Eisenhower: The President

Rating:
Summary: A first-rate biography, volume 2
Review: In this book, Ambrose follows up on his biography of Dwight Eisenhower. The first book dealt with the sixty-two years of Eisenhower's life before he became president. This volume deals with the last seventeen years of his life, focusing particularly on his eight years as President.

It is clear that Ambrose likes Eisenhower, but he nonetheless is critical of Eisenhower when it is appropriate. If one of the lessons of the first book is how politics can have a negative effect on a principled man, the main lesson in this one is how moderation is both a virtue and a vice.

For Eisenhower, it is a virtue when he besieged by extremists within his own party who are all too willing to use nuclear weapons and it is he who stays a middle course. As moderation's negative image, hesitancy, however, it is a vice as he fails to take on McCarthy or segregation. As one of the most continuously popular presidents in history, Ike could have done more in these areas.

Overall, however, Eisenhower comes off as a President whose accomplishments are generally underrated. Ike himself generally comes off as a good person, honest and intelligent, with a vision of a better America that many would agree with, one without the threat of nuclear war.

There are a couple little errors in the book and its predecessor, but that doesn't take away from this volume's high caliber. This is a great biography, well written, detailed and always interesting.

Rating:
Summary: A first-rate biography, volume 2
Review: In this book, Ambrose follows up on his biography of Dwight Eisenhower. The first book dealt with the sixty-two years of Eisenhower's life before he became president. This volume deals with the last seventeen years of his life, focusing particularly on his eight years as President.

It is clear that Ambrose likes Eisenhower, but he nonetheless is critical of Eisenhower when it is appropriate. If one of the lessons of the first book is how politics can have a negative effect on a principled man, the main lesson in this one is how moderation is both a virtue and a vice.

For Eisenhower, it is a virtue when he besieged by extremists within his own party who are all too willing to use nuclear weapons and it is he who stays a middle course. As moderation's negative image, hesitancy, however, it is a vice as he fails to take on McCarthy or segregation. As one of the most continuously popular presidents in history, Ike could have done more in these areas.

Overall, however, Eisenhower comes off as a President whose accomplishments are generally underrated. Ike himself generally comes off as a good person, honest and intelligent, with a vision of a better America that many would agree with, one without the threat of nuclear war.

There are a couple little errors in the book and its predecessor, but that doesn't take away from this volume's high caliber. This is a great biography, well written, detailed and always interesting.

Rating:
Summary: An Able President for the High Cold War
Review: This is the second of a two-volume biography of Dwight Eisenhower, the great World War II military administrator who was elected president in 1952 without any experience in elective office and served two full terms, one of only five presidents in this century to do so. Author Stephen Ambrose, whose Nothing Like It in the World: The Men Who Built the Transcontinental Railroad 1863-1869 became a bestseller just days after it was published last August, writes authoritatively here about a president whom he clearly admires. This is a comprehensive study of an eight-year period which is sometimes portrayed as a mid-20th century era of good feelings. As Ambrose ably demonstrates, it was, in fact, a period marked by frequent international crises, as well as by strong undercurrents of change in American life, most notably in the area of civil rights.

The Cold War was at its height in the 1950s, and Ambrose devotes a great detail of space to diplomatic and military affairs. According to Ambrose, Eisenhower intended to "continue the policies of containment, foreign aid, and Europe first," but opposition to Eisenhower's program came most frequently from within his own party, beginning with battles over Eisenhower's appointees to key State Department positions at the beginning of his first term. Some of the most interesting passages in this book involve Ambrose's presentation of the frequent conflicts between the moderate Eisenhower Republicans and the "Old Guard," which was practically hysterical in its opposition to the threat posed by international Communism, real and supposed. Ambrose's discussion of Eisenhower's consistent opposition to increased military spending is fascinating. This is one area in which Eisenhower displayed real leadership, even when the president's position was not popular. By1960, one important issue was whether Richard Nixon and John Kennedy would spend more on national defense. (Ambrose makes clear Eisenhower's disappointment with the choice the American people were offered in that election: Eisenhower, one of the giants of World War II, would have to turn over executive power at the height of the Cold War to a former junior officer, either Nixon or Kennedy.) In his Farewell Address, Eisenhower warned of the dangers posed by the creation of a military-industrial complex. Only a president with Eisenhower's impeccable military credentials could credibly have said that. Ambrose leaves no doubt about Eisenhower's determination to decrease international tensions, especially in Europe, and most especially the threat of nuclear war. For the most part, Eisenhower's management of the frequent international crises during his administration was deft.

