JFK & the Press (Contd.)

For the most part, the U.S. press responded enthusiastically to President Kennedy's State of the Union message--but there were some thistles in the corsage.

The New York Times was editorially ecstatic: "An inspiring, eloquent and straightforward address." Said the San Francisco Chronicle: "Good for him for having the courage to believe that the American people are strong enough, wise enough and resolute enough to accept a rigorous demand for harder, more intense national and individual effort." Echoed the Louisville Courier-Journal: "Challenge and direction are providing us with a sense of exhilaration, of purpose, even when they are accompanied by solemn warning."

Way Out. But some editorialists and cartoonists expressed doubts and disagreements. Said the Tulsa World: "President Kennedy has outlined to Congress a program so wondrous in its hopes, so broad in its ambition, that it seems almost sinful to wonder if it may be too far out of this world." Said the Worcester (Mass.) Telegram: "Although his picture tends to be overly grim, Kennedy has made a thorough and quite scholarly diagnosis of the ills of the nation and the world. When it comes to remedies, he is less persuasive. The specifics of his program remain to be tested in the congressional fires." Grumbled the Chicago Tribune: "Less an exercise in statesmanship than in public relations." And the Wall Street Journal added a bit of caution: "When Franklin Roosevelt took office he told the nation there was nothing to fear but fear itself. There were moments when we thought President Kennedy was trying to scare the nation out of its wits. We would feel more reassured if we were sure that this Administration, in its haste to deal with the things which are wrong, will not upset the things which are right."

Added Burden. The State of the Union message was not the only target. Hearst newspapers from Boston (the Record) to Los Angeles (the Examiner) ran an editorial blast at Historian Arthur Schlesinger Jr.'s appointment as a presidential speechwriter on the ground that he is "politically far, far out," can only be an "added weight" on President Kennedy. Edward R. Murrow's job as chief of the U.S. Information Agency, while welcomed by such columnists as the New York Times's Washington Bureau Chief James Reston and the Christian Science Monitor's William H. Stringer, prompted Publisher John S. Knight's Miami Herald to part company, at least for the moment, with Kennedy. Although Murrow speaks with "passionate clarity," said the Herald, his self-confessed failure,as an executive at CBS renders him unfit for the post: "For once, the President is impractical."

President Kennedy's action last fortnight in ordering Chief of Naval Operations Arleigh Burke to rewrite almost completely a speech that minced no words about Russia brought press growls from several quarters. Said the New York Daily News: "Such suppressions can only stir up rumors, gossip and exaggerated guesses as to what the muzzled persons would say if permitted to talk."

One of the most acid criticisms of all came from New York Times Military Expert Hanson W. Baldwin, commenting on President Kennedy's order for a reappraisal of the entire U.S. defense position to be delivered within four weeks. Said Timesman Baldwin: "The President gave every indication of being a young man in a hurry. This Herculean task, which could well occupy a lifetime, is to provide judgments in four weeks that will shape our defense future. No man, or no group of men new to the Pentagon, no matter how brilliant, could possibly provide thoroughly studied, carefully factual judgments on matters of such tremendous scope and complexity within the time frame laid down. In the field of military policy it should be clear to Mr. Kennedy that it is to the national interest to make haste slowly. Quick decisions are desirable, but sound ones are imperative."

This file is automatically generated by a robot program, so reader's discretion is required.