Sputnik’s Golden Anniversary
America raced to the moon in less
than a dozen years

Today (Oct. 4) is the golden anniversary of one of the most important events in American history…and it happened half a world away. On this day, half a century ago, the Russians launched Sputnik, the first unmanned satellite to orbit the earth. This, from the same people who brought you the Berlin Wall and the AK-47, was enough to send American leaders into conniption fits of hysteria and paranoia (hystenoia?).

“What are we going to do? The Commies can spy right into our living rooms and see if we’re watching The Honeymooners or The Ed Sullivan Show!”

On October 4, 1957 the Soviets launched Sputnik, the first manmade satellite to orbit the earth. The event touched off a space race that led to American Neil Armstrong walking on the moon less than 12 years later.

It was one of those defining moments for our country and under the directive of first Dwight Eisenhower and then John Kennedy, we rolled up our sleeves, got to work, and launched our own space program. Within a dozen years, we were walking on the moon.

I sometimes wonder how we did it. I can’t imagine America today taking on such a daunting task and getting it done in less than twelve years. If we were forced to reach for the moon these days, the mere decision to do it or not would get mired in the paralysis that is partisan politics for at least five years. Then if it was decided that we would attempt a mission to the moon, the effort would be hindered by dozens of special interest groups that would argue that their causes deserve an equal amount of attention and resources.

The truth is that our manned missions to the moon were expensive, dangerous, and have yet to pay the kinds of dividends that you would expect by now. But they were our way of saying to Russia and the rest of the world, “You want a space race? We’ll give you a space race.”

These days that kind of American moxie is all but extinguished, having been replaced with a morally repugnant “You’re either with us or you’re against us” mentality that has alienated all but our staunchest allies (read Britain). Franklin D. Roosevelt, when faced with the prospect of entering World War II, told the American public, “the only thing we have to fear is fear itself — nameless, unreasoning, unjustified terror which paralyzes needed efforts to convert retreat into advance.”

Today’s leaders spend a good deal of time convincing America that fear is the only game in town. “Be afraid of terrorists. Be afraid of immigrants. Be afraid that liberals don’t have the will to keep you safely snug in your bed at night.”

Meanwhile, these same leaders are using the American military the way a drunken fraternity boy would use his father’s Cadillac and using the federal budget the way that same frat boy would use his mother’s Visa card.

It’s a simple case of bait and switch. Get the American public in a fearful lather and you can do pretty much anything you want. The truly sickening thing is that many of these spend-thrift, invade-sovereign-country politicians have the nerve to call themselves “conservative.” They should really look the word up in the dictionary.

Two weeks ago it was in the news that New York officials rejected Iranian president Mahmoud Ahmadinejad’s request to visit ground zero and lay a wreath at the site. The request was rejected because of “on-going construction” and NYPD “security concerns.”

I think the rejection was a two-fold decision based on public relations. First it would have shown a human side to the leader of Iran at a time when many in the Bush administration are trying to make his country the next Iraq. Second, it would have shown the world how little progress has been made at ground zero since the terrorist attacks of over six years ago.

If 9/11 had happened in the Sputnik era, we would’ve rebuilt the World Trade Center halfway to the moon by now.