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

by Jeff Shesol

" Mutual Contempt is at once a fascinating study in character and an illuminating meditation on the role character can play in shaping history."―Michiko Kakutani, New York Times Lyndon Johnson and Robert Kennedy loathed each other. Their antagonism, propelled by clashing personalities, contrasting views, and a deep, abiding animosity, would drive them to a bitterness so deep that even civil conversation was often impossible. Played out against the backdrop of the turbulent 1960s, theirs was a monumental political battle that would shape federal policy, fracture the Democratic party, and have a lasting effect on the politics of our times. Drawing on previously unexamined recordings and documents, as well as memoirs, biographies, and scores of personal interviews, Jeff Shesol weaves the threads of this epic story into a compelling narrative that reflects the impact of LBJ and RFK's tumultuous relationship on politics, civil rights, the war on poverty, and the war in Vietnam. As Publishers Weekly noted, "This is indispensable reading for both experts on the period and newcomers to the history of that decade." "An exhaustive and fascinating history. . . . Shesol's grasp of the era's history is sure, his tale often entertaining, and his research awesome."―Russell Baker, New York Review of Books "Thorough, provocative. . . . The story assumes the dimensions of a great drama played out on a stage too vast to comprehend."―Jonathan Yardley, Washington Post (1997 Critic's Choice) "This is the most gripping political book of recent years."―Arthur Schlesinger, Jr. A New York Times Notable Book of the Year Illustrations and photographs

Genres: History, Politics, American History, Nonfiction, Biography, The United States Of America, American

622 pages, Paperback

First published October 1, 1997

About the author

Jeff Shesol is the author of Supreme Power and of Mutual Contempt, a study of Lyndon Johnson and Robert F. Kennedy. He was a speechwriter in the Clinton administration and lives in Washington, DC.

Reviews

[Christopher Saunders · Rating 4 out of 5]

A detailed examination of the personality feud between Lyndon Johnson and Robert Kennedy. Shesol shows the two men at odds almost from their first meeting; Johnson's ambivalence towards a 1960 presidential run, his reluctantly becoming John F. Kennedy's running mate, and his chafing at the near-powerless vice presidency rubbed Bobby Kennedy the wrong way. Kennedy came to resent Johnson more following his brother's death, feeling Johnson boorish in his assumption of power and attempts to clothe himself in JFK's legacy. Yet Johnson did his best to appease RFK's ego, keeping him on as Attorney General and helping his New York Senate campaign, until Kennedy soured on the Vietnam War. Shesol captures this in meaty, well-researched detail, showing the feud generated more by personal slights than political disagreements. Still, he may overstate his case: Kennedy was relatively Johnny-come-lately to the antiwar party, so his feud with Johnson more fairly represented than caused the liberal split over Vietnam. Nonetheless, a fascinating portrait of clashing egos on a world stage.

[Chris · Rating 5 out of 5]

An enthralling tour of Democratic politics in the 1960s. While there seems to be a (very) slight tendency to "force-fit" a couple events to support his thesis, Jeff Shesol's retelling of the epic struggle between Lyndon Johnson and Robert F. Kennedy for the soul of the reform movement of the 1960s is a superlative example of how to write narrative history.

It's also a book tinged by sadness: you know how it turns out in the end. The sadness comes not only from the assassinations you know are coming, but also from a sense longing for "what might have been"--an empowering version of liberalism that might have avoided being undermined and underfunded by Great Society shortcuts, and possibly avoided being short-circuited by Vietnam--all against the stark reality of what actually came to be. And hanging over it all are the events of November 22, 1963--the 50th anniversary of which is coming up next month--and, in the early parts of this book, a reminder of what an astonishingly effective president JFK really was.

At the same time, after reading this work I've come away with great sympathy for both figures--LBJ's central political dilemma and his psychological plight, as well as RFK's pain and his inability to affect events without having his motives questioned.

Overall, one of the best political histories I've read--Highly recommended.

