jfk speech essay

111th Commencement of Rice University - May 3-4 - Watch All Ceremonies

“We choose to go to the Moon”

"We choose to go to the Moon", officially titled the address at Rice University on the nation's space effort, is a September 12, 1962, speech by United States President John F. Kennedy to further inform the public about his plan to land a man on the Moon before 1970.

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 the race for space. 

Those who came before us made certain that this country rode the first waves of the industrial revolutions, 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 in 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 the 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 may 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 five 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 of 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 $5,400,000 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 term 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.

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. 

• Skip to main content
• Keyboard shortcuts for audio player

'Ask Not...': JFK's Words Still Inspire 50 Years Later

Nathan Rott

During his inaugural speech on Jan. 20, 1961, U.S. President John F. Kennedy wasn't wearing a coat or hat in freezing weather as he spoke of beginnings and ends, war and peace, disease and poverty. AP hide caption

During his inaugural speech on Jan. 20, 1961, U.S. President John F. Kennedy wasn't wearing a coat or hat in freezing weather as he spoke of beginnings and ends, war and peace, disease and poverty.

It was cold in Washington, D.C., on Jan. 20, 1961 -- a day that would change the lives of many young Americans.

Bruce Birch woke to find the city at a near-standstill. Blanketed by eight inches of snow, the nation's capital reacted to the weather in much the same way it does a half-century later -- by pretty much shutting down.

Birch was a student from Midwestern College in Kansas who was studying at American University in D.C. for a semester. And for him, waiting out the weather wasn't an option.

History would be made that day. John F. Kennedy, the youngest man ever elected U.S. president and the first Roman Catholic, would be sworn in at the Capitol, some seven miles away. And Birch was determined to be there.

Watch a video about the writing of Kennedy's inaugural address.

"Being 19 years old, you sort of think you're invincible, so we figured we'd go anyway," he says.

He and a friend caught a bus from the university in Northwest Washington, got stuck in the snow in downtown D.C., and hiked the final two miles.

"I remember being very, very cold," he says. "It took us a long time to get there. It was literally still snowing and blowing."

Cold as it was, Birch says, "I always felt it was worth it."

A Challenge To America's Youth

Once there, huddled beneath a group of trees facing the Capitol, Birch heard what would become one of the most famous speeches in American history, a speech that would help shape his life -- and his generation.

Kennedy stepped to the podium. Famously, he wasn't wearing a coat or tie. Deeply tanned in the bright winter light, he stood out against the backdrop of bundled politicians and family. From the back of the crowd, Birch and his friend watched, passing a pair of shared binoculars back and forth. But it wasn't the images that stuck with them; it was the words.

John F. Kennedy stands on a platform for his inauguration on the east front of the U.S. Capitol on Jan. 20, 1961, accompanied by his parents, Rose and Joseph Kennedy, First Lady Jacqueline Kennedy, Vice President Lyndon Baines Johnson and his wife, Lady Bird Johnson. Hulton Archive/Getty Images hide caption

John F. Kennedy stands on a platform for his inauguration on the east front of the U.S. Capitol on Jan. 20, 1961, accompanied by his parents, Rose and Joseph Kennedy, First Lady Jacqueline Kennedy, Vice President Lyndon Baines Johnson and his wife, Lady Bird Johnson.

Kennedy started: "We observe today not a victory of party, but a celebration of freedom -- symbolizing an end as well as a beginning -- signifying renewal as well as change."

And he ended with a line that defined a generation: "And so, my fellow Americans: Ask not what your country can do for you -- ask what you can do for your country."

Kennedy's inaugural was as much a challenge to America's youth as it was a speech. And the challenge was not lost on Birch.

"I remember feeling very invigorated by it," Birch says. "Feeling at the end of the speech, man, this really makes me want to do something, to contribute."

That's what Kennedy's speech was intended to do. He touched on inspiration in many ways -- "the torch has been passed to a new generation of Americans.… Now the trumpet summons us again.… I do not shrink from this responsibility -- I welcome it."

But none were as direct or memorable as the "Ask Not" line. That was the one that made service an American imperative.

Birch was one of the many listeners who took it to heart. He went on to become a teacher, a professor and, later, dean of Wesley Theological Seminary in Washington, D.C. -- positions he held for 38 years before retiring.

Words 'Like A Splash Of Water'

Donna Shalala was sitting on the floor of her residence hall at Western College for Women in Ohio that January day. The room was packed with freshmen, she remembered, but dead silent as everyone watched on a fuzzy black-and-white television set.

Shalala was a 19-year-old freshman with a lot of options.

"I could go to graduate school, I could go to law school," she says. "Before I heard the speech I was thinking of being a journalist, a war correspondent as a matter of fact."

But Kennedy's speech changed all that.

She remembers feeling like Kennedy wasn't addressing the nation, he was addressing her. And "he was talking about public service," she says.

She'd never considered public service until that day, until his words hit her "like a splash of water," as she puts it.

In 1962, Shalala was one of many young Americans who joined the newly-formed Peace Corps, an organization she called, "the embodiment of President Kennedy's call to our generation for service." Its first director, Kennedy's brother-in-law Sargent Shriver, died Tuesday.

Shalala went to a mud village in southern Iran, part of the Peace Corps' first batch of volunteers. It was a learning experience for everyone, she says. All the Iranians knew was that these kids were sent to help by an "energetic young president." And because of that, she says, they were welcomed.

For two years she taught at an agricultural college before returning to the U.S. where she earned her doctorate at Syracuse University.

Shalala went on to serve as a professor, president and chancellor at numerous colleges. In 1993, Bill Clinton made her his Secretary of Health and Human Services.

Today, Shalala is the president of the University of Miami. She's garnered many honors in her career, the most prestigious in 2008, when then-President George W. Bush awarded her the nation's highest civilian award -- the Presidential Medal of Freedom.

'He Spoke To All Of Us'

Gonzalo Barrientos was a freshman at the University of Texas when he heard the speech.

The son of farmers and cotton pickers in central Texas, Barrientos was studying business because it was a way to escape.

"I didn't want to stay in the cotton fields forever," he says. Barrientos wanted more -- not a lot more, just an opportunity to "go out and be a part of a place that had air-conditioning and carpet -- the niceties that life could provide in this country."

Barrientos figured that a business degree was the best way to do that. Kennedy's speech made him reconsider.

"It was what I had always learned about in books in elementary and high school about the American dream, even though I saw that American dream being shattered when I grew up," he says. Barrientos, now 69, dealt with poverty and racism growing up. So when Kennedy, "spoke for all of us, he spoke to all of us whether you were poor, rich, whatever color, whatever background as an American," he says. "That was especially inspiring to me."

Barrientos seized that inspiration. He switched majors, focusing on sociology, economics and government. He went on to train newcomers to the Volunteers in Service to America (VISTA), and in 1974 he became one of the first Mexican-Americans elected to the Texas state legislature.

He served in the House for 10 years and in the Texas Senate for 21 more. His goal: "to help the community, to help the poor people, to help the downtrodden, to empower those people to get the American Dream. All of which, I think, came from John Kennedy."

But the inspiration didn't strike everyone immediately. Bill Hilliard heard Kennedy's speech, but says it wasn't until two years later, on Nov. 22, 1963, that the words inspired him into action.

That morning, around the same time Kennedy was setting out in a motorcade in Dallas, a 21-year-old Hilliard was at work in Jackson, Mich., reading a letter he'd received that morning, "for the third or fourth time," he says.

More On John F. Kennedy

JFK, Digitized: Presidential Archive Debuts Online

The Two-Way

Jfk's assassination: 'changing from memory to history'.

The Picture Show

On jfk's 50th election anniversary, unpublished campaign photos.

"Greetings," it read, "You will report for induction into the U.S. Army at 0530, 5th of December, 1963, at the County Building."

It was a draft letter. But Hilliard didn't want to be a soldier. He was working at a small insurance business. He was in school, just in between semesters. He wanted to be an artist.

There was the anti-war movement, his own moral misgivings. He contemplated running to Canada. And then he heard the news.

Kennedy had been shot. He listened with his co-workers as the events unfolded.

