(2 of 3)
In an odd way, the moon is rapidly becoming a mark of where one stands on political and social issues. If Apollo was a victory for U.S. engineering genius, it could not disguise American failures at home. That fact has already become a thundering cliche, and one that promises to be heard for a long time. If we can put men on the moon, why can't we build adequate housing? Or feed all citizens adequately? Or end social and economic injustices? (Or even make the airlines run on time?) One answer, at least, is obvious: unlike the moon landing, these earthbound problems involve complex human instincts and frailties, torturous legacies and anomalies of history.
It is the liberals (along with radicals, many blacks, many of the young) who ask these nagging questions, with particular insistence pressing home the contrast between the accomplishments in space and failures on earth. In this decade the liberals made an issue of these national inadequacies and attempted solutions. Promises made stirred hopes and then frustrations. Other factors, most importantly the war, have set loose political and social demons that neither liberals nor conservatives can yet capture or placate. The events of last week underscored the irony of the liberals' present eclipse. In 1961 John Kennedy set for the U.S. the goal of landing men on the moon by 1970; Richard Nixon, the man Kennedy defeated, presided over the attainment of that goal in 1969. By mischance, Senator Edward Kennedy, the heir to an important part of U.S. liberal leadership, found his political future seriously in doubt.
Competitive Prod. Ted Kennedy himself has argued for a shift of national priorities away from space and Viet Nam to pressing domestic needs. Given the temper of Congress and the Nixon Administration, and the continuing costs of war, that shift is not likely to happen soon. The very success of Apollo 11 is an augury that the level of space spending may not be cut. The liberals seem out of tune with the majority of middle Americans—at least for now. Middle America does not seem discontented with the present ordering of national values. It elected Richard Nixon and strongly backs the U.S. space program.
There is a special affinity between Richard Nixon and the people of middle America. TIME'S Washington bureau chief, Iowa-born Hugh Sidey, flew with Nixon across the Pacific last week and reflected:
"The President is obviously the embodiment and leader of these people who have paid their taxes, kept the wheels of the country turning, absorbed ridicule from their children and from college professors without saying much. Nixon has given a voice to the majority that did not know it was a majority. Suddenly a few things seem to be going right. This is encouragement to Nixon; this is what his kind of people can do. There is something to be said for it. There is some praise due all those middle-stratum Americans who do the best they know how, trying to do what is honorable—or at least what they think is honorable.