On July 20, 1969, at 10:56 p.m. EDT, American astronaut Neil Armstrong, 240,000 miles from earth, gave a brief statement before stepping off the Eagle landing module and onto the moon. Back on earth, close to a billion people were listening. A moment later, Armstrong put his left foot into the powdery lunar surface, took a few steps, and humanity had walked on the moon. No doubt, this was a great moment for mankind, and it gave the world a psychological lift of conquering something that before seemed so impossible. It fed the craving of man's imagination and wonder of space and places beyond the earth. It gave a feeling of adventure and excitement of venturing into the unknown. And all of these things are great and wonderful, but this expedition had an enormous price tag. And maybe that price tag was ok and justified back in 1969, for we went and conquered and it is an exciting accomplishment in our history books, but now...in 2004 President Bush proposes not only a manned flight return trip to the moon, but a man voyage to mars, and I, John Doe, have a serious problem with this proposal for several reasons and am here to persuade you not to support this proposal and convince you that sending man back into place is unnecessary human risk factor for astronauts, and a waste of trillions of dollars when there are domestic issues that could desperately use this money instead, and lastly, that there are cheaper and more effective methods of space exploration.
             We should be suspicious of Bush's administration's motives and we should question how exactly will sending men back to the moon benefit us here on earth? The fact is, there is really very little benefit. We have already jumped around on the moon, taken photographs and planted a U.S. flag. Is is necessecary to go back? What is there to do? Bush's proposal is not justified; it just seems to be part of the idea of a "leader with a vision". And at first ...