"We just couldn't believe it," Hilliard says. "After it was confirmed, after Walter Cronkite made his announcement, I went upstairs and got an old copy of Life magazine, which had a picture of [Kennedy] on it. And on the page opposite of the photograph it said, 'Ask not what your country can do for you, but what you can do for your country.'"

Hilliard tore off the cover, painted "Closed in Memoriam," on the bottom, and taped it to the front door of the insurance business.

The next day, he enlisted in the Air Force. He traveled around the Pacific Rim for the next two years and in 1965, "The first time I was in Vietnam, we were in Da Nang and the words came back to me again about 'Ask not…'" he says.

"It was the reason I went in," Hilliard says, now 70. "It made me more of a patriot than I had ever been. I really believed in the country you know? It was a turning point, a real change of life and I wouldn't trade it for anything."

'It Still Clicks Today'

Fifty years later, it is another cold and quiet January day in the nation's capital.

From across the river, in Arlington National Cemetery, the white dome of the Capitol building, where Kennedy spoke and 1,038 days later, laid in state, is a blip on the horizon.

It's here, at Kennedy's gravesite, that pieces of his speech are etched in granite. Among them, the infamous "Ask Not," line that inspired Barrientos, Birch, Hilliard, Shalala, and countless others -- teachers, nurses, veterans and volunteers.

But half a century has passed. Those who heard those words and acted on them are reaching the end of their careers. Will Kennedy's challenge fade with the generation that carried it?

Andrew Collier, 21, from Tennessee, doesn't seem to think so. He says he learned the words in school, more times than he can count

"You think about it and it still clicks today, thinking about what you can do instead of trying to see what other people can do for you," he says.

It clicked for him. He's still tan from his most recent trip to New Orleans -- his sixth -- where he's helping to rebuild houses destroyed in Hurricane Katrina.

Laying new floors, putting up walls -- it's Collier's way of giving back, of answering his generation's challenges. And in a way, he's answering Kennedy's.

Even the next generation is familiar with Kennedy's words. Kole Hultgren, 6, was visiting the cemetery with his family and his dad, Randy Hultgren, a freshman Republican congressman from Illinois. The family says Kole knows the words well and asks him to recite them.

"Do not ask what your country can do for you. Ask what you can do for your country," Kole says.

It isn't perfect. But it's close. And in the numbing cold, with the wind and snow, it doesn't seem all that different from what it must have been on that day, 50 years ago.

• Film Events
• Post-1970 Art
• Book Events
• Development of the President
• John Kennedy, The Leader
• The Speech – The Politician’s Poetry
• Kennedy’s Legacy
• Selected Speeches
• Development of the Poet
• Robert Frost, The Teacher
• The Poet – Politician
• Frost’s Legacy
• Selected Poems
• Bibliography
• Reflecting on the Film
• Discussion Questions
• Submissions Guidelines
• Sample Topics & Lesson Plans
• Cuban Missile Crisis
• Cuban Missile Crisis September 1962
• Cuban Missile Crisis October 16, 1962
• Cuban Missile Crisis – October 24, 1962

The Film Premiered at the John F Kennedy Library and Museum in May 2018 to an audience of more than 300.

Click the arrow above to view a “trailer” of the film.

“Speaking at Amherst College in his native Massachusetts on Oct. 26, 1963 – with his final trip to Dallas four weeks ahead — Kennedy delivered a powerful message to the liberal arts-schooled students about the dynamics of poetry and power. His thesis – that the young were obligated, through the arts and their activism, to question societal institutions, government and politics included – struck a chord among those who were there, so strongly for some that it has profoundly influenced their lives.” — Ed Bradley, Associate curator of film at the Flint Institute of Arts; formerly Flint Journal editor, writing for the East Village Magazine.

“A strong, polished and inspiring documentary about two men of influence, John F. Kennedy and Robert Frost, and how a speech at a moment of time, the groundbreaking event at Amherst College on October 26, 1963 for the Robert Frost Library, impacted a group of Amherst College classmates then, and continues to this day, as they pass on Kennedy’s message of social action and self-sacrifice, through their own personal interaction, sharing and mentoring with current generations and impacting generations to come.” Gordon Nordstrom, Jury Member, Vero Beach Wine and Film Festival

JFK: The Last Speech is available for purchase, and for streaming on iTunes and Amazon. 

Read interview of Bestor Cram  by Albert Nigrin, Executive Director/Curator of the New Jersey Film Festival. Bestor Cram is Producer/Director of JFK The Last Speech .

The Film – JFK: The Last Speech

In this era of political tension, when civic culture is fractured, when the value of the liberal arts is questioned, a message from 1963 has particular resonance toda​y.

Twenty-seven days before he was assassinated, President Kennedy came to Amherst College to honor the poet Robert Frost. He spoke of the relationship between poetry and power and of a view shared with Frost that power must be exercised, but wisely — tempered by a moral restraint inspired by the arts and a liberal education. And, he spoke of the obligation of those “given a running start in life” to serve the public interest.

Our documentary, JFK: The Last Speech , coinciding with the 2017 centenary of JFK’s birth, communicates the impact of this message through the stories of Amherst alumni and students and reflections by prominent scholars and political observers. Produced by an award winning filmmaker, Northern Light Productions, this film will ignite public discourse on enduring values and on our shared responsibility for the public interest. It is a call to action to rebuild our civic sphere — infused with broad sympathy, understanding, and compassion. – Reunion ’64

From the Filmmaker

The filmmaker, Bestor Cram, discussed his perspective on the meaning of JFK: The Last Speech in his essay, “Solace from Well-Chosen Words.” Excerpts from this essay follow:

In 1960, Norman Mailer prophesized that “America’s politics would now be America’s favorite movie.” Following three years of John Kennedy’s presidency, motion pictures of assassination, murder and funeral would unite the nation in astonished grief, in a manner we had not known before. What we had believed and trusted all changed. The solace and insight that words bring seemed to disappear. We were left to judge not if life had become a movie, but more profoundly what had this shared medium meant to our sense of self, our evolving national character, and the way we understood the world we lived in.

The fact was that we had been brought together less by an event than by an individual: Kennedy. And the camera had much to do with translating his charismatic eloquence.

As a documentary filmmaker, visual evidence is my stock and trade. I know, however, that this is not the silent film era. It is a time in which the sound that accompanies cinema is more than mere music or amplification of natural elements. It is often the vehicle that enables the narrative to unveil itself. Often it is what provides structure, sets tone, and reveals emotion so linked to the experience of cinematic storytelling.

In the case of the two principal subjects of JFK: The Last Speech , it is the passionate voice and carefully selected words that provide the foundation for reconsidering an address that was largely lost in the tragic events closely following its October 1963 delivery at Amherst College by JFK, who was honoring Robert Frost. Historian Douglas Brinkley states,

“Kennedy thought oratory was a way to move people. And you saw that when he started out with his inaugural address and you follow these remarkable set of speeches. Honestly, you have to go back – I mean, FDR had great speeches, but they weren’t these compositions of intellectual and civic engagement the way that Kennedy did.”

JFK: The Last Speech has been a project of passion, in memory of a man who served our nation with a noble distinction that would seem essential to the office he held, and yet is so lacking in the politics of today The disparity causes us to reflect on the stanzas of President Kennedy’s address that speak to our need to be engaged citizens who find wisdom in the arts:

“The artist, however faithful to his personal vision of reality, becomes the last champion of the individual mind and sensibility against an intrusive society and an officious state … In pursuing his perceptions of reality, he must often sail against the currents of his time.”

We learn from the past; it offers inspiration and guidance for how to navigate the ethical dilemmas we encounter on a daily basis. “When power corrupts, poetry cleanses,” Kennedy said. And like many documentaries, this story has multiple endings…

The other ending has to be with Robert Frost, whom JFK was eulogizing at Amherst: “We must never forget that art is not a form of propaganda; it is a form of truth,” said the President. I love to believe that cinema is part of understanding what the truth is. The act of going to the cinema is part of our own search for truth. It is also an affirmation of friendship, for we are able to see life in a movie and share that with those we hold dear. For many of us, it is Frost who was able to underscore our humanity simply and eloquently as an extension of who we are to one another. 1

– excerpts from essay by Bestor Cram, Principal and Creative Director of Northern Light Productions

Listen to the interview of filmmaker Bestor Cram, and Amherst ’64 classmate Roger Hirschberg discussing the development of JFK: The Last Speech. They are interviewed by Chuck Clough and Ron Hirschberg for the Boston-based podcast Above The Basement .  Pictured: Bestor Cram, Ron Hirschberg and Roger Hirschberg.