[Holly Foley (Procida) · Rating 3 out of 5]

I have read many accounts of this time period. I have read biographies about both Robert Kennedy and LBJ, I have read work by Arthur Schlesinger and Clark Clifford. Several works about Nixon go into his perception of this rivalry. A good analogy was drawn in the book. It relayed a political cartoon involving a representation of a LBJ as a stout book propped up between two bookends one labeled JFK, the other RFK. Lyndon B Johnson accomplished an awful lot in his presidency but will probably always be overshadowed by the Kennedy myth and legend. This book is a little slanted toward RFK , but in general is very well written, well researched and informative. Not beach reading, mind you, but worth it if you are interested in politics.

[May · Rating 4 out of 5]

Like Shesol says in the introduction, there are few (if any) books that address the Johnson/Kennedy feud without an obvious bias - Shesol does a great job in avoiding these biases and unfolds the story of their feud on both sides, with input from both sides, in ways that show both were at fault, in their own ways, to the little triggers and potshots and paranoia that made up the feud. Thoroughly engaging and well-written, if loose on the impact of the feud -- Shesol doesn't argue the ultimate consequence(s) of why the LBJ/RFK feud matters until the epilogue, in an off-hand few sentences, but it would've been interesting if he had argued that it drove specific policy decisions or could've changed the course of the war.

[Samilja · Rating 3 out of 5]

Kennedy & Johnson are both fascinating in their distinctive ways. Kennedy - privileged, aggressive, passionate & idealistic. Johnson - smart, down-home, passionate & paranoid. Perhaps not the best mix?

I enjoyed revisiting the history of the sixties via this myopic view. If nothing else, it motivates me to find a good biography on both of these men to round out each picture.

The book is organized not chronologically but rather by issue. For instance, the Kennedy vs. Johnson approach to civil rights is dealt with over the course of a few chapters, taking the reader all the way back to the 50's and Johnson's turn as Senate Democratic Leader through the late sixties (up to RFK's assassination).

I understand Shesol's approach - a chronological reflection on this complicated relationship might have risked missing some of the nuances as tied to particular disagreements of policy. Still, it was hard for me to go back and forth historically as the author delved into each topic. Not being an historian, I had to go back to previous chapters to discover when something happened compared to where I was in the book at that point. It became tedious for this apparently linearly-minded reader.

Still - this book taught me a lot and was, in turn, a good read. For me, that's what a good non-fiction book has to offer. Information and entertainment.

[Bill Manzi · Rating 4 out of 5]

Having read all of the Caro books on LBJ I was not sure this book would add much of interest. It certainly did, giving a detailed view of the men in the context of their long rivalry and quite frankly their hated for each other. I think the author did a fair job of trying to be "balanced", with an honest assessment of where some of the fault lines existed in this relationship. LBJ could win over politicians that were his equal or even his superiors (see Richard Russell and Sam Rayburn) but he just could not crack the personality of Bobby Kennedy. It is clear that Kennedy did not wish to be persuaded on the relative merits of LBJ, and that animus led him to make bad judgements. His attempt to move LBJ off the ticket in 1960 was finessed away by JFK, but if Bobby had his way it is very likely that JFK would not have prevailed in that election. LBJ, having felt the RFK whip, remained paranoid and bitter over him right to the end. Having ascended to the presidency the way he did fueled that paranoia, and had LBJ looking over his shoulder constantly. The LBJ-RFK rivalry is one of the most intriguing political relationships in American history, and for those interested this book is an excellent examination of the men and the relationship between two strong willed titans of the Democratic Party.

[Noah Gittell · Rating 5 out of 5]

Fascinating look at the politics of the 1960s viewed through the lens of a fued between two of the most compelling political characters of the 20th century. Kennedy is the one who is remembered, but I think LBJ is one of the most fascinating politicans of the modern era: an enigma, who was overbearing but deeply sensitive and able to be wounded, a pragmatist from Texas who did for more civil rights than any politician in the modern era.

[Sheri Lutz · Rating 4 out of 5]

Could have benefited from editing, as he repeats himself, repeatedly, again and yet again, over and over. (By the 3rd time, I irritably and irrationally wanted to disagree with the perfectly reasonable assertions.)

