Mutual Contempt: Lyndon Johnson, Robert Kennedy, and the Feud That Defined a Decade

Rating:
Summary: AT SWORDS' POINTS
Review: Robert Kennedy and LBJ were truly at political, ideological and philosophical swords' points. As one reviewer aptly noted, was their "feud" really one that defined the 1960s? That point is questionable at best, doubtful at worst. The very position these men occupied during that period (Attorney General and later Senator/President respectively) certainly does command the world's interest and attention.

Both men are drawn in stark relief to each other. One point I think is worth mentioning is that they really did have a lot in common. Both men were very bright, very aggressive and very determined. Both men had strong convictions and personalities to match. As has been duly recorded over time, one major point of contention was the Vietnam War.

I agree with one reviewer who questioned the harsh description of Johnson's character. I happen to believe that Johnson was a good, effective administrator. As for the Vietnam War, he inherited that headache and as an unfortunate consequence, followed bad advice about that war instead of bailing out sooner. RFK seemed to feel LBJ was wholly responsible for the war escalation. He neglected to note in his arguments and criticisms of President Johnson that the Vietnam conflict began in the late 1950s! (ca 1957, under Eisenhower's administation). During President Kennedy's tenure in office, the Vietnam conflict was well underway, but it is interesting to note that this author does not really point out that fact.

In this reading, one gets the feeling that Robert Kennedy was still working to protect the interest and reputation of his late brother. Since President Johnson assumed office after President Kennedy's death, one could sympathize with the Attorney General's resentment of anyone assuming that office.

The whole description of the "feud" is really a clashing of ideologies; it is really the parting of ways over issues. This author, to his credit does a thorough job in researching this subject and portrays historical events accurately.

It is hoped that in time, the general perception of LBJ will be softened; LBJ was by far and away the most progressive administrator on domestic issues since FDR. LBJ had more bills enacted during his tenure in office than any other president to date. He took a strong stand on environmental, education and civil rights issues that have positive impacts to this day. He was the president who negotiated and succeeded in securing public/subsidized housing, Head Start programs for underprivileged school children; MediCaid/MediCare and the 1965 Voters' Rights Acts which have today a positive impact on the large number of minorities who vote today. It is the opinion of this reviewer that President Johnson was a good and decent man whose many bills, budgets and proposals have had many positive impacts on the world as we now know it.

Robert Kennedy, the tireless worker who actively became involved in Civil Rights after the death of his brother, provided a parallel view of the work Johnson was already immersed in. Both men shared a vision and a quest for a better world with more advantages extended to all persons and with the rights of all persons more fully protected and enacted.

Robert Kennedy was in many ways not too different from President Johnson in objectives.

Rating:
Summary: An interesting argument taken a touch too far
Review: This extraordinary work will ignite the reader's imagination, and he will never be able to think of Robert Kennedy or Lyndon Johnson the same again. The vague historical references to this feud can never fully express the emotion and passion that fueled it. Robert Kennedy and Lyndon Johnson were inextricably tied throughout the 1960's and, indeed, this book superbly records their eternal connection. Though the author is clearly Kennedy-partisan, the work is a fair study of both players. The reader will find himself on an emotional rollercoaster, filled with varying degrees of anger, shock and sympathy toward both men. This book chronicles beautifully a real life Shakespearian tragedy as it unfolds and progresses toward its all too sudden finale.

Rating:
Summary: marvelous political story
Review: This is a gripping book. It deals with the feud between RFK and LBJ, and the influence that their animosity had on a wide range of domestic and political issues from the time of JFK's election to RFK's assasination. However, despite the extensive notes and detailed research, this is no dry-as-dust political science tome, but a nicely structured, well-paced tale, with plenty of juicy gossip and amusing anecdotes to enliven it. This book supplies a new and original dimension to the Kennedy myth, and I enjoyed it enormously. Definitely a "10"!

Rating:
Summary: I wish I had written this book
Review: This was a wonderful book. Having recently read Master of the Senate, by Robert Caro, and Robert Kennedy and His Times by Arthur Schlesinger, this seemed the natural next read. I was not disappointed. The author presents a balanced account of both men. It is not a biography of either man, instead telling of the years in which their lives ran together. Their disagreements are told in great detail, through the eyes of participants on both sides. One advantage to this is that the reader sees not only the character of RFK or LBJ, but of their staffers, like Dick Goodwin or George Reedy. I would recommend this book to anyone with an interest in politics or history, and a great follow up to reading a full scale biography of either man.

Rating:
Summary: An excellent study of the effect of power on personality.
Review: What comes to the fore in this book is that power influenced both LBJ and RFK negatively -- especially with respect to their treatment of each other. During the 1960 presidential campaign and then during the JFK administration, Robert Kennedy's innate dislike and scorn of LBJ was put into practice by his uniquely powerful position within JFK's cabinet. Clearly, RFK held the upper hand from 1960 through 1963, and he used his influence to shut LBJ out of important meetings and events and to make sure that LBJ's role was little more than that of "water boy." LBJ, for his part, fumed at the repeated slights from RFK during JFK's tenure, and -- as Shesol well demonstrates -- allowed the hurt and resentment that had built up during those three years to play much too large a role in his decision-making calculus during his own administration. If anything, LBJ's well-documented personal insecurities (which may have reached the level of clinical paranoia by the time he left the presidency) and mastery of the political game made his ostracism of "all things RFK" even more effective than RFK himself had ever been able to manage.

What all this means is that the personal animosity that these two important men felt toward one another was best effected by each during his own time of greatest power and influence. As a result, the talents and resources that each of these two great public servants had available to contribute were underutilized (at best) or squandered (at worst) at a time when the country desperately needed both men to help see it through some of its most difficult times. To the largest extent, Shesol does not ascribe greater fault or worse judgment to either man, and indeed he cannot, as each took advantage of his own personal power to minimize the influence of the other. That is the sad theme underlying Shesol's important and fascinating book.