Film Credits:

Executive Producer: Neil Bicknell Associate Producers: Robert Benedetti, Roger Mills, Stephen Smith II, Richard Sparks, Charles Stover III

Historians appearing in the film: Douglas Brinkley, Ellen Fitzpatrick, Jay Parini

Amherst 64 Classmates: Featured Stories: Steve Downs, Ted Nelson, Gene Palumbo, George Wanlass

Perspectives: Raymond D. Battocchi, Pat DeLeon, Robert Frank, James T. Giles, Tom Jacobs, Doug Lowy, Mitch Meisner, Roger Mills, Peter Rubinstein, Terry Segal, Paul C. Stern, Joseph Stiglitz, Charles Stover, Joseph Wilson

Filmmaker: Northern Light Productions Producer/Director: Bestor Cram Co-Producer/Writer: Matthew MacLean Co-Producer/Narrator: Portland Helmich Editor: Glen Fukushima Animator: James Carlsen Research Archivist: Shane Butler Cinematographers: Bestor Cram, Jesse Beecher Sound Recordists: Matthew MacLean, Ben Avishai, Andy Turrett

Broadcasts of The Film 2018-9

Alpena, MI (WCML) June 2, August 18

Augusta (WEBA) August 18, 19, 21, 22, 23, 25, 26; November 24, 25, 26, 29; December 2 March 2, 4, 2019

Austin (KLRU) June 5, 6; August 26, 27

Baltimore (MPT) June 5

Billings (KBGS) November 4 May 19, 2019

Boise (KAID) October 22, 26, 28, 29, 30; November 1

Boston (WGBH, WGBZ) August 9, 10, 12 July 25, 28, 2019

Buffalo (WNED) June 5

Butte-Bozeman (KUSM) November 4 May 19, 2019

Charleston, SC (WITV) August 19, 21, 22, 23, 25, 26; November 24, 25, 26, 29; December 2 March 2,4, 2019

Charlotte (WNSC) August 19, 21, 22, 23, 25, 26; November 24, 25, 26, 29; December 2 March 2,4, 2019

Cheyenne (KTNE) June 4, 7

Cleveland (WVIZ) June 9 March 4, August 16, 2019

Columbia, SC (WRJA, WRLK) August 19, 21, 22, 23, 25, 26; November 24, 25, 26, 29; December 2 March 2, 4, 2019

Detroit (WTVS) June 5

Eureka (KEET) June 7, 2019

FARGO (KFME, KGFE, KCGE, KMDE) June 10

Flint-Saginaw (WCMU, WCMZ) June 2; August 18

Grand Rapids & Kalamazoo June 3

Great Falls (KUGF) November 4 May 19, 2019

Greenville-Spartan (WNEH, WNTV, WRET) August 19, 21, 22, 23, 25, 26; November 24, 25, 26, 29; December 2 March 2, 4, 2019

Helena (KUHM) November 4 May 19, 2019

Idaho Falls (KISU) October 22, 26, 28, 29, 30; November 1

Indianapolis (WFYI) June 5, 6, 10; August 19; December 3, 4, 8

Las Vegas (KLVX) February 17, 21, 2019

Lincoln-Hastings (KOUN, KHNE, NET2) June 4, 7

Los Angeles (KCET) June 2, 3, 5, 7, 8, 24, 26; July 3, 4, 7; October 1, 5, 7 January 15, 17, 19, 21, 23, 25, 2019

Maryland (MPT) June 5

Miami (WLRN) June 3, 6

Minot-Bismarck (KBME, KDSE, KSRE,KWSE) June 10

Missoula (KUFM, KUKL) November 4 May 19, 2019

Monterey CA (KQET-2) June 3, 4, 6

Myrtle Beach (WHMC, WJPM) August 19, 21, 22, 23, 25, 26; November 24, 25, 26, 29; December 2

March 2, 4, 2019

NEBRASKA (NET World) June 4, 7

New Orleans (WYES, WLAE) June 7, 20; November 22, 23, 25, 26 February 1, 3, 4; May 23, 24, 26, 27; August4

Norfolk (WHRO) June 5, 6, 10

N DAKOTA (Prairie Public Broadcasting) June 10

Oklahoma City and Tulsa June 5

Peoria (WTVP) June 4

Philadelphia (WLVT) June 3, 5

Pittsburgh (WQED Showcase) June 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15

Pittsburgh (MPT) June 5

Providence (RIPBS) June 3, 4

Rochester/Austin MN (KSMQ) June 6, 8, 11

Sacramento (KVIE) December 30

Salisbury (WCPB) June 5

San Francisco (KQED PLUS & KQEH) June 3, 4, 6

Savannah (WJWJ) August 19, 21, 22, 23, 25, 26; November 24, 25, 26, 29; December 2 March 2 4, 2019

Spokane (KWSU, KCDT, KUID) June 10 (KWSU) June 14; October 22, 25, 28, 29, 30; November 1

Springfield – Holyoke (WGBY) August 5

St. Louis (KETC) June 10; December 11

Topeka (KTWU) June 10

Traverse City (WCMV) June 2; August 18

Tucson (KUAT) June 3, 4, 5, 9; August 25, 28

Tulsa (KOED/KOET) June 5

Twin Falls (KIPT) October 22, 25, 28, 29, 30; November 1

Washington (WHUT) June 3, 11, 12; August 12 August 15, 2019

Washington DC (MPT) June 5

Wilkes Barre/Scranton (WVIA) June 5, 6, 9

“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”

–  President Kennedy at Amherst College

1 Bestor Cram, “Solace from Well-Chosen Words,” JFK: The Last Speech. Mascot Books, 2018.

Photo Credits:

Excerpt showing President Kennedy’s hand-written edit to his address at Amherst.  Courtesy of the Amherst College Archives and Special Collections, Amherst College Library.

Bestor Cram.  Courtesy of Northern Light Productions.

Bestor Cram, Ron Hirschberg, Roger Hirschberg.  Courtesy of Above The Basement.

Historical Impact of John F. Kennedy’s Inaugural Speech Essay

John F. Kennedy’s inaugural address was followed through on a harshly chilly, snow-loaded winter of 1961. It was the perfection of his challenging extended mission for the administration. He won that prize in the past political race with the tightest mainstream vote edge. The principal setting to Kennedy’s Inaugural location is the Cold War. The speech, along these lines, is pointed at the United States’ kin, however those of the whole world.

This performance was not quite the same as other inaugurals since he caused it to seem like each American resident played a part in his arrangement for the country. The new president singularly proclaimed a suspension of American atomic testing in the climate (Formica and Curley 190). His location welcomed each resident to participate in the public authority, and it gave them a stake in the result of approaches and clashes. He joined the general society, and he could keep ordinary people joined all through his term in office.

Kennedy was initiated at the tallness of the Cold War. He realized that he expected to tell partners and potential foes what his international strategy would be. His speech set the vibe for his position on unfamiliar legislative issues for the remainder of his term in office. He told the world that he would not like to begin a conflict yet would prefer to discover an answer through collaboration and exchange (Formica and Curley 183). When many individuals accepted that the Cold War would end in viciousness, he saw an opportunity to come to peace (Formica and Curley 185). Albeit the Cold War ended only in the late twentieth century, Kennedy started the effective first means to harmony in his inaugural.

In conclusion, the inaugural may not have been John F. Kennedy’s most important speech on its effect on the world. Despite this, Kennedy’s inaugural address was world-changing, proclaiming the initiation of another American organization. The ex-president was not hesitant to battle for freedom and democracy. The new not set in stone upon a serene triumph in the west’s long relentless war with the Soviet Union over the world’s future course of development.

Formica, Piero, and Martin Curley. Exploring the Culture of Open Innovation: Towards an Altruistic Model of Economy . Emerald Publishing, 2018.