One Republican with whom Eisenhower publicly refused to dispute was Sen. Joseph McCarthy. According to Ambrose, one of Eisenhower's reasons for avoiding conflict with the notorious witch-hunter was personal: "I just won't get into a pissing contest with that skunk." But Ambrose also writes: "Eisenhower was more on McCarthy's side than not on the issue of Communism in government. It was McCarthy's methods he disapproved of, not his goals or his analysis." Ambrose concludes: "Eisenhower's cautious, hesitant approach - or nonapproach - to the McCarthy issue did the President's reputation no good, and much harm."

Eisenhower also was often criticized for presiding over a British-style cabinet government in which he purportedly delegated too much responsibility to his department heads. Ambrose makes clear that Eisenhower was keenly interested in the big issues facing the State, Defense, and Treasury departments, but the record presented here indicates that Eisenhower had much less interest in domestic affairs. The creation of the interstate highway system probably was the principal domestic achievement of the Eisenhower administration.

Civil rights was an issue which begged for presidential leadership. Eisenhower rightly deserves credit for appointing Earl Warren Chief Justice of the United States, and Warren, of course, presided over the unanimous 1954 decision declaring separate-but-equal public education systems to be unconstitutional. But Ambrose makes clear that, except on the issue of voting rights, Eisenhower refused to be pushed into the forefront in civil rights. Eisenhower was a product of the late-19th century (he was born in 1890), and this is one area in which he failed to grow as president. On occasion, according to Ambrose, Eisenhower could be "bumbling" and "ineffective." With regard to civil rights, Eisenhower simply failed to lead. According to Ambrose: "In the field of civil rights, [Eisenhower] felt he had done as well as could be done." The judgment of history disagrees.

Ambrose makes very effective use of primary sources, including Eisenhower's diaries. The text includes numerous references to Eisenhower's assessments of colleagues and subordinates, political rivals, other public figures international leaders, and some of them are cutting. Although Nixon loyally served as Eisenhower's vice president for eight years, they never were close, and Eisenhower was not enthusiastic about Nixon's candidacy in 1960. During that campaign, when Nixon was trying to make the most of his experience as vice president, Eisenhower told a reporter it would take him a week to think of a major contribution Nixon had made to the administration. But if Nixon had followed Eisenhower's advice and had refused to debate Kennedy, he might well have been elected in 1960.

Ambrose may admire his subject too much. To cite just one example, although Ambrose writes that "friends as well as critics worried about how unprepared [Eisenhower] was for the presidency," the author, himself, asserts that, in foreign affairs, Eisenhower "was undoubtedly the best prepared man ever elected to the Presidency." But I believe Ambrose is correct when he observes at the beginning of his chapter assessing the Eisenhower presidency: "To say that Eisenhower was right about this or wrong about that is to do little more than announce one's own political position." That is Ambrose's justification for examining Eisenhower's years in the White House "in his own terms."

When this book was published in 1984, Ambrose predicted: Eisenhower's "reputation is likely to continue to rise, perhaps to the point that he will be ranked just below Washington, Jefferson, Jackson, Lincoln, Wilson, and Franklin Roosevelt." I am skeptical that history ever will be that kind to Eisenhower. Ambrose writes that, by November 1952, Eisenhower had come to actively dislike Harry Truman" because "in Eisenhower's view Truman had diminished the prestige of the office of the President of the United States." Even Eisenhower's critics, and there remain plenty of them, must concede, based upon the record presented by authors such as Ambrose, that he conducted the duties of the presidency with great dignity. And that places him far above some of his successors. The two-volume Ambrose biography of Eisenhower is now out of print, having been superceded by this author's Eisenhower: Soldier and President and more recent works of scholarship. But Eisenhower, Volume Two, The President, continues to have value as a highly-detailed account of the administration of a president who may, indeed, have been under-appreciated. Ambrose is partial to his subject, but he generally allows Eisenhower's actions to speak for themselves, and I do not believe that a reader may ask much more from a biographer.