Book Review - Mutual Contempt: Lyndon Johnson, Robert Kennedy and the Feud that Defined a Decade
In Mutual Contempt: Lyndon Johnson, Robert Kennedy and the Feud that Defined a Decade, Author Jeff Shesol provides a detailed analysis of the complex relationship between President Lyndon B. Johnson and Robert F. Kennedy, which by most accounts was, true to the book's title, one of mutual contempt. Shesol traces the roots of the conflict, recalling a time when a fight for the 1960 Democratic presidential nomination between Johnson and John F. Kennedy left both camps bitter as personal attacks from the respective campaigns on the opposing candidate's health, family and ethics left mutual resentments between candidate Johnson and campaign manager RFK. The resentments grew when JFK waffled but ultimately settled on Johnson as his running mate, over his younger brother's objections. RFK's attempt to scuttle the arrangement after Johnson's agreement added to the stress of the relationship.
Johnson was used to being a major player in the Senate, but found it frustrating that his position as Vice-President was subservient to the unofficial role that Robert Kennedy enjoyed as "assistant president". Technically the Attorney-General, Robert Kennedy's influence strayed into areas such as foreign affairs, national defense and practically any other important sphere of government. Johnson's resentment of RFK's expanded sphere of influence coexisted with Robert Kennedy's low opinion of Johnson as someone with no useful contribution to the discussion of the important issues of the day.
The assassination of John F. Kennedy in Dallas changed the playing field for the two protagonists. Shesol ably describes the tensions of the moment, including Johnson's perceived insensitivity when it came to seizing power, his treatment of the grieving first lady Jacqueline Kennedy, and the blame placed on Johnson for forcing JFK to come to Dallas to mend political fences that should have been Johnson's responsibility. Shesol gives the reader a good account of how RFK was affected by his grief during this period, and how the two men handled the reversal of power that followed. Shesol tells of the behind the scenes considerations of RFK's run for the New York Senate, the possibility of a Johnson-RFK ticket in 1964 and the tense relationship that continued to the exist between the two even in the aftermath of the tragedy.
Shesol tells us how the two men worked together towards the passage of very significant civil rights legislation, amid Johnson's manipulation to seize political credit without appearing outwardly callous towards Kennedy. The author gives a vivid picture of Johnson's paranoia towards the holdovers from the Kennedy administration, while recognizing his political need for their association.
It is the Vietnam War which puts the greatest strain on the relationship between the two. Johnson resents RFK's departure from a commitment to a policy of containment, and displays bitterness and pettiness towards his adversary as Kennedy challenges Johnson's handling of the war, going so far as to reject Kennedy's proposals for poverty programs which are badly needed in some of the poorest areas of the nation. Shesol tells us of the political constraints on Kennedy before his decision to challenge Johnson for the Presidency in 1968. Shesol also gives us an accounting of Johnson's decision not to seek re-election in 1968.
A supposed reconciliation meeting between the two, held following Johnson's decision not to seek re-election, proves to be insincere as Shesol describes Johnson's spoken policy of neutrality for members of his administration in the 1968 presidential contest, while privately encouraging those who supported Hubert Humphrey and rebuking those who supported RFK. When an assassin's bullet ends Kennedy's campaign in June of 1968, Johnson is still unable to put aside his pettiness, at first threatening not to permit RFK's interment in Arlington Cemetery, then deferring the issue of funding for maintenance of the gravesite to his successor, and becoming outraged when the Washington DC football stadium is named RFK Stadium and not LBJ stadium.
Shesol is to be commended for his thoroughness and the wealth of information he relates, much of which was not previously public knowledge. If there is any criticism of this book, it is too detailed at times, but Shesol is to be forgiven because of his superb use of sources. He acknowledges that true insight of the thinking of both of these men is difficult to glean with certainty, but makes a strong case for plausible explanations of the temperament, personalities and motivations of both of these men. His ability to do so makes history come alive and makes this a very interesting book.
Johnson was used to being a major player in the Senate, but found it frustrating that his position as Vice-President was subservient to the unofficial role that Robert Kennedy enjoyed as "assistant president". Technically the Attorney-General, Robert Kennedy's influence strayed into areas such as foreign affairs, national defense and practically any other important sphere of government. Johnson's resentment of RFK's expanded sphere of influence coexisted with Robert Kennedy's low opinion of Johnson as someone with no useful contribution to the discussion of the important issues of the day.
The assassination of John F. Kennedy in Dallas changed the playing field for the two protagonists. Shesol ably describes the tensions of the moment, including Johnson's perceived insensitivity when it came to seizing power, his treatment of the grieving first lady Jacqueline Kennedy, and the blame placed on Johnson for forcing JFK to come to Dallas to mend political fences that should have been Johnson's responsibility. Shesol gives the reader a good account of how RFK was affected by his grief during this period, and how the two men handled the reversal of power that followed. Shesol tells of the behind the scenes considerations of RFK's run for the New York Senate, the possibility of a Johnson-RFK ticket in 1964 and the tense relationship that continued to the exist between the two even in the aftermath of the tragedy.
Shesol tells us how the two men worked together towards the passage of very significant civil rights legislation, amid Johnson's manipulation to seize political credit without appearing outwardly callous towards Kennedy. The author gives a vivid picture of Johnson's paranoia towards the holdovers from the Kennedy administration, while recognizing his political need for their association.
It is the Vietnam War which puts the greatest strain on the relationship between the two. Johnson resents RFK's departure from a commitment to a policy of containment, and displays bitterness and pettiness towards his adversary as Kennedy challenges Johnson's handling of the war, going so far as to reject Kennedy's proposals for poverty programs which are badly needed in some of the poorest areas of the nation. Shesol tells us of the political constraints on Kennedy before his decision to challenge Johnson for the Presidency in 1968. Shesol also gives us an accounting of Johnson's decision not to seek re-election in 1968.
A supposed reconciliation meeting between the two, held following Johnson's decision not to seek re-election, proves to be insincere as Shesol describes Johnson's spoken policy of neutrality for members of his administration in the 1968 presidential contest, while privately encouraging those who supported Hubert Humphrey and rebuking those who supported RFK. When an assassin's bullet ends Kennedy's campaign in June of 1968, Johnson is still unable to put aside his pettiness, at first threatening not to permit RFK's interment in Arlington Cemetery, then deferring the issue of funding for maintenance of the gravesite to his successor, and becoming outraged when the Washington DC football stadium is named RFK Stadium and not LBJ stadium.
Shesol is to be commended for his thoroughness and the wealth of information he relates, much of which was not previously public knowledge. If there is any criticism of this book, it is too detailed at times, but Shesol is to be forgiven because of his superb use of sources. He acknowledges that true insight of the thinking of both of these men is difficult to glean with certainty, but makes a strong case for plausible explanations of the temperament, personalities and motivations of both of these men. His ability to do so makes history come alive and makes this a very interesting book.