• Chicago (A-D)
• Chicago (N-B)

IvyPanda. (2022, November 11). Historical Impact of John F. Kennedy's Inaugural Speech. https://ivypanda.com/essays/historical-impact-of-john-f-kennedys-inaugural-speech/

"Historical Impact of John F. Kennedy's Inaugural Speech." IvyPanda , 11 Nov. 2022, ivypanda.com/essays/historical-impact-of-john-f-kennedys-inaugural-speech/.

IvyPanda . (2022) 'Historical Impact of John F. Kennedy's Inaugural Speech'. 11 November.

IvyPanda . 2022. "Historical Impact of John F. Kennedy's Inaugural Speech." November 11, 2022. https://ivypanda.com/essays/historical-impact-of-john-f-kennedys-inaugural-speech/.

1. IvyPanda . "Historical Impact of John F. Kennedy's Inaugural Speech." November 11, 2022. https://ivypanda.com/essays/historical-impact-of-john-f-kennedys-inaugural-speech/.

Bibliography

IvyPanda . "Historical Impact of John F. Kennedy's Inaugural Speech." November 11, 2022. https://ivypanda.com/essays/historical-impact-of-john-f-kennedys-inaugural-speech/.

• Rhetorical Analysis: Roosevelt’s Inaugural Address
• Barack Obama's Inaugural Speech and Rhetoric
• Abraham Lincoln's First Inaugural Address
• George Washington's and John Adams's Policies
• The Actions of Roosevelt During the New Deal
• Was Andrew Jackson a Good President?
• Republican Simplicity Following the Market Revolution in America
• Andrew Jackson’s Political Legacy

Milestone Documents

President John F. Kennedy's Inaugural Address (1961)

Citation: Inaugural Address, Kennedy Draft, 01/17/1961; Papers of John F. Kennedy: President's Office Files, 01/20/1961-11/22/1963; John F. Kennedy Library; National Archives and Records Administration.

View All Pages in the National Archives Catalog

View Transcript

On January 20, 1961, President John F. Kennedy delivered his inaugural address in which he announced that "we shall pay any price, bear any burden, meet any hardship, support any friend, oppose any foe to assure the survival and success of liberty."

The inaugural ceremony is a defining moment in a president’s career — and no one knew this better than John F. Kennedy as he prepared for his own inauguration on January 20, 1961. He wanted his address to be short and clear, devoid of any partisan rhetoric and focused on foreign policy.

Kennedy began constructing his speech in late November, working from a speech file kept by his secretary and soliciting suggestions from friends and advisors. He wrote his thoughts in his nearly indecipherable longhand on a yellow legal pad.

While his colleagues submitted ideas, the speech was distinctly the work of Kennedy himself. Aides recounted that every sentence was worked, reworked, and reduced. The meticulously crafted piece of oratory dramatically announced a generational change in the White House. It called on the nation to combat "tyranny, poverty, disease, and war itself" and urged American citizens to participate in public service.

The climax of the speech and its most memorable phrase – "Ask not what your country can do for you – ask what you can do for your country" – was honed down from a thought about sacrifice that Kennedy had long held in his mind and had expressed in various ways in campaign speeches.

Less than six weeks after his inauguration, on March 1, President Kennedy issued an executive order establishing the Peace Corps as a pilot program within the Department of State. He envisioned the Peace Corps as a pool of trained American volunteers who would go overseas to help foreign countries meet their needs for skilled manpower. Later that year, Congress passed the Peace Corps Act, making the program permanent.

Teach with this document.

Previous Document Next Document

Vice President Johnson, Mr. Speaker, Mr. Chief Justice, President Eisenhower, Vice President Nixon, President Truman, Reverend Clergy, fellow citizens:

We observe today not a victory of party but a celebration of freedom--symbolizing an end as well as a beginning--signifying renewal as well as change. For I have sworn before you and Almighty God the same solemn oath our forbears prescribed nearly a century and three-quarters ago.

The world is very different now. For man holds in his mortal hands the power to abolish all forms of human poverty and all forms of human life. And yet the same revolutionary beliefs for which our forebears fought are still at issue around the globe--the belief that the rights of man come not from the generosity of the state but from the hand of God.

We dare not forget today that we are the heirs of that first revolution. Let the word go forth from this time and place, to friend and foe alike, that the torch has been passed to a new generation of Americans--born in this century, tempered by war, disciplined by a hard and bitter peace, proud of our ancient heritage--and unwilling to witness or permit the slow undoing of those human rights to which this nation has always been committed, and to which we are committed today at home and around the world.

Let every nation know, whether it wishes us well or ill, that we shall pay any price, bear any burden, meet any hardship, support any friend, oppose any foe to assure the survival and the success of liberty.

This much we pledge--and more.

To those old allies whose cultural and spiritual origins we share, we pledge the loyalty of faithful friends. United there is little we cannot do in a host of cooperative ventures. Divided there is little we can do--for we dare not meet a powerful challenge at odds and split asunder.

To those new states whom we welcome to the ranks of the free, we pledge our word that one form of colonial control shall not have passed away merely to be replaced by a far more iron tyranny. We shall not always expect to find them supporting our view. But we shall always hope to find them strongly supporting their own freedom--and to remember that, in the past, those who foolishly sought power by riding the back of the tiger ended up inside.

To those people in the huts and villages of half the globe struggling to break the bonds of mass misery, we pledge our best efforts to help them help themselves, for whatever period is required--not because the communists may be doing it, not because we seek their votes, but because it is right. If a free society cannot help the many who are poor, it cannot save the few who are rich.

To our sister republics south of our border, we offer a special pledge--to convert our good words into good deeds--in a new alliance for progress--to assist free men and free governments in casting off the chains of poverty. But this peaceful revolution of hope cannot become the prey of hostile powers. Let all our neighbors know that we shall join with them to oppose aggression or subversion anywhere in the Americas. And let every other power know that this Hemisphere intends to remain the master of its own house.

To that world assembly of sovereign states, the United Nations, our last best hope in an age where the instruments of war have far outpaced the instruments of peace, we renew our pledge of support--to prevent it from becoming merely a forum for invective--to strengthen its shield of the new and the weak--and to enlarge the area in which its writ may run.

Finally, to those nations who would make themselves our adversary, we offer not a pledge but a request: that both sides begin anew the quest for peace, before the dark powers of destruction unleashed by science engulf all humanity in planned or accidental self-destruction.

We dare not tempt them with weakness. For only when our arms are sufficient beyond doubt can we be certain beyond doubt that they will never be employed.

But neither can two great and powerful groups of nations take comfort from our present course--both sides overburdened by the cost of modern weapons, both rightly alarmed by the steady spread of the deadly atom, yet both racing to alter that uncertain balance of terror that stays the hand of mankind's final war.

So let us begin anew--remembering on both sides that civility is not a sign of weakness, and sincerity is always subject to proof. Let us never negotiate out of fear. But let us never fear to negotiate.

Let both sides explore what problems unite us instead of belaboring those problems which divide us.

Let both sides, for the first time, formulate serious and precise proposals for the inspection and control of arms--and bring the absolute power to destroy other nations under the absolute control of all nations.

Let both sides seek to invoke the wonders of science instead of its terrors. Together let us explore the stars, conquer the deserts, eradicate disease, tap the ocean depths and encourage the arts and commerce.

Let both sides unite to heed in all corners of the earth the command of Isaiah--to "undo the heavy burdens . . . (and) let the oppressed go free."

And if a beachhead of cooperation may push back the jungle of suspicion, let both sides join in creating a new endeavor, not a new balance of power, but a new world of law, where the strong are just and the weak secure and the peace preserved.

All this will not be finished in the first one hundred days. Nor will it be finished in the first one thousand days, nor in the life of this Administration, nor even perhaps in our lifetime on this planet. But let us begin.

In your hands, my fellow citizens, more than mine, will rest the final success or failure of our course. Since this country was founded, each generation of Americans has been summoned to give testimony to its national loyalty. The graves of young Americans who answered the call to service surround the globe.

