space. We mean to be a part of it — we mean to lead it. For the eyes of the world now look into space, to the moon and to the planets beyond, and we have vowed that we shall not see it governed by a hostile flag of conquest, but by a banner of freedom and peace. We have vowed that we shall not see space filled with weapons of mass destruction, but with instruments of knowledge and understanding.

Yet the vows of this Nation can only be fulfilled if we in this Nation are first, and, therefore, we intend to be first. In short, our leadership in science and industry, our hopes for peace and security, our obligations to ourselves as well as others, all require us to make this effort, to solve these mysteries, to solve them for the good of all men, and to become the world's leading space-faring nation.

We set sail on this new sea because there is new knowledge to be gained, and new rights to be won, and they must be won and used for the progress of all people. For space science, like nuclear science and all technology, has no conscience of its own.

Whether it will become a force for good or ill depends on man, and only if the United States occupies a position of pre-eminence can we help decide whether this new ocean will be a sea of peace or a new terrifying theater of war. I do not say that we should or will go unprotected against the hostile misuse of space any more than we go unprotected against the hostile use of land or sea, but I do say that space can be explored and mastered without feeding the fires of war, without repeating the mistakes that man has made in extending his writ around this globe of ours.

There is no strife, no prejudice, no national conflict in outer space as yet. Its hazards are hostile to us all. Its conquest deserves the best of all mankind, and its opportunity for peaceful cooperation many never come again. But why, some say, the moon? Why choose this as our goal? And they may well ask why climb the highest mountain? Why, 35 years ago, fly the Atlantic? Why does Rice play Texas?

We choose to go to the moon. We choose to go to the moon in this decade and do the other things, not because they are easy, but because they are hard, because that goal will serve to organize and measure the best of our energies and skills, because that challenge is one that we are willing to accept, one we are unwilling to postpone, and one which we intend to win, and the others, too.

It is for these reasons that I regard the decision last year to shift our efforts in space from low to high gear as among the most important decisions that will be made during my incumbency in the office of the Presidency. In the last 24 hours we have seen facilities now being created for the greatest and most complex exploration in man's history.

We have felt the ground shake and the air shattered by the testing of a Saturn C-1 booster rocket, many times as powerful as the Atlas which launched John Glenn, generating power equivalent to 10,000 automobiles with their accelerators on the floor. We have seen the site where five F-1 rocket engines, each one as powerful as all eight engines of the Saturn combined, will be clustered together to make the advanced Saturn missile, assembled in a new building to be built at Cape Canaveral as tall as a 48 story structure, as wide as a city block, and as long as two lengths of this field.

Within these last 19 months at least 45 satellites have circled the earth. Some 40 of them were made in the United States of America and they were far more sophisticated and supplied far more knowledge to the people of the world than those of the Soviet Union. The Mariner spacecraft now on its way to Venus is the most intricate instrument in the history of space science. The accuracy of that shot is comparable to firing a missile from Cape Canaveral and dropping it in this stadium between the 40-yard lines.

Transit satellites are helping our ships at sea to steer a safer course. Tiros satellites have given us unprecedented warnings of hurricanes and storms, and will do the same for forest fires and icebergs.

We have had our failures, but so have others, even if they do not admit them. And they may be less public.

To be sure, we are behind, and will be behind for some time in manned flight. But we do not intend to stay behind, and in this decade, we shall make up and move ahead.

The growth of our science and education will be enriched by new knowledge of our universe and environment, by new techniques of learning and mapping and observation, by new tools and computers for industry, medicine, the home as well as the school. Technical institutions, such as Rice, will reap the harvest of these gains.

And finally, the space effort itself, while still in its infancy, has already created a great number of new companies, and tens of thousands of new jobs. Space and related industries are generating new demands in investment and skilled personnel, and this city and this state, and this region, will share greatly in this growth. What was once the furthest outpost on the old frontier of the West will be the furthest outpost on the new frontier of science and space.

Houston, your city of Houston, with its Manned Spacecraft Center, will become the heart of a large scientific and engineering community.

