Try reading the comment I was responding to for context. I was responding to these claims in particular: > But in 1969 it was not settled that the country shou

Try reading the comment I was responding to for context. I was responding to these claims in particular: > But in 1969 it was not settled that the country should fix civil rights. I responded to that by enumerating some of the civil rights laws that were passed during the 1960's. > Probably Apollo would have been received differently by many people if other, more humane areas had seen as enthusiastic spending. I agree that "enthusiastic spending" is an awkward phrase, but I was specifically calling back to actionfromafar's usage of it. And I responded by listing all of the humane spending programs that had been enacted in that period, ranging from Medicare and Medicaid to Social Security expansion to new funding programs for education, food stamps, transportation, and other such things. In reality the administration of Lyndon Johnson was the second greatest expansion of the American federal welfare state in history (after the New Deal); it's simply not true to claim that the federal government during that period lacked "enthusiasm" for such things.