Now the trumpet summons us again--not as a call to bear arms, though arms we need--not as a call to battle, though embattled we are-- but a call to bear the burden of a long twilight struggle, year in and year out, "rejoicing in hope, patient in tribulation"--a struggle against the common enemies of man: tyranny, poverty, disease and war itself.

Can we forge against these enemies a grand and global alliance, North and South, East and West, that can assure a more fruitful life for all mankind? Will you join in that historic effort?

In the long history of the world, only a few generations have been granted the role of defending freedom in its hour of maximum danger. I do not shrink from this responsibility--I welcome it. I do not believe that any of us would exchange places with any other people or any other generation. The energy, the faith, the devotion which we bring to this endeavor will light our country and all who serve it--and the glow from that fire can truly light the world.

And so, my fellow Americans: ask not what your country can do for you--ask what you can do for your country.

My fellow citizens of the world: ask not what America will do for you, but what together we can do for the freedom of man.

Finally, whether you are citizens of America or citizens of the world, ask of us here the same high standards of strength and sacrifice which we ask of you. With a good conscience our only sure reward, with history the final judge of our deeds, let us go forth to lead the land we love, asking His blessing and His help, but knowing that here on earth God's work must truly be our own.

• Share full article

Advertisement

The Morning

The influence of r.f.k. jr..

What the independent candidate is emphasizing in his speeches — and which voters support him.

By David Leonhardt and Ian Prasad Philbrick

George Wallace, Ross Perot, Ralph Nader and now perhaps Robert F. Kennedy Jr.

With the support of about 10 percent of likely voters, Kennedy has a chance to join the list of third-party candidates who have influenced modern presidential elections. Consider the latest Times poll:

If the 2024 presidential election were held today, who would you vote for if the candidates were:

(Among likely voters in six battleground states)

Donald Trump

Another candidate

Don't know or

would not vote

Don't know or would not vote

In today’s newsletter, we’ll offer a primer on Kennedy’s candidacy — who he is, which voters support him, how his level of support is likely to change and what he’s emphasizing in his speeches and ads.

He is the third of 11 children of Robert F. Kennedy — the former attorney general, senator and presidential candidate — and Ethel Kennedy. He was 6 years old when his uncle was elected president and 14 years old when Sirhan Sirhan assassinated his father because of his father’s support for Israel during its 1967 war.

R.F.K. Jr., who’s now 70, has never run for office before. He spent his early career as an environmental advocate and lawyer. He fought for clean water and renewable energy and opposed coal, factory farms and pollution in heavily Black and Native American communities.

In recent decades, he has focused much of his attention on spreading false, conspiratorial ideas. After the 2004 election, he suggested that George W. Bush had stolen victory from John Kerry. Kennedy has claimed that vaccines cause autism, that H.I.V. may not cause AIDS and that Covid vaccines are a dangerous corporate plot.

What is he saying now?

His anti-vaccine views are his best-known position, but our colleague Jess Bidgood points out that Kennedy’s overall campaign is more traditionally populist. Ben Tulchin, a former pollster for Bernie Sanders, has noted the similarity between Kennedy’s and Sanders’s messages.

“We are no longer living in a democracy,” Kennedy has said. “We’re living in a corporate kleptocracy.” He has criticized wealth inequality, praised labor unions and called for a higher minimum wage, free day care, stronger border security, tougher corporate regulation and tax increases on the rich.

His foreign policy views lean toward isolationism. He describes Democrats and Republicans as warmongers and promises to keep the country “out of foreign conflicts.” He says President Biden has been too aggressive in confronting Russia and calls for a diplomatic solution to the war in Ukraine. He supports Israel’s right to defend itself after the Oct. 7 attacks and has said Hamas “must be destroyed.”

His views on other issues are a mix of liberal and conservative, and he says those labels aren’t useful anymore. He says abortion should be legal early in pregnancy and restricted later. He favors marijuana legalization. He has promised not to take away people’s guns. He questions medical treatments for trans children.

Regular readers of this newsletter know that the American public leans to the left on many economic issues and to the right on many social issues. We’ve called it the Scaffle vote (for socially conservative and fiscally liberal ). R.F.K. Jr.’s platform may not be wholly consistent, but he is mostly a Scaffle.

Who supports him?

The people who say they plan to vote for R.F.K. Jr. are not vastly different from Americans as a whole. But there are some differences, says Ruth Igielnik, a polling expert at The Times.

His fans skew young: About 17 percent of likely voters younger than 30 backed him in our recent poll of swing states. His supporters are less likely to have a college degree than the electorate as a whole and are more likely to make less than $50,000 a year. They are more likely to be Latino. None of this should be surprising: Working-class and Latino Americans are often Scaffles.

“I’m just not seeing much change,” Chantel Turk, 33, a dance studio owner in Marietta, Ga., and a Kennedy supporter, told The Times . “I haven’t seen change since I started voting, so I’m losing faith in the system.”

For now, R.F.K. Jr. seems to be hurting Biden more than he’s hurting Donald Trump — but only modestly more. About 32 percent of R.F.K. Jr.’s supporters said they had voted for Biden in 2020, while 24 percent voted for Trump. Most of his remaining supporters didn’t vote four years ago.

Support for third-party candidates usually declines during a campaign. It happened to Wallace in 1968, Perot in 1992 and Nader in 2000.

Why? Some voters signal their unhappiness with the major-party candidates by telling pollsters they plan to vote for a third party, Ruth explains, but ultimately choose the Democrat or Republican they prefer. If this year’s campaign follows historical patterns, R.F.K. Jr.’s level of support is likely to decline by at least half (and he may not get onto the ballot in every state).

“But we should also take the lesson that less is not none,” Ruth says. In 2000, Nader, who received less than 3 percent of the popular vote, likely cost Al Gore the election. In 2016, the combined support for third-party candidates was larger than Trump’s margin over Hillary Clinton in six swing states.

Kennedy is faring well with voters who get their news from social media, our colleagues Shane Goldmacher and Neil Vigdor write. Here are more interviews with his supporters .

Kennedy polls especially well with voters who usually back Democrats but are now sympathetic to Trump. Read Nate Cohn’s analysis .

Dig into the results of the poll — done jointly by The Times, Siena College and The Philadelphia Inquirer.

Nicole Shanahan, the Silicon Valley millionaire who is Kennedy’s running mate, has started giving stump speeches. Her first quoted Carl Jung .

THE LATEST NEWS

Trump on trial.

The lawyer Michael Cohen testified at Trump’s Manhattan criminal trial that Trump directed him to pay Stormy Daniels hush money before the 2016 election and approved the plan to reimburse Cohen for it.

Trump believed that Daniels’s story of a tryst would be “ a disaster for the campaign ” and wanted it buried, Cohen testified. “Women are going to hate me,” Cohen recalled Trump saying. “Just take care of it.”

Cohen’s testimony is crucial to the prosecution’s case that Trump ordered the payment to win the election, not for personal reasons. Trump, Cohen said, “ wasn’t thinking about Melania .”

Cohen looked gaunt but seemed calm, speaking smoothly and carefully. Trump sat with his eyes closed for much of the testimony but at times smirked, scoffed or shook his head.

Senator J.D. Vance, an Ohio Republican and potential Trump running mate, was in the courtroom yesterday . Eric Trump, sitting behind his father, glared at Cohen as he testified.

China Policy

Biden will announce higher tariffs on Chinese imports , including electric vehicles and computer chips.

As a presidential candidate, Biden criticized Trump’s trade war with China. In office, he has escalated it, but with a different focus: high-tech industries .

The Biden administration will expand a chip factory in Minnesota .

2024 Elections

Harry Dunn, a former Capitol Police officer who was on duty during the Jan. 6 riot, is running for a U.S. House seat in today’s Maryland Democratic primary.

Voters in Nebraska and West Virginia will also cast primary ballots today. Read what to watch for .

Israel-Hamas War

The U.N. said that a staff member was killed when one of its convoys came under fire in Rafah.

“Our hearts are broken”: On Israel’s Memorial Day, people visited to the site of a music festival where hundreds were killed during the Hamas-led attacks on Oct. 7.

War in Ukraine

Ukraine is short on troops and weapons as it tries to repel a new Russian offensive in the northeast.

As Russia advances, Secretary of State Antony Blinken arrived in Kyiv to reaffirm U.S. support for Ukraine.

