The History Book Club discussion
This topic is about
Landslide
PRESIDENTIAL SERIES
>
WE ARE OPEN - WEEK FOUR AND WEEK FIVE - PRESIDENTIAL SERIES: LANDSLIDE - December 22nd - January 4th - Chapter Four - No Spoilers, Please
On the money, Vince. An important contributing factor. Gently also makes a good point. In cleaning out my house recently, I came across a manual on installing moral values in one's children. It's a SNL skit waiting for a news hook.
Oops. I was responding to Vince on both points. The iPad Scrambled a couple of posts. It also has a mind of its own when it cOmes to capitalization.
Kathy wrote: "Ann wrote: "Aw shucks, Martin. Let me enjoy getting on my moral high horse. :-) ..."Perhaps if our elected officials were a little more "high horsed" the government might run a bit smoother."
Perhaps not. The most moral recent president was almost certainly Jimmy Carter and, while I think he is better than his reputation, I can't say he was in charge of a smooth running government.
When I visited the Johnson Library a couple of years ago, I listened in on one of the tape recordings of LBJ and his wife. He was telling her to expect extra guests for dinner. He sounded loving and appreciative, so I am sure that there was also a much more positive side to their relationship.On page 101, Darman suggested that Lady Bird married a man much like her father, T. J. Taylor, known as "Cap'n". Of the father, he says:
he was a man with tremendous power and a forceful manner of exercising it...Like the man she would marry, he seemed to fill any room he entered. The Cap'n had terrible rows with any number of opponents...His daughter retreated to out-of-the-way corners of the old house and quiet places in nature, seeking shelter and escape. The world around her could not be trusted. She learned to find order within herself."
Bentley wrote: "I think she did care Kressel in that she cared deeply about her husband - LBJ and his hurt feelings but I actually think she was made of stronger stuff than even her husband and was extremely intel..."I agree with your comment Bentley. I never knew much about Ladybird and was very impressed with her. She had a lot on her shoulders and she handled his hard job well.
Peter makes a good point about "moral" presidents. The job description is for an executive who can master the political demands of a huge and diverse democracy/republic hybrid.Requirements: The most astute political skills imaginable.
Experience: Get out of town. There is no prior experience for being prez (Grover Cleveland excepted).
The funny thing about Carter is that he was a poor executive who accomplished a lot. Everyone knows about the Camp David accords, and that he appointed the exact right man to chair the Fed in Paul Volcker whose decisions led to the taming of inflation during the Reagan administration; but how many know about his vast appointments of women and minorities to the judiciary.
And, I'll bet no one here knows about the time Carter visited the Pope. They were on a yacht sailing the Mediterranean when a gust of wind blew the Pope's mitre into the water. Lickity split, Carter went over the side, ran across the water to retrieve the holiest of hats and returned it to the pontiff. Headlines the next day read: "Carter can't swim."
Anywho, to bring this back around to JFK and Reagan, both were flexible enough in their moral bearings to handle the job adequately, relatively speaking, not there is much morality in being prez.
Note that LBJ's compunction about Vietnam focused on the recognition that practically speaking the war was not winnable. He got his Great Society agenda through by recognizing the political moment was right.
Reagan's reactionary policies surfed the wave of rejection against LBJ's policies, especially the coalesced anger of blue collar white folks and religious fundamentalists. A tricky ride that he mastered artfully. Not so sure about the morals, especially given that the poor and marginal are God's people.
Ann - thanks for bringing that quote up. Had totally forgotten it.
First I hope everyone had a Merry Christmas. Second have a great New Year as well.Now for my view on Chapter four.
I found the chapter very interesting and revealing. Interesting on the glimpse we get of LBJ as a real man and not a politician. Revealing as to how cruel a man he was to his wife. As well as how loyal he wife was despite his treatment of her. It was also revealing as to show how well of a politician LBJ was and how he could butter people up, and sugar coat things and make them look better then they may have been.
I do not hold this against the man for it is not for me to judge him. I just find him to be like every politician today. He would do well in today's political world. He may even be a master as he was in his time.
I do like that again Jonathan is portraying LBJ as human full of mistakes and showing his ego in the pages and through his research. I so far am find the book to be very good.
My one issue is that he seems to focus more on LBJ up to this point in the book. I know the next chapter is about Reagan.
I would like to see more of how the two were similar to each other despite political standing. The introduction on gave us a quick look at it.
Mod
I have to agree with you about this being the way politicians seem to display their ego and self absorption. I think LBJ knew how to get folks to want to get things done - if that was even their intent in the first place.