During the next 5 years the National Aeronautics and Space Administration expects to double the number of scientists and engineers in this area, to increase its outlays for salaries and expenses to $60 million a year; to invest some $200 million in plant and laboratory facilities; and to direct or contract for new space efforts over $1 billion from this center in this city.

To be sure, all this costs us all a good deal of money. This year's space budget is three times what it was in January 1961, and it is greater than the space budget of the previous eight years combined.

That budget now stands at $5,400 million a year — a staggering sum, though somewhat less than we pay for cigarettes and cigars every year. Space expenditures will soon rise some more, from 40 cents per person per week to more than 50 cents a week for every man, woman and child in the United States, for we have given this program a high national priority — even though I realize that this is in some measure an act of faith and vision, for we do not now know what benefits await us.

But if I were to say, my fellow citizens, that we shall send to the moon, 240,000 miles away from the control station in Houston, a giant rocket more than 300 feet tall, the length of this football field, made of new metal alloys, some of which have not yet been invented, capable of standing heat and stresses several times more than have ever been experienced, fitted together with a precision better than the finest watch, carrying all the equipment needed for propulsion, guidance, control, communications, food and survival, on an untried mission, to an unknown celestial body, and then return it safely to earth, re-entering the atmosphere at speeds of over 25,000 miles per hour, causing heat about half that of the temperature of the sun — almost as hot as it is here today — and do all this, and do it right, and do it first before this decade is out — then we must be bold.

I'm the one who is doing all the work, so we just want you to stay cool for a minute. [laughter]

However, I think we're going to do it, and I think that we must pay what needs to be paid. I don't think we ought to waste any money, but I think we ought to do the job. And this will be done in the decade of the Sixties. It may be done while some of you are still here at school at this college and university. It will be done during the terms of office of some of the people who sit here on this platform. But it will be done. And it will be done before the end of this decade.

And I am delighted that this university is playing a part in putting a man on the moon as part of a great national effort of the United States of America.

Many years ago the great British explorer George Mallory, who was to die on Mount Everest, was asked why did he want to climb it. He said, "Because it is there."

Well, space is there, and we're going to climb it, and the moon and the planets are there, and new hopes for knowledge and peace are there.

And, therefore, as we set sail we ask God's blessing on the most hazardous and dangerous and greatest adventure on which man has ever embarked.

Thank you.

Archived under: Transportation
Permalink TrackBack EMail This Post


Share this post
del.icio.us:President Kennedy Challenging America to Go to the Moon digg:President Kennedy Challenging America to Go to the Moon newsvine:President Kennedy Challenging America to Go to the Moon reddit:President Kennedy Challenging America to Go to the Moon fark:President Kennedy Challenging America to Go to the Moon Y!:President Kennedy Challenging America to Go to the Moon What's This



17 Comments »

The Hill welcomes comment from anyone and will almost always post it whether it is favorable or critical, as long as it is substantive and advances debate.

  1. I don't understand the reason for this post, unless the Saturn V rocket plans to take Obama to the moon and leave him there for good, and that would be money well spent…

    Comment by Metamucil — June 23, 2008 @ 4:59 pm

  2. What is it with u guys today?

    Is it because this is June and most of u are on vacation until the conventions?

    The speech in its entirety can be read and listened to here:

    http://www.historyplace.com/speeches/jfk-space.htm

    Comment by Theard — June 23, 2008 @ 5:13 pm

  3. Yes. Where is a JFK when you need one? The only national program coming from Washington right now is to give social security to illegal aliens
    (Link below), while they continue to screw the American public by displaying any lack of leadership, with the exception of John McCain, on our energy crisis. The scum dwelling society inside the beltway is ignoring the anger building outside the beltway. Maybe one day, the corruption cycle will be broken.
    http://www.retiresafe.org/04-18-08_Totalization.html

    Comment by Robert Rosencrans — June 23, 2008 @ 6:15 pm

  4. Great, original post. Very timely and relevant as usual.

    Comment by Misha — June 23, 2008 @ 7:00 pm

  5. Today JFK would be to the right of McCain. Moon shots today have to be based on Al Gore's cynical hoax. What do you expect when the academia and the press are dominated at least 9 to 1 by "progressives"? They dumbed down the populace, taught them that the superficial concern by the government for the welfare of the least successful, backed up by other people's money, and radical environmentalism are the only things worth doing anything about. Feelings have replaced facts as the way of looking at things.