Russia’s gains in the east show the danger of even a small crack in Ukraine’s front lines.

Climate Change

Declining profitability of homeowners insurance.

Ratio of revenue to costs per year

South Dakota

Home insurers are losing money as climate change produces more extreme weather, like wildfires and hurricanes. They are raising premiums and cutting back on coverage .

The government approved sweeping changes to electric grids. This could lead to many new high-voltage power lines as well as more wind and solar power.

Business and Economy

“How am I supposed to retire?” Millions of low- and moderate- income Americans are struggling with high borrowing costs.

OpenAI unveiled a new version of ChatGPT that can respond to voice commands , images and videos.

Other Big Stories

A pediatrician who led a British review of youth gender treatments said that U.S. doctors were out of step with scientific evidence and too encouraging of the treatments — based on a fear of upsetting political progressives.

Melinda French Gates will resign from the foundation she started with her ex-husband, Bill Gates, but said she would continue her philanthropic work .

Biden alienates swing voters when he panders to the left on Israel, immigration and electric vehicles , Mark Penn writes.

Here are columns by Michelle Goldberg on “vice signaling” and Paul Krugman on Biden’s unpopularity .

MORNING READS

Good dogs : See behind-the-scenes photos from this year’s Westminster dog show.

Your Money: This week, our personal finance columnist is helping 20-somethings sort out their finances .

Lives Lived: The civil rights expert Christopher Edley Jr. advised three Democratic presidents and six presidential campaigns. He died at 71 .

N.B.A.: The Oklahoma City Thunder beat the Dallas Mavericks in Game 4 to tie their series at 2-2. And the Boston Celtics won their game against the Cleveland Cavaliers to take a 3-1 series lead.

N.H.L.: The Carolina Hurricanes defeated the New York Rangers to force a Game 6 . And the Vancouver Canucks beat the Edmonton Oilers .

W.N.B.A.: The season starts tonight. People are watching Caitlin Clark and the Indiana Fever .

ARTS AND IDEAS

Britain’s butlers are changing. These days, buttling (yes, that’s a verb) is less about looking after a mansion and polishing silver and more about lifestyle management — akin to a private maître d’, one expert explained. If a client wants to eat dinner on a mountaintop, it’s the butler’s job to arrange the meal and the helicopter to get it there. And if a client wants donkeys for a Christmas Nativity scene, the butler will wrangle them. (Both are real examples from a new story by Plum Sykes in The Times .)

More on culture

There’s a battle over New York City’s streets : Cars, pedestrians, e-bikes and dining sheds are competing for space on a grid designed over two centuries ago.

George Clooney will make his Broadway debut in a stage adaptation of his 2005 film “Good Night, and Good Luck,” about the pioneering newscaster Edward R. Murrow.

Four subway stations will sell a limited-edition MetroCard featuring the New York rapper Ice Spice , Time Out reports.

Trump mentioned “Silence of the Lambs” character Hannibal Lecter at a rally. “Please tell me this is not your V.P. announcement,” Seth Meyers said on his late night show .

THE MORNING RECOMMENDS …

Turn a modest can of beans into a creamy, spicy tomato dish .

Relieve discomfort from muscle knots .

Game with a better keyboard.

Here is today’s Spelling Bee . Yesterday’s pangram was cornily .

And here are today’s Mini Crossword , Wordle , Sudoku , Connections and Strands .

Thanks for spending part of your morning with The Times. See you tomorrow. — David and Ian

P.S. Around the world and inside The Times: Nicholas Kristof, the longtime columnist and correspondent, has published a memoir today. It’s called “Chasing Hope.”

Sign up here to get this newsletter in your inbox . Reach our team at [email protected] .

David Leonhardt runs The Morning , The Times’s flagship daily newsletter. Since joining The Times in 1999, he has been an economics columnist, opinion columnist, head of the Washington bureau and founding editor of the Upshot section, among other roles. More about David Leonhardt

Ian Prasad Philbrick is a writer for The Morning newsletter. More about Ian Prasad Philbrick

The President and the Press: Address before the American Newspaper Publishers Association, April 27, 1961

President John F. Kennedy Waldorf-Astoria Hotel, New York City April 27, 1961

Mr. Chairman, ladies and gentlemen:

I appreciate very much your generous invitation to be here tonight.

You bear heavy responsibilities these days and an article I read some time ago reminded me of how particularly heavily the burdens of present day events bear upon your profession.

You may remember that in 1851 the New York Herald Tribune under the sponsorship and publishing of Horace Greeley, employed as its London correspondent an obscure journalist by the name of Karl Marx.

We are told that foreign correspondent Marx, stone broke, and with a family ill and undernourished, constantly appealed to Greeley and managing editor Charles Dana for an increase in his munificent salary of $5 per installment, a salary which he and Engels ungratefully labeled as the "lousiest petty bourgeois cheating."

But when all his financial appeals were refused, Marx looked around for other means of livelihood and fame, eventually terminating his relationship with the Tribune and devoting his talents full time to the cause that would bequeath the world the seeds of Leninism, Stalinism, revolution and the cold war.

If only this capitalistic New York newspaper had treated him more kindly; if only Marx had remained a foreign correspondent, history might have been different. And I hope all publishers will bear this lesson in mind the next time they receive a poverty-stricken appeal for a small increase in the expense account from an obscure newspaper man.

I have selected as the title of my remarks tonight "The President and the Press." Some may suggest that this would be more naturally worded "The President Versus the Press." But those are not my sentiments tonight.

It is true, however, that when a well-known diplomat from another country demanded recently that our State Department repudiate certain newspaper attacks on his colleague it was unnecessary for us to reply that this Administration was not responsible for the press, for the press had already made it clear that it was not responsible for this Administration.

Nevertheless, my purpose here tonight is not to deliver the usual assault on the so-called one party press. On the contrary, in recent months I have rarely heard any complaints about political bias in the press except from a few Republicans. Nor is it my purpose tonight to discuss or defend the televising of Presidential press conferences. I think it is highly beneficial to have some 20,000,000 Americans regularly sit in on these conferences to observe, if I may say so, the incisive, the intelligent and the courteous qualities displayed by your Washington correspondents.

Nor, finally, are these remarks intended to examine the proper degree of privacy which the press should allow to any President and his family.

If in the last few months your White House reporters and photographers have been attending church services with regularity, that has surely done them no harm.

On the other hand, I realize that your staff and wire service photographers may be complaining that they do not enjoy the same green privileges at the local golf courses that they once did.

It is true that my predecessor did not object as I do to pictures of one's golfing skill in action. But neither on the other hand did he ever bean a Secret Service man.

My topic tonight is a more sober one of concern to publishers as well as editors.

I want to talk about our common responsibilities in the face of a common danger. The events of recent weeks may have helped to illuminate that challenge for some; but the dimensions of its threat have loomed large on the horizon for many years. Whatever our hopes may be for the future--for reducing this threat or living with it--there is no escaping either the gravity or the totality of its challenge to our survival and to our security--a challenge that confronts us in unaccustomed ways in every sphere of human activity.

This deadly challenge imposes upon our society two requirements of direct concern both to the press and to the President--two requirements that may seem almost contradictory in tone, but which must be reconciled and fulfilled if we are to meet this national peril. I refer, first, to the need for a far greater public information; and, second, to the need for far greater official secrecy.

The very word "secrecy" is repugnant in a free and open society; and we are as a people inherently and historically opposed to secret societies, to secret oaths and to secret proceedings. We decided long ago that the dangers of excessive and unwarranted concealment of pertinent facts far outweighed the dangers which are cited to justify it. Even today, there is little value in opposing the threat of a closed society by imitating its arbitrary restrictions. Even today, there is little value in insuring the survival of our nation if our traditions do not survive with it. And there is very grave danger that an announced need for increased security will be seized upon by those anxious to expand its meaning to the very limits of official censorship and concealment. That I do not intend to permit to the extent that it is in my control. And no official of my Administration, whether his rank is high or low, civilian or military, should interpret my words here tonight as an excuse to censor the news, to stifle dissent, to cover up our mistakes or to withhold from the press and the public the facts they deserve to know.