Mod
Requirements: The m..."
You are right about Reagan Martin and how certain groups felt about him.
Mod
The more I learn about her - the more I like her - she was not one to blow her own horn but somebody should have blown it for her - because she was one remarkable and intelligent woman.
Mod
There is a lot of truth in what you said about Lady Bird and the type of man she married - a bit of a mirror image of her father.
Mod
Perhaps if our elected officials were a little more "high horsed" the government might run a bit..."
No for some reason the most intelligent presidents seem to have a bit of a rough ride.
Mod
I wonder how often the press is invited to the Obama's private residence or their home in Chicago or when they last had a barbecue for the press. Or when the Bushes did the same thing or the Clintons for that matter?
Mod
Mod
Johnson and the press. He worked the room I guess whichever room he was in.
I didn’t know much of the “treatment” of Ladybird (LB from now on) b..."
Good outline Vince.
Mod
Sorry to disappoint, bu..."
To be honest with you Martin - I think a lot is wrong with a sex scandal in the White House or in any branch frankly if it takes away from the folks being responsible and accountable for getting things done and moves the focus to the sordid and the profane versus the important and legislatively critical enactments which need to be discussed and gotten through Congress. I was very tired of the Lewinsky matter I can tell you and so were a lot of folks. Clinton was an excellent President on many fronts but his image and his presidency were tied up with dismal moral failures on his part.
Mod
Interesting questions, Steve. I had a very shelt..."
Great post Ann - I think LBJ was Lady Bird's world and she knew how to take refuge in the world that she had chosen and the only way she got the life she wanted was with a man like Lyndon so she took the good with the bad.
Mod
I think any scandal was fair game.
Mod
Steve I felt the same way about LBJ myself but then again I thought that this was a way for him to feel desirable and manly - and strangely enough it sort of fits his history of feeling inadequate due to his father's failures. Why Lady Bird did not put her foot down is beyond me. But then again she had been beaten down in her home growing up with a father who was a dominant and domineering fellow.
Mod
Bentley wrote: "Christopher you may want to ask Jonathan some questions on his reasons for portraying one more or less than the other - although it could be that this is just where we are at this point in time.I..."
As I read I am noticing more detail on LBJ then on Reagan. I don't have a problem with that the book is still very interesting.
Though I would like to see a more in depth explanation as to what got Reagan into politics. What was the driving force or event that propelled him into politics.
LBJ was great in how he could stroke the ego's of other politicians to achieve his end goal. Jonathan also shows he would destroy or at the very least hurt a person if they got in his way.
Mod
I think Darman puts forth the case that both were the archetypal men on a horse, leaders aspiring to hero.I now despise the word hero with what has been done to it in our jingoism and think that the presidential scholar Robert Dallek says it a little better in his book Nixon and Kissinger (a compelling companion read to Darman's book):
"It is not unreasonable to suggest that for Kissinger, like Nixon, politics was a form of vocational therapy. There is nothing unique about this; most politicians are drawn to public life by the personal satisfaction of fame and adulation..."
I think Darman, essentially is attributing the same motivation to both LBJ and Reagan.
Speaking of archetypal men on horses, think back on:
Washington
Jackson
Harrison
Tyler
Taylor
Pierce
Andrew Johnson
Grant
Hayes
Garfield
Arthur
Harrison
McKinley
Teddy Roosevelt
Franklin Roosevelt
Eisenhower
Kennedy
And that doesn't include candidates who led men in battle but fell short in the electoral college.
It is interesting that the majority of these presidents led men into battle in the 18th century, yet it is the 20th century that we commonly found ourselves embroiled in armed conflict all around Spaceship Earth, frequently asking ourselves: What were we thinking, once we were in up to our hips.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_...
Peter wrote: "We have certainly started paying a lot more attention to the personal and sexual lives of our presidents (and politicians in general) than we used to. To our detriment, I think.
As a society, w..."
Well said Peter. Although I think our current focus as a society on the private lives of our political leaders is a fallout from the TV drama that is in our homes on a 24/7 basis. So as Entertainment Tonight looks at ever corner of a celebrity's life we do the same thing with our leaders. I think it was a better world when the only reality show on TV was the nightly news and shows like 20/20, 60 Minutes, etc.
I think reality TV is dumbing us down in large ways. Our entitlement culture is another big part of this. We want to be protected from bad things but when our national leaders and our law enforcement people make the attempt to protect us we go after them.
