Customer Reviews

KENNEDY & NIXON: The Rivalry that Shaped Postwar America

5 star:		(26)
4 star:		(13)
3 star:		(2)
2 star:		(2)
1 star:		(0)

 

 

You might be surprised after reading Matthews' fascinating story on the friendship and rialry between these icons of post-WWII America. Having read numerous books on Nixon, and a few on Kennedy, I began reading without much expectation that I would walk away with any new insights or knowledge. How wrong I was.

What surprised me most was the number of similarities between Kennedy and Nixon's political views. From their ardent anti-communism to their disdain for the prevailing purveyors of liberalism, it's easy to see how they forged a friendship upon their election to Congress in 1947.

Kennedy and Nixon also shared a strong desire to move ahead and gain the ultimate prize - the Presidency - and this evenaully lead to their rivalry and ultimate disdain for one another. I never realized how Kennedy (and his family) consumed and impacted Nixon's political and physical psyche. But given Teddy Kennedy's significant behind-the-scenes involvement in Nixon's ultimate downfall, fully chronicled here, he had good reason.

If you're searching for a fresh analysis and interpretation of these two icons in American history, this is the book for you.

MSNBC host and news columnist Christopher Matthews charts the rivalry of "Kennedy v. Nixon" as backstory and inspiration behind most of America's post-World War II history. His meticulous research and breezy storytelling style creates a psychological/historical drama mixed with Shakespearean tragedy and some hilarious, touching anecdotes.

In it, Richard Nixon, the 37th president who resigned under pressure from the Watergate scandal, battles the ambitions, then the "Camelot" mythology of President John F. Kennedy, who defeated Nixon in 1960's close, contested election. Nixon is then shadowed throughout his political life by memories of the slain president: first by brother Robert, (a likely 1968 candidate before his assassination), and finally youngest brother Edward Kennedy.

"Kennedy vs. Nixon" tells a story of personal friendship souring under political differences and career paths. It shows how these cordial political colleagues who shared a hallway both opposed what they saw as Yalta's squandered victory after World War II, and fought Communist insurgency and infiltration domestically and internationally. Matthews traces their roles in the era's major events, all playing against a Cold War backdrop: tacit support for Joe McCarthy's investigations, distrust of Alger Hiss as Nixon prosecuted him, 1952's infamous "Checkers" speech preserving Nixon's vice-presidential candidacy even as President Dwight Eisenhower coldly minimizes Nixon's accomplishments and even attempts to remove him.

During these chapters Matthews reveals the start of Nixon's legendary personal distrust, hinted when vanquished Congressional opponent Helen Douglas branded him "Tricky Dicky." Here Matthews also introduces characters (Archibold Cox, Charles Colson, Larry O'Brien) who became household names less than 15 years later as henchmen for or targets of Nixon's need to retain power . You also see the slow roots of America's painful Vietnam involvement, and how it helped fuel Nixon's 1968 comeback victory.

The core of the book is dedicated to 1960's presidential election and TV's major role in its presentation and outcome. Matthews meticulously retells 1960's "Great Debate" and how Nixon's TV image which, compared to Kennedy's carefully crafted public persona (and what Nixon saw as creative counting) painfully cost him that election. But recounting private taped and untaped unconversations, you sense both men's anger and frustration against enemies foreign (Kennedy's Bay of Pigs, and 1963's assassination of South Vietnam president Ngo Dihn Diem) and domestic (Nixon's "Saturday Night Massacre," his palpable need to discredit Ted Kennedy even after 1969's Chappaquiddick tragedy ended any hopes for his presidential run.)

Matthews effectively argues Ted Kennedy's threat as fueling Nixon's self-destruction, but adds Nixon's suspicions were justified. From being used by Kennedy's wealthy father as pawn for President-elect Kennedy before the inauguration, to investigated for loans given Nixon's brother Donald (for "Nixonburgers"), to Ted Kennedy's role in prosecuting Watergate, Nixon felt constantly chased by Kennedy legacy and perceptions he only held space until another Kennedy "restoration" and couldn't compete with Kennedy' carefully written legacy. This leads to several bitter but even hilarious anecdotes (the ones about the phony train conductor, the pregnant woman and the beach photo opportunity being three favorites).