[Sara · Rating 4 out of 5]

Read this years ago and thought it was quite good. By the end of it, you’ll feel tired from all the vitriol between RFK and LBJ. How mean and petty can people get?

[John Owen · Rating 5 out of 5]

I continue to be enamored by the Kennedys and the history of the 1960s. This book is an exhaustive and compelling retelling of the incredible fascinating feud between the "heirs" to the Kennedy Legacy: Robert Kennedy and Lyndon Johnson. I absolutely recommend this to anyone who enjoys this time period or history in general.

[Geoffrey Kelley · Rating 4 out of 5]

The political world has an odd feature. Ultimately it is a team sport, and governments and legislatures that are the most effective work together to advance policies and programs designed to improve life in our societies. But for the elected officials, there are these hyper-individualized moments, especially during election campaigns , where "it's all about me!" So egos, of various shapes and sizes, are part of the game. The book Mutual Contempt reveals this truth in crushing detail as it traces the tortuous relationship between Robert F Kennedy and Lyndon Johnson. For LBJ, it was a roller coaster of a riding: from master of the Senate to the frustrations of the vice-presidency to his tragic presidency. It was a career of significant domestic legislative achievements, but largely overshadowed by the Vietnam War. For RFK, it was a path that begin as a Senater staffer to Senator Joseph McCarthy, then rose as his brother John became president, then was cut short by the consequences of the assassinations that rocked the USA in the 1960s. Through it all, the relationship between the two men was marred by mistrust, jealousy, and pure bad faith as they wrestled for their places in history as the guardians of JFK's legacy. It was a struggle that continued all the way to the arrangements for RFK's gravesite in Arlington National Cemetery. This book is a sad one, because one is aware of all the time, thought and energy that could have been better deployed against the overwhelming social and economic challenges of the day.

[Kevin Scott · Rating 3 out of 5]

The first half or so of the book--until RFK's election to the Senate in 1964--is very much the book I expected (and the better part of the book). The second half, when RFK and LBJ's paths don't cross much, is a much less interesting story, in part because it's a proxy battle (fought by staff and over staff moreso than in person), in part because the theme of LBJ's paranoia can only be articulated in so many ways. That said, the additional aggravating part about the second half of the book is that Shesol focuses much more on RFK than on LBJ in the 1964-68 period. I don't know if this is because of who he had access to or if it's Shesol's sympathies lie with RFK, or some other reason. But the core battle between the two gets lost, I think. Editorially, it's interesting to me that the whole book passes with little more than a passing mention of Hubert Humphrey--was he really that peripheral to policy, LBJ, and Democratic politics as vice president?

[Bruce Scott · Rating 5 out of 5]

RFK was shot the day before my 21st birthdat, and died the day after. I remember seeing him in Kalamazoo shortly before ... Unlike many froends, I supported him over Gene McCarthy as the candidate who should succeed LBJ, who withdrew from the race when Bobby entered it. Turns out RFK was LBJ's nemesis, at least in the latter's mind, and the rivalry described aby in this book shaped the decade of my youth (and not insignificantly, my liability to serve in the nasty war in Vietnam). Bobby had a lot to offer ... Leadership, compassion, mostly, but also electability. Instead Hubert Humphrey ran, lost the progresive vote to Gene McCarthy, enabling Richard Nixon's victory, and the war continued needlessly for years.
There are ramifications for today. Cities were burning over racial tensions and we were split as a nation over the continued need for a foreign war. RFK urged us all to get involved in our communities in positive ways, and the advice still applies.

[Mauberley]

I was genuinely impressed by the depth of research as well as the insight of this book's twenty-eight year old author. LBJ might have been the more 'paranoid' of the two but even paranoids have real enemies and RFK was a very calculating man. For all of its revelations of the relations between these two men, it is refreshingly non-salacious. RFK was shot in April and by June, LBJ had driven through some gun control in response to the assassinations of Kennedy and King although Shesol observes that the gub lobby had managed to water down the bill to a considerable degree. As I write this (August 2012), it is almost a month after an horrific mass murder in Colorado and, so great has the power of the NRA and gun lobby grown in the past forty years, that the atrocity is surprisingly untouched as an issue by either Obama or Romney.