Some of this "peeking through the curtains" that has affected how we see our presidents and other national leaders has likely cost us some good people. I would rather they stay true to their spouse. I would rather they keep their zipper up in the Oval office but the reality is that some and or most of them won't.
I remember when I found out we were distant relatives of Warren Harding. My mom told me it was true but we don't claim him because he was a womanizer. Hmmmm!
That is my first rant for this chapter - ;-)
Bentley wrote: "Bryan wrote: "Exactly Kressel, Darman talks about how Lady Bird wanted to be that insider and LBJ gave her that life she wanted. No doubt it was not perfect.I visited the LBJ ranch and it was gr..."
We think nothing of this now with our poor cell phone manners. I sometimes think that the cell phone is to us as lead was to the Romans.
I was struck by the conscious decision that was made by Kennedy and his advisers to place poverty on the back burner because it did not equal votes. I also noticed that LBJ had concerns in his elections of making sure that he kept backers and donors happy with his decisions. He, therefore, backed off on some things in order to keep the money in the right court. In and oversimplified way I wonder if it is possible to come up with an election reform that places a certain budget at every candidates disposal. Non-partisan funding that would allow us to focus on actual needs rather than on what the big boys want. Somehow we need to get past the ability of the lobbys to buy what they want. Can we ever, in any other way, bring true focus to the actual needs of the country. I know I am showing some naivety. But, what if...?
Martin wrote: "Sorry to disappoint, but the mantra for reporters in the post Watergate era was: "Follow the money," which was the guidance deep throat gave Woodward."I agree that following the money is the best way to uncover corruption, but I'm afraid that sex scandals sell more papers. Also, look at how complicated money and banking has become. The people selling the CDOs didn't even understand what they were, and they led the economy to disaster.
Michael wrote: "I was struck by the conscious decision that was made by Kennedy and his advisers to place poverty on the back burner because it did not equal votes. I also noticed that LBJ had concerns in his ele..."Lobbyists are some of the most powerful forces in the shaping of government policy. Funded by huge corporations and other special interest groups, they have extreme influence over the Congress and the President. They are like the bully who takes his ball and goes home if he doesn't get his way. And that ball is their support and money which the administration and Congress can't ignore....it spells votes.
Bentley wrote: "Vince - I think the American people want to trust their President - whether they can or not is another thing and if they lie with facility - after awhile they will get caught and all trust is gone."Not to cloud our discussion of this book - It was tricky Dick Nixon that toppled my real ability to trust a president. Maybe the worst thing he did - from my view.
Christopher wrote: "Bentley wrote: "Christopher you may want to ask Jonathan some questions on his reasons for portraying one more or less than the other - although it could be that this is just where we are at this p..."Hi Christopher - I think that maybe there is just more meat - more detail - more accomplishment by LBJ than RR did pre presidency or in total accomplished. LBJ had more that a quarter century in Washington before he became Pres -
RR shifted careers and jobs - and really didn't fully succeed as a actor.
Mod
I now despise the word hero with what has been done to it in our jingoism and think that ..."
Martin you need to add the full citation for the author and book mentioned.
Mod
To our detriment, I think.
A..."
No problem Michael - we all rant now and then (good post)
Mod
Michael I was very disappointed in the lot of them for putting that on the back burner as well because it did not translate to votes. So much for principles.
Michael - it was not perfect but the McCain/Feingold bill had us moving in the right direction and the Supreme Court no less unhooked even that. I frankly do not know how we are going to disenfrancise the lobbyists but agree with you that it should be done.
Mod
I agree that following the mo..."
Good point Kressel
Mod
Yes Jill and unfortunately very true.
Mod
Yes Vince because all of the dirty laundry was hung out in full view but it is odd to say but there were even worse things going on before him.
Vince wrote: "Christopher wrote: "Bentley wrote: "Christopher you may want to ask Jonathan some questions on his reasons for portraying one more or less than the other - although it could be that this is just wh..."Yes I understand that LBJ was in politics longer and had more accomplished then RR. Though there had to be a point where RR took more to politics and a reason why which would be interesting to know.
Here's an interesting critique of that movie "Selma." This historian says it was unjustifiably hard on Johnson: http://www.thetakeaway.org/story/what...
Martin wrote: "Carter lived the righteous life. Can we have a show of hands from those wishing him back in the White House?"Here's one hand. I think Carter was pretty good as president, notwithstanding the withering Republican complaints. Republicans have demonized every Democratic president since Wilson, with the possible exception of LBJ, who was damned by his own party.