Even in Nixon's declining, post-retirement years, his foreign policy expertise respected and presidency re-examined, he couldn't hide antipathy for his 1960 rival and events leading America to the Vietnam war always associated with Nixon's presidency. Even his 1994 death was shadowed a few weeks later by that of President Kennedy's widow Jacqueline (with whom Nixon shared sweet and sincere correspondence after Ms. Kennedy's family visited Nixon's White House in 1971.) It is a somber, fitting ending to Matthews' remarkably told story, whose details provided deeper, long-missing reasons behind some of history's tragic, yet seismic events. "Kennedy vs. Nixon" is a recommended story addressing personal and political clashes between two of American history's most significant, forever fascinating figures.

Chris Matthews was an aid to Thomas "Tip" O'Neill, the largest liberal voice of the 1980s. I was surprised then at how even-handedly he treated his subjects.

He describes the Kennedy flaws quite aptly. He lays out the Nixon virtues in quite the same way.

It begins with Kennedy and Nixon both elected to the house of representatives in 1946. Kennedy was jovial and light. Nixon was quite a serious young man. Nixon went to the senate first. Kennedy made it to the Senate when Nixon became vice-president. The men had a cordial relationship.

In 1946 they went to Pennsyvannia to debate. Afterwards they ate dinner together in a local diner. On the train trip back to Washington they flipped a coin for the bottom bunk. Richard Nixon was a Guest at John and Jackie's wedding. They were both guests at Senator Joe McCarthy's wedding.

They would have remained cordial until they went against each other in the 1960 presidential contest.

Matthews shows how this loss at the hands of John Kennedy changed the way he saw politics. In a way Matthews blames the kennedy's for Nixon's ethical demise. Nixon felt the Kennedy's stole the election and decided no more Mr. Nice Guy. The culmination of this would lead to Nixon's resignation some 14 years later.

I left the book liking both Kennedy and Nixon as men and Presidents more than when I picked it up.

Chris Matthews, former journalist and Tip O'Neill staffer, and more recently host of MSNBC's "Hardball", has written an informative book detailing the political relationship between two men who became president, John F. Kennedy and Richard M. Nixon. Going back to when they first met, at the start of the 80th Congress in 1947, and continuing long after Kennedy's tragic assassination in 1963, until Nixon's resignation from office in 1974, Matthews reveals the ebb and flow of the relationship, and how it affected history. His story continues after Kennedy's death due to Matthews' convincing theory about how the deceased president and his family left President Nixon in a state of obsession, prompting him to go to extreme lengths to help assure his victory in 1972, convinced that the Kennedy legacy and the deceased president's youngest brother, Senator Edward "Ted" Kennedy, could thwart his chances for a second term.

Matthews draws his analogy from the Peter Shafer play and subsequent film "Amadeus," which revealed the tremendous jealousy of famous Austrian court composer Salieri toward young Wolfgang Amadeus Mozart. While an accomplished professional, Salieri was obliged to rely upon form and hard work. Mozart, on the other hand, exuded a seemingly effortless genius and that indefinable quality known as charisma.

Nixon felt the same way about the handsome young Senator Kennedy. He felt in his shadow when in the presidency and was fearful that Ted Kennedy would ultimately seek the big prize in 1972. Matthews cites the Ted Kennedy factor as a major reason why Nixon, determined to leave as little to chance as possible, launched his ruthless Palace Guard operation which culminated in a "Dirty Tricks" campaign and Watergate, which resulted in Nixon becoming the only U.S. president to resign from office.

Matthews reveals that Kennedy and Nixon began as friends but, as it became increasingly obvious that they would oppose each other for the presidency, became tenacious competitors. Matthews tells his readers that the first Kennedy-Nixon presidential debate in 1960, in which Nixon's stiffness cost him dearly, had been preceded by a similar debate in 1947 in McKeesport, Pennsylvania, when they were both freshmen congressmen. On that occasion, as in 1960, Kennedy was the ingratiating debater, relaxed, making contact with his audience. Nixon, on the other hand, was like the tense debate competitor seeking to impress a panel of judges, concentrating on raw facts at the expense of failing to generate warmth and spontaneity.

Matthews saw Nixon as the ultimate journeyman and Kennedy as the politician touched with genius. He notes that there are no memorable phrases associated with Nixon speeches whereas Kennedy is known for his electrifying Berlin speech as well as his inaugural address, when he stated, "My fellow Americans, ask not what your country can do for you, but what you can do for your country."

