As a practical matter, he seems long on style and short on substance. As an asethetic consideration, I do not find comparisons with John F. Kennedy reassuring. A sober analysis of Kennedy's tenure in office shows that he was not all that effective a President. Despite his prior tenure in both the House and the Senate, the Congress was not cooperative with his progressive agenda, and very little of it got passed during his lifetime. In my view, the handling of the Cuban Missle Crisis is offset by his ordering the Bay of Pigs fiasco to go forward, not to mention supporting the overthrow of the moderate Diem government in Vietnam, and the Baathist revolution in Iraq in 1963, which decision directly lead to Saddam Hussein coming to power, and which still haunts us today. Of course his comitment to space exploration is dear to the hearts of science-fiction fans everywhere, and one of the great what-ifs of history may be what would have happened had he survived to see the joint agreement with Kruschev formalized. Perhaps we would have bases on the Moon and Mars now--.