[Mike · Rating 4 out of 5]

Many of the books regarding this feud are written by Johnson or Kennedy partisans and the bias is evident. In this instance, that is not the case. Both RFK and LBJ receive fair treatment, but I still think you’ll find RFK the more compelling figure. Johnson frequently comes off as paranoid, petty, and vindictive. I recommend if you are a fan of history in the 1960’s.

[Michael Curry · Rating 5 out of 5]

Excellent! Contains mini-bios of each concentrating on the late 1950s and 1960s. One critic complained of a Kennedy bias. But if you go in looking for a bias on either side you will find it. It is a laundry list of events and not much into the mental Whys, but it is the only book on this subject (amazingly) and a good read.

[Karen Lundquist · Rating 4 out of 5]

While the feud between him and RFK brought out the worst in LBJ's personality, this book overstate those faults and is not objective in how it portray these two men. It is clear that the author thinks that RFK was the better of the two. It was a slow read at times and not as compelling as Caro's books, but still an interesting portrait of two very compelling and intriguing figures in US politics.

[JRB · Rating 5 out of 5]

Shesol's research brings this high stakes rivalry to life. Very well written, especially his subtly varied references to characters (i.e. 'Johnson' one minute, 'the President' the next, and 'LBJ' when appropriate). A little too easy on Kennedy at times, but justifiably so.

[Craig · Rating 4 out of 5]

Very good book.

Seemed a bit biased toward RFK, but then again I think LBJ was just a bit nuts.

I really enjoyed learning about two seminal figures of the 1960s, just a fascinating time in America.

I'd definitely recommend this book. A very easy read despite it being a history book.

[Dave Ginger · Rating 3 out of 5]

While I found the book to be interesting, it seemed to proceed rather slowly. If you're interested in the politics of the 1960s, you will likely enjoy this book...occasionally, the depth of detail was more than I was looking for.

[Dawn Wells · Rating 4 out of 5]

I really liked this book. I'm often fascinated by two individuals on the same team fighting from within. Showing how we all interpret things differently. Based on things such as money, privilege, education, intelligence, selfishness instead of just right and wrong.

[George Hodgson · Rating 3 out of 5]

This is a decent book especially for those who have not read a lot of books on the Kennedy/Johnson era. It does go over ground that has been well tilled elsewhere and could have spent a little more time on the character of each man.

[Daniel Farabaugh · Rating 3 out of 5]

While informative, this book was a bit dry and dense. I had to put it aside for a few days in the middle and read something else. It does a great job with the topic and really shows how this rivalry effected politics, but lacked a little on the readability scale.

[Todd Wright · Rating 3 out of 5]

Well-researched and well-written (especially with regard to all the many names and characters involved.) However, this was a hard read. This was way more detailed and categorized than I expected. Glad to have read it, but it wasn't easy to see it through.

[Margaret]

I really want to read the book Supreme Power by the same author but it hasn't made it to goodreads yet. However, this one looks promising.

[Jared · Rating 4 out of 5]

The fact that Kennedy and Johnson are so clearly drawn makes this book almost perfect.

[Heath · Rating 5 out of 5]

An absolutely brilliant and fascinating study in political cooperation and feuds.

[Alan · Rating 4 out of 5]

Excellent. Fascinating to read this having read the later written Caro volume Passage to Power.

[Jim · Rating 4 out of 5]

While this book did not break any new ground (from a 2014 perspective), it is well-researched and finally puts all the RFK-LBJ battles into one book.

[Katherine Mccarthy · Rating 4 out of 5]

I found this to be an interesting read and easier to understand compared to Supreme Power. Largely in part of the lack of legal jargon that I didn’t know. I also found the author to have a balanced view on the rivalry between the two men and didn’t seemed to be particularly biased towards either LBJ or RFK.