Chris Matthews has written a extremely readable, informative, and fair history concerning two of the most important politicians in the post war era. Both were elected to the House of Representatives in 1946. Kennedy ran as a fighting conservative and Nixon as a common sense liberal. They became friends while serving in the House and later in the Senate. When it appeared that Kennedy might die in the mid 1950's Nixon broke down and cried. Both come across as extremely fair minded Senators politicians to do the right thing. Their friendship did not survive the 1960 election. After Kennedy was assassinated, Nixon could never live up to the myth of Camelot. It haunted him throughout the rest of his political career and played a part in his descent into Watergate.

Matthews provides a balanced and fair, if superficial, examination of Nixon and Kennedy. As an avid studier of this era of politics, and Nixon in particular, I didn't learn a whole lot that I did not already know. But this book, I don't think, is meant to provide the function of in-depth scholarly research. It's pleasant fluff, for people who might be interested in learning a little bit about Nixon and Kennedy, but don't want to invest too much energy and brain power. And there's nothing wrong with that. I think we all have subjects we'd like to know a little bit more about, but don't necessarily want to make a major scholarly investment in.

Matthews' writing style is easily digestible and entertaining, even if it does make you think that Matthews might just be as stupid in real life as he appears on TV. He also provides a solid and fair account free of egregious errors. If anything, I might be inclined to believe he has a slight bias towards Nixon and against Kennedy in terms of their respective treatments. Despite Watergate, and my own liberal leanings, I tend to have a similar bias so it didn't bother me. Nevertheless, Kennedy and especially Nixon are both fascinating figures, and Matthews does a credible job of capturing what makes the both of them so interesting. In short, I'd give this book a fairly mild recommendation, with the understanding that there are better books about each figure out there, and Matthews does not provide any crucial, original, or insightful analysis. It is good for the person with a mild interest, who'd like to know a bit more about Kennedy and Nixon, but who does not have the time or energy for something heftier.

I am very impressed with Chris Matthews's narrative on the political careers of John F. Kennedy and Richard Nixon. His book is well-researched, well-written, and his conclusions are well-proven. At first, I was suspicious of Mr. Matthews's claim that their jousting was "the rivalry that shaped postwar America." But in completing the book, I can appreciate that Kennedy and Nixon were the American version of Disraeli and Gladstone. They both served in the South Pacific during World War II and were elected to Congress in the same year, 1946. Nixon ran as a "pragmatic liberal." Kennedy ran as a "fighting conservative." Excuse me? But beneath the contradictory rhetoric lay an ideological similarity: a passionate hate of communism and a deep suspicion of the New Deal, Eastern Establishment. American leaders during the Cold War, they rallied their nation against Communist threats at home and abroad. They further overthrew the old Washington rules of political cordiality and fairness. To substitute, the first leaders of the G.I. Generation created a winner-take-all political culture that forever changed the Beltway. Kennedy started as the more ruthless pol. His early political career was filled with charges of bribery, vote-stealing, and other low-ball maneuvers. Nixon, of course, would not be outdone. His relentless pursuit of Alger Hiss gave him his first political break and cemented his fear that the Elite was out to break him. Similar in political style and ideology, Kennedy and Nixon became genuine friends in the 1950s. This surprised me but Mr. Matthews documents this point prodigiously. Nixon was invited to the Kennedy wedding in 1953. When Kennedy was near death in 1954, Nixon was in tears. "Oh God, don't let him die." Jackie Kennedy told friends that Jack admired Nixon more than any other man he knew. What forever changed the relationship was the 1960 presidential election. Kennedy beat Nixon by an incredibly narrow margin and the loser was forever convinced that the election was stolen. Mr. Matthews emphasizes the role of "imagery" in the 1960 campaign. All things being equal, Nixon should have topped Kennedy that year. But Kennedy's good looks and aristocratic style contrasted favorably with Nixon's common looks and straight talk. When Kennedy was assassinated, the manufactured mythology of "Camelot" masked an average presidency. When Nixon was finally elected president in 1968, it was the ideal of Camelot that haunted him throughout his term. No matter what Nixon did, he could never measure up to Kennedy in the eyes of the American people. The Eastern Establishment viewed Nixon especially distastefully; they saw him as an illegitimate president. Nixon