    When the evil progressives can't wait to destroy the Constitution while claiming that Bush has already done so, where is JFK indeed?

    Comment by Igor R. — June 23, 2008 @ 9:55 pm

  6. While we're on speeches, take a look at Kennedy's at Amherst college on 10.26.63 in honor of art in general, and Robert Frost in particular.
    "The men who create power make an indispensable contribution to the Nation's greatness, but the men who question power make a contribution just as indispensable, especially when that questioning is disinterested, for they determine whether we use power or power uses us."
    And this;
    "When power leads man towards arrogance, poetry reminds him of his limitations. When power narrows the areas of man's concern, poetry reminds him of the richness and diversity of his existence. When power corrupts, poetry cleanses. For art establishes the basic human truth which must serve as the touchstone of our judgment."

    Contrast this to what passes for leadership of the last several years.
    "Nuff said.

    Comment by bertoray — June 23, 2008 @ 10:10 pm

  7. Metamucil, the reason for this post is that
    I have a column in the paper today that was
    linked in the post, The Next Moon Shot, calling
    for a five year JFK Moon-shot magnitude
    program to mass market cars that achieve
    at least 100 miles per gallon. This is a goal
    that is far less hard than JFK calling for a
    new rocket to bring us to the moon within
    ten years of his speech. I lay out a series
    of policies in the column which take from
    both progressives and conservatives aimed
    at the 100 MPG gallon car and alternative
    energies solar, wind, geothermal energy.
    The problem is analogous to the technology
    JFK called for to get to the moon and we must
    do much more than complain about the gas
    prices on the evening news. We need to solve
    the problem, as we've solved problems in the
    past. Brent

    Comment by Brent — June 24, 2008 @ 1:45 am

  8. Brent, thank you for clarification. However, 100 MPG car by itself is a half-measure towards energy independence. There are tens of thousands of trucks hauling cargo, thousands of airplanes and ships that require fuel to operate. We also need oil for chemical industry to produce materials we depend on every day. What we need I think is a huget investment into a transportation infrastructure like high-speed rail systems powered by nuclear energy, staring with corridors along the coasts to eliminate these wasteful airline shuttle flights. Solar and wind could supplement where appropriate, but they are not panacea. This way, we'd at least not waste oil on transportation and divert its usage for more vital needs.

    Returning to politics, while McCain supports constructing such nuclear powered infrastructure, Obama said that "nuclear power should be researched further". Researched? Country like France is getting most of its power from nuclear energy for 30+ years now and it also supplies several European countries with electricity, and Obama needs to investigate this further? With such "change" and "hope" I suggest we keep him where he is…

    Comment by Metamucil — June 24, 2008 @ 1:19 pm

  9. Yes, if we feel good about solving the problem, and really, really want to solve the problem, and try really, really hard to solve the problem, in the progressive mind is as good as solved. Remember, to them only the intentions matter. Results, who needs them?

    Comment by Igor R. — June 24, 2008 @ 2:14 pm

  10. After a few years of Bush it's good to be reminded of the better times and better leadership that your great nation has had.
    We look forward to McCain or Obama in the expectation that either will be infinitely better than the current incumbent.

    Comment by uk visa — June 24, 2008 @ 5:22 pm

  11. uk, you're misunderestimating Bush's strategery.

    Comment by Igor R. — June 24, 2008 @ 7:12 pm

  12. Igor and Robert, you guys are hilarious! Your total partisan hackery is something to be seen. You are aware, are you not, that McCain and even Bush are finally admitting there might be something to "Al Gore's hoax" and that global warming is real?

