Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

snagglepuss

(12,704 posts)
Wed Apr 6, 2016, 02:06 PM Apr 2016

Sanders commitment to breakup banks is no different than JFK's commitment to land on the moon!

In a speech given on Sept 12, 1962 JFK said:


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.



No journalist back then ever demanded of JFK what journalists have now demanded of Sanders regarding the breakup up of big banks, namely to detail how a seemingly impossible task was going to be accomplished, back then everyone knew that as a leader Kennedy framed the goal but that it would be the responsibility of scientists to make it happen.





GO Bernie GO!








8 replies = new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight: NoneDon't highlight anything 5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
Sanders commitment to breakup banks is no different than JFK's commitment to land on the moon! (Original Post) snagglepuss Apr 2016 OP
You mean how it took the House of Representatives to fund it? onehandle Apr 2016 #1
Landing on the Moon was easier and less obstacles are being put in the way. Baobab Apr 2016 #7
Excecpt, "We must land on the moon" was not JFK's answer to every question asked of him. Buzz Clik Apr 2016 #2
LOL. +1 firebrand80 Apr 2016 #6
Are you kidding? JFK gave plenty of specifics in that very same speech. ContinentalOp Apr 2016 #3
Did he know how many pounds of thrust would be needed? Did he design those rockets? Human101948 Apr 2016 #5
Kickin' Faux pas Apr 2016 #4
. snagglepuss Apr 2016 #8

onehandle

(51,122 posts)
1. You mean how it took the House of Representatives to fund it?
Wed Apr 6, 2016, 02:08 PM
Apr 2016

Good luck getting the GOP to back breaking up banks.

ContinentalOp

(5,356 posts)
3. Are you kidding? JFK gave plenty of specifics in that very same speech.
Wed Apr 6, 2016, 02:16 PM
Apr 2016

He gives numbers and talks about actual rockets and programs that were already underway

"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 the 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.

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 Stated, 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]

 

Human101948

(3,457 posts)
5. Did he know how many pounds of thrust would be needed? Did he design those rockets?
Wed Apr 6, 2016, 02:33 PM
Apr 2016

Perhaps he left that up to NASA engineers who were assigned the task of figuring it out.

P.S.--I don't think he wrote that speech either.

Latest Discussions»Retired Forums»2016 Postmortem»Sanders commitment to bre...