But I do ask every publisher, every editor, and every newsman in the nation to reexamine his own standards, and to recognize the nature of our country's peril. In time of war, the government and the press have customarily joined in an effort based largely on self-discipline, to prevent unauthorized disclosures to the enemy. In time of "clear and present danger," the courts have held that even the privileged rights of the First Amendment must yield to the public's need for national security.

Today no war has been declared--and however fierce the struggle may be, it may never be declared in the traditional fashion. Our way of life is under attack. Those who make themselves our enemy are advancing around the globe. The survival of our friends is in danger. And yet no war has been declared, no borders have been crossed by marching troops, no missiles have been fired.

If the press is awaiting a declaration of war before it imposes the self-discipline of combat conditions, then I can only say that no war ever posed a greater threat to our security. If you are awaiting a finding of "clear and present danger," then I can only say that the danger has never been more clear and its presence has never been more imminent.

It requires a change in outlook, a change in tactics, a change in missions--by the government, by the people, by every businessman or labor leader, and by every newspaper. For we are opposed around the world by a monolithic and ruthless conspiracy that relies primarily on covert means for expanding its sphere of influence--on infiltration instead of invasion, on subversion instead of elections, on intimidation instead of free choice, on guerrillas by night instead of armies by day. It is a system which has conscripted vast human and material resources into the building of a tightly knit, highly efficient machine that combines military, diplomatic, intelligence, economic, scientific and political operations.

Its preparations are concealed, not published. Its mistakes are buried, not headlined. Its dissenters are silenced, not praised. No expenditure is questioned, no rumor is printed, no secret is revealed. It conducts the Cold War, in short, with a war-time discipline no democracy would ever hope or wish to match.

Nevertheless, every democracy recognizes the necessary restraints of national security--and the question remains whether those restraints need to be more strictly observed if we are to oppose this kind of attack as well as outright invasion.

For the facts of the matter are that this nation's foes have openly boasted of acquiring through our newspapers information they would otherwise hire agents to acquire through theft, bribery or espionage; that details of this nation's covert preparations to counter the enemy's covert operations have been available to every newspaper reader, friend and foe alike; that the size, the strength, the location and the nature of our forces and weapons, and our plans and strategy for their use, have all been pinpointed in the press and other news media to a degree sufficient to satisfy any foreign power; and that, in at least in one case, the publication of details concerning a secret mechanism whereby satellites were followed required its alteration at the expense of considerable time and money.

The newspapers which printed these stories were loyal, patriotic, responsible and well-meaning. Had we been engaged in open warfare, they undoubtedly would not have published such items. But in the absence of open warfare, they recognized only the tests of journalism and not the tests of national security. And my question tonight is whether additional tests should not now be adopted.

The question is for you alone to answer. No public official should answer it for you. No governmental plan should impose its restraints against your will. But I would be failing in my duty to the nation, in considering all of the responsibilities that we now bear and all of the means at hand to meet those responsibilities, if I did not commend this problem to your attention, and urge its thoughtful consideration.

On many earlier occasions, I have said--and your newspapers have constantly said--that these are times that appeal to every citizen's sense of sacrifice and self-discipline. They call out to every citizen to weigh his rights and comforts against his obligations to the common good. I cannot now believe that those citizens who serve in the newspaper business consider themselves exempt from that appeal.

I have no intention of establishing a new Office of War Information to govern the flow of news. I am not suggesting any new forms of censorship or any new types of security classifications. I have no easy answer to the dilemma that I have posed, and would not seek to impose it if I had one. But I am asking the members of the newspaper profession and the industry in this country to reexamine their own responsibilities, to consider the degree and the nature of the present danger, and to heed the duty of self-restraint which that danger imposes upon us all.

Every newspaper now asks itself, with respect to every story: "Is it news?" All I suggest is that you add the question: "Is it in the interest of the national security?" And I hope that every group in America--unions and businessmen and public officials at every level-- will ask the same question of their endeavors, and subject their actions to the same exacting tests.

And should the press of America consider and recommend the voluntary assumption of specific new steps or machinery, I can assure you that we will cooperate whole-heartedly with those recommendations.

Perhaps there will be no recommendations. Perhaps there is no answer to the dilemma faced by a free and open society in a cold and secret war. In times of peace, any discussion of this subject, and any action that results, are both painful and without precedent. But this is a time of peace and peril which knows no precedent in history.

It is the unprecedented nature of this challenge that also gives rise to your second obligation--an obligation which I share. And that is our obligation to inform and alert the American people--to make certain that they possess all the facts that they need, and understand them as well--the perils, the prospects, the purposes of our program and the choices that we face.

No President should fear public scrutiny of his program. For from that scrutiny comes understanding; and from that understanding comes support or opposition. And both are necessary. I am not asking your newspapers to support the Administration, but I am asking your help in the tremendous task of informing and alerting the American people. For I have complete confidence in the response and dedication of our citizens whenever they are fully informed.

I not only could not stifle controversy among your readers--I welcome it. This Administration intends to be candid about its errors; for as a wise man once said: "An error does not become a mistake until you refuse to correct it." We intend to accept full responsibility for our errors; and we expect you to point them out when we miss them.

Without debate, without criticism, no Administration and no country can succeed--and no republic can survive. That is why the Athenian lawmaker Solon decreed it a crime for any citizen to shrink from controversy. And that is why our press was protected by the First Amendment-- the only business in America specifically protected by the Constitution- -not primarily to amuse and entertain, not to emphasize the trivial and the sentimental, not to simply "give the public what it wants"--but to inform, to arouse, to reflect, to state our dangers and our opportunities, to indicate our crises and our choices, to lead, mold, educate and sometimes even anger public opinion.

This means greater coverage and analysis of international news--for it is no longer far away and foreign but close at hand and local. It means greater attention to improved understanding of the news as well as improved transmission. And it means, finally, that government at all levels, must meet its obligation to provide you with the fullest possible information outside the narrowest limits of national security--and we intend to do it.

It was early in the Seventeenth Century that Francis Bacon remarked on three recent inventions already transforming the world: the compass, gunpowder and the printing press. Now the links between the nations first forged by the compass have made us all citizens of the world, the hopes and threats of one becoming the hopes and threats of us all. In that one world's efforts to live together, the evolution of gunpowder to its ultimate limit has warned mankind of the terrible consequences of failure.

And so it is to the printing press--to the recorder of man's deeds, the keeper of his conscience, the courier of his news--that we look for strength and assistance, confident that with your help man will be what he was born to be: free and independent.

Home — Essay Samples — Government & Politics — John F. Kennedy — Analysis Of Rhetorical Strategies Used By John F. Kennedy In His Inaugural Speech

Analysis of Rhetorical Strategies Used by John F. Kennedy in His Inaugural Speech

• Categories: John F. Kennedy Rhetoric

About this sample

Words: 469 |

Published: Sep 1, 2020

Words: 469 | Page: 1 | 3 min read

In summary, John F. Kennedy's 1961 inaugural speech aimed to unite both Americans and the global community, using various rhetorical strategies effectively. Repetition was a key strategy to emphasize his call for peace. Phrases like "Let both sides" and "to those" connected with a broader audience, underlining his commitment to international cooperation. Pathos appealed to Americans' loyalty and compassion, emphasizing unity in facing common challenges. This emotional connection aimed to change perspectives toward other nations. Direct address reinforced his point, acknowledging the ambitious task of achieving global peace but encouraging citizens to start the journey together.

Table of contents

Prompt examples for the "jfk steel speech rhetorical analysis" essays, jfk steel speech rhetorical analysis essay.

• Exploring Rhetorical Strategies Analyze the use of rhetorical strategies such as repetition, pathos, and direct address in John F. Kennedy's steel speech and how they contribute to the effectiveness of his message.
• The Power of Repetition Examine the instances of repetition in JFK's speech and discuss their significance in reinforcing his central message of unity and responsibility.
• Pathos and Emotional Appeal Analyze the emotional impact of JFK's speech on the audience and its role in conveying his call for global responsibility.
• The Art of Direct Address Analyze how JFK's direct address to the audience strengthens his call to action and responsibility.
• JFK's Vision for a Unified World Discuss how Kennedy's speech aims to unite not only Americans but all citizens of the world in pursuit of common goals.