    The only dumbing down that has occurred in this nation has been on the anti-science, anti-public education right wing, the Republican Party, embracing ignorance and ignoring evidence, whether it involved CO2 emissions or weapons of mass destruction.

    Try presenting facts sometime instead of histrionic fear-based rhetoric. Your link is easily debunked. You'll find the only actual offer of Social Security to non-citizens concerns only those who have been working and PAYING TAXES, including Social security taxes, here.

    That's right, we're finally offering SS benefits to those WE have been free-loading off of for years, collecting SS taxes and giving them nothing in return.

    Please, and for your own sake, I suggest you educate yourself before you post. Otherwise you're only going to continue to serve as comic relief.

    Comment by mkochinski — June 24, 2008 @ 10:09 pm

  13. I am so glad that Igor and Rosencrans are not my neighbors, for I would be constantly fighting the urge to slap those neanderthals upside their flat heads!

    Geez, I am astounded how pathetic their respective lives must be as to permit them so much daily time to weigh in here with their invective. They are PERFECT examples of the do-nothing, KNOW-nothing repukes who have run our country into the ditch.

    Should either of them have children…. well, my heart goes out to them.

    Comment by Michael — June 24, 2008 @ 10:34 pm

  14. mkochinski, the Pope and Mother Theresa's ghost could proclaim anthropogenic global warming to be the undisputed truth and it wouldn't make a bit of difference as to whether it's really true or not.

    Can you be so kind and point me to any scientific proof of man-made global warming? Can you perhaps explain to me how the rise of something from 30 molecules in 10,000 to 38 molecules in 10,000 will trap enough heat to make a difference? Can you explain to me why the thirties are the warmest decade, or at least on par with the hottest recent year, 1998? Can you explain to me why the earth cooled dramatically in the last year and has not warmed since 1998?

    For every time someone proclaims that the recent East Coast heat wave constitutes and example of global warming, someone else notices that it snowed in Seattle and the Rockies in June, and during the winter it snowed in parts of China and Iraq where in has never snowed before in human memory. For everyone who points out that the Midwestern floods and tornadoes are caused by man-made global warming, someone else points out that they need either cold land masses or cold air to precipitate these events. For everyone who points to the destruction of ice in the Arctic, someone points out that the Antarctic ice has grown, in spite of someone else liking to point to a particular bay where it has not.

    All "global warming science" consists of is some computer models done by very few people who don't even take clouds into account because that's too difficult! The UN releases some summary opinions but not the science behind them. I'm a scientifically trained person, and you take me for an illiterate idiot. Shame on you and shame on the perpetrators of the hoax!

    Comment by Igor R. — June 25, 2008 @ 2:10 pm

  15. Michael, you've managed to display your concern for the children, and a good liberal you are, very good!

    Comment by Igor R. — June 25, 2008 @ 2:12 pm

  16. mkochinski: Don't look now, but your entire post is nothing buy partisan hackery, and it's NOT something to be seen.

    Comment by Robert Rosencrans — June 25, 2008 @ 6:05 pm

  17. Anyone see the hearing yesterday held by the energy sub committee chaired by Markey(D)Mass ?There was a gentlman that from Nissan with a viable plan using wind energy and cars charging at night with the batteries recharged from electricty generated by wind.Wind energy is not storable so it is simply wasted at night so this car with the battery modifications he was referring to is a zero loss to the ehergy grid and has zero emmissions.If you go to C-Span.org you can see the hearing or listen to it on podcast.Absolutely exciting to hear some "good"alterbatives for a change that do not cost millions of dollars.The building of these wind turbines and batteries are hundreds of thousands of jobs that are not exportable as well.On the business pages I see General Electric announced it's entry into the solar market as well.That is more good news.GE serves the future and that is not drilling for more oil now is it?

    Comment by LindainCT — June 27, 2008 @ 4:31 pm

RSS feed for comments on this post. TrackBack URI

Leave a comment

Privacy Policy | Terms and Conditions
rss

The contents of this site are © 2008 Capitol Hill Publishing Corp., a subsidiary of News Communications Inc.