LBJ was a inveterate liar his entire life, a point made crystal clear by Robert A. Caro. He lied about big things (Vietnam) and small (what he paid for his socks). He was a crook (KTBC), a bully (Mary Rather), and an ingrate (Bobby Baker), although I credit his concern for the poor and downtrodden as sincere.
Vheissu, you forgot the part where LBJ conspired with Nixon against his own VP Hubert Humphrey during the '68 campaign.
Ann wrote: "Kressel wrote: "Though I don't remember the precise quote, Harry Truman said that if a man can't be trusted to be faithful to his own wife, he can't be trusted with anything.I gotta like Harry."
My grandfather always said history would be kinder to Truman than his contemporaries were.
Anyway, we have to remember that power and sex tend to be intertwined, and are as old as history itself. Don't you think a president or any leader would have an affair as a diversion, not as a way to gain a new adviser?
Mod
Mod
Here's one hand. I think Carter was pretty good as president, notwithst..."
Vheissu - I do respect your views - I honestly do - and I think that Carter was an extremely bright and intelligent - good man but things did not go right for him and he was not able to convince the voters that he had done a good job.
In terms of citations - author's photo and author's link are required - we would appreciate your editing your post and then we will delete this part of the comment.
Robert A. Caro
Mod
Thank you Kressel - could you also place that in the glossary.
Mod
I think so too - you might want to pose that question for the author on the Q&A thread - just saying - it is an important consideration.
This was an interesting chapter. My initial reaction was overall disgust for how LBJ treated his wife and his expectations for how others should balance work/life. For Example the quote on pg 92 "'you've got to make up your mind whether you're going to be a good father or a good senator.' For Johnson, the answer was self-evident." Pushing Hubert Humphrey to prioritize being a senator over his family in addition to his treatment of his wife really set me off. I disagree with his premise that you can't be both a good father and a good senator (or in general be a family man and be very good/successful at what you do.)
It is admirable to work hard, and LBJ is obviously a hard worker, but at what cost? I wish more in politics would work harder in the public service. That said, I start to lose admiration for those that work hard at the expense of their family, especially when they imply that others can't be a good father because of their job.
Bentley wrote: "Christopher wrote: "Vince wrote: "Christopher wrote: "Bentley wrote: "Christopher you may want to ask Jonathan some questions on his reasons for portraying one more or less than the other - althoug..."I posted the question in the Q&A thread. I am interested to find out what he answers.
Mark wrote: "This was an interesting chapter. My initial reaction was overall disgust for how LBJ treated his wife and his expectations for how others should balance work/life. For Example the quote on pg 9..."
That quote really makes no sense (although it made sense to LBJ) since there are so many people and not only politicians who work exceedingly long hours and still are good parents. It shows his obsession (maybe too strong a word) with power and that nothing took precedence over his political life. I think your statement "....at what cost?", is right on target. Did he realize that he was or could be a lonely man since his political "friends" would turn against in a heart beat if things didn't go their way but his family would not. Although his quote made me mad, I felt some pity for him......I may be the only one!!!!
The work/home balance is an important one that especially today is relevant. Call me crazy, but it seems to me that it is one of those guns and butter decisions in life. Resouces - including time - committed to butter cannot be committed to guns. Same thing with parenting and work. If you're working 16-18 hrs/day, some weekends included, it's physically impossible for you to be there for your children.
On the other hand, if you're devoting two hours in the a.m. getting your kids off to school, then picking them up, getting them to where ever they have to go, fixing them dinner, helping with homework, and just being there for them; that's time you can't devote to a job.
I think a lot of parents, especially in the US, are caught betwixt and between and feel a degree of collective angst over this bind.
Essentially, LBJ had it right.
The History Book Club
Books mentioned in this topic
Harry S. Truman (other topics)A Call to Action: Women, Religion, Violence, and Power (other topics)
Indomitable Will: LBJ in the Presidency (other topics)
Harry S. Truman (other topics)
All the Truth Is Out: The Week Politics Went Tabloid (other topics)
More...
Authors mentioned in this topic
Jimmy Carter (other topics)Mark K. Updegrove (other topics)
Robert A. Caro (other topics)
Robert A. Caro (other topics)
Matt Bai (other topics)
More...
Right Bentley but also the media then depended upon being included by the administration in press releases - leaks etc. that seem less necessary today with global info moving. More so in FDR's time the access to the White House was very critical to the press and without cable and the internet there were far fewer "purveyors" of the "news"