Works Cited

• ampbell, R., & Jamieson, K. H. (1990). Deeds Done in Words: Presidential Rhetoric and the Genres of Governance. University of Chicago Press.
• Coleman, D. (2003). The Rhetoric of American Exceptionalism: Critical Essays. McFarland.
• Griffin, C. L. (2009). A First Look at Communication Theory. McGraw-Hill Education.
• Kennedy, J. F. (1961). Inaugural Address. Retrieved from https://www.jfklibrary.org/learn/about-jfk/historic-speeches/inaugural-address
• Kennedy, J. F. (1963). A Strategy of Peace. Retrieved from https://www.jfklibrary.org/learn/about-jfk/historic-speeches/a-strategy-of-peace
• Medhurst, M. J. (1989). Dwight D. Eisenhower and the Rhetoric of the Middle Way. Greenwood Press.
• Pfau, M., & Parry-Giles, S. J. (2010). Rhetoric and Communication Perspectives on Domestic Terrorism: Counterterrorism Policy and Presidential Leadership. Lexington Books.
• Simons, H. W. (2002). Persuasion in Society. SAGE Publications.
• Smith, C. (1991). Rhetoric and Human Consciousness: A History. Allyn & Bacon.
• Zarefsky, D. (2009). Public Speaking: Strategies for Success. Pearson.

Cite this Essay

Let us write you an essay from scratch

• 450+ experts on 30 subjects ready to help
• Custom essay delivered in as few as 3 hours

Get high-quality help

Dr. Heisenberg

Verified writer

• Expert in: Government & Politics Literature

+ 120 experts online

By clicking “Check Writers’ Offers”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy policy . We’ll occasionally send you promo and account related email

No need to pay just yet!

Related Essays

2 pages / 768 words

3 pages / 1188 words

1 pages / 445 words

2 pages / 1174 words

Remember! This is just a sample.

You can get your custom paper by one of our expert writers.

121 writers online

Still can’t find what you need?

Browse our vast selection of original essay samples, each expertly formatted and styled

Related Essays on John F. Kennedy

The Second World War was an international conflict fought from 1939 to 1945 involving Germany, Italy, and Japan, who were known as the Axis powers, and France, Great Britain, the United States, and the Soviet Union, who were [...]

John F. Kennedy's inaugural address is widely regarded as one of the most powerful speeches in American history. Delivered on January 20, 1961, it marked the beginning of Kennedy's presidency and set the tone for his [...]

President John F. Kennedy and President Abraham Lincoln are two such leaders. Although they lived in different eras, their lives and achievements bear striking resemblances. This essay aims to explore the similarities between [...]

Former President John F. Kennedy in his Presidential Inaugural Address, delivers a hopeful, inspiring speech about the actions he will take and the actions he expects citizens to take to achieve world peace. Kennedy’s purpose is [...]

June 26, 1963, post WWII, a time were the United States and the Soviet Union were the world’s superpowers. The two powers fought a war of different government and economic ideologies known as the Cold War. During the time of the [...]

The 35th president of the United States, John F. Kennedy, in his first Inaugural Address, aims to inspire Americans by outlining his plans for the future as he is being sworn into office. Kennedy’s purpose is to gain the [...]

Related Topics

By clicking “Send”, you agree to our Terms of service and Privacy statement . We will occasionally send you account related emails.

Where do you want us to send this sample?

By clicking “Continue”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy policy.

Be careful. This essay is not unique

This essay was donated by a student and is likely to have been used and submitted before

Download this Sample

Free samples may contain mistakes and not unique parts

Sorry, we could not paraphrase this essay. Our professional writers can rewrite it and get you a unique paper.

Please check your inbox.

We can write you a custom essay that will follow your exact instructions and meet the deadlines. Let's fix your grades together!

Get Your Personalized Essay in 3 Hours or Less!

We use cookies to personalyze your web-site experience. By continuing we’ll assume you board with our cookie policy .

• Instructions Followed To The Letter
• Deadlines Met At Every Stage
• Unique And Plagiarism Free

Gaffes, insults, a well-timed joke: The best moments in US presidential debate history

When John F. Kennedy and Richard Nixon stepped onto the debate stage in 1960, a staggering 70 million Americans watched as the U.S. presidential candidates squared off.

It was the first televised presidential debate in U.S. history. The primetime event set in motion a new era of politics that has since relied on spectacle, the appearance of candidates, and the ability to deliver the best one-liners.

As Joe Biden and Donald Trump – now their parties’ official presumptive nominees – prepare to take the debate stage, let’s look back at five of the most memorable moments in presidential debate history.

1. The 1960 Kennedy-Nixon Debate: The First Time Looks Matter

Nearly half of all Americans with televisions tuned in to the 1960 debate between Kennedy and Nixon. What voters saw may have changed the course of the election: a poised, tanned Kennedy next to Nixon, who looked pale and gaunt after a recent hospital stay .

Prep for the polls: See who is running for president and compare where they stand on key issues in our Voter Guide

As the debate wore on, the optics worsened for then-Vice President Nixon. He began sweating off his stage makeup under the hot studio lights. He failed to stare directly into the cameras, instead looking off to the side to address various reporters’ questions.

Kennedy, on the other hand, looked like the picture of health compared to Nixon. He was sun-kissed from his weeks of campaigning on the road and looked right into the camera—a tactic still used by politicians today when they hope to appeal to Americans more directly.In that single televised appearance, the damage was done. Some believe Nixon’s defeat was sealed that night, with one commentator remarking the next day, “My God, they’ve embalmed him before he even died.”

2. The 1980 Carter-Reagan Debate: ‘There You Go Again…’

President Jimmy Carter and Republican nominee Ronald Reagan’s second debate in October 1980 featured a matchup between a soft-spoken Southerner and a smooth-talking former actor .

By this point in Carter’s term, his approval rating had fallen to around 30%, a sharp decline from his 75% approval rating at the start of his presidency. Meanwhile, Reagan’s appeal had started to grow with Southern Democrats and evangelicals.

During a discussion on Medicare, Carter went on the offensive, criticizing Reagan’s track record of campaigning against the health care benefit. Though factual, his point was longwinded compared to Reagan’s quip in response.“ There you go again ,” Reagan chuckled, disarming Carter and cementing the definitive line of the 1980 presidential election.

Politicians, from Bill Clinton to Mike Pence, have continued to use the line throughout debates to dismiss their opponents and accuse them of hyperbole.

3. The 1984 Mondale-Reagan Debate: ‘I Won’t Exploit My Opponent’s Youth’

Reagan continued to deliver memorable one-liners during his 1984 campaign against Democratic opponent Walter Mondale.

By the second presidential debate, Reagan was 73 years old – already the oldest president in U.S. history at the time. When asked if he was too old to be president, he responded :  

“I will not make age an issue of this campaign. I am not going to exploit, for political purposes, my opponent’s youth and inexperience.”

Even Mondale laughed. Reagan’s poll numbers went up, and he won the election by a landslide.

4. The 1988 Quayle-Bentsen Debate: ‘You’re No Jack Kennedy’

A remark from the 1988 vice presidential debate between Republican nominee Dan Quayle and his Democratic opponent Lloyd Bentsen is still in today’s political lexicon.

Quayle, 41, was frequently questioned about his age after becoming George H.W. Bush’s running mate and his relatively short time in Congress. In response, he frequently compared himself to former President John F. Kennedy, saying that he and JFK each served in Congress for 12 and 14 years, respectively.

During the 1988 debate, Quayle again compared his time in congressional service to Kennedy’s.

Bentsen shot back with the now famous line , “Senator, you’re no Jack Kennedy.”

5. The 2016 Clinton-Trump Debate: ‘Such a Nasty Woman’

The third presidential debate between Democratic candidate Hillary Clinton and Republican nominee Donald Trump was memorable, with critics accusing Trump of stalking Clinton around the stage.

But one of the most significant lines came from the soon-to-be-president, when he referred to Clinton as “such a nasty woman.”

Little did he know, that phrase would launch a movement of fellow “ nasty women ” into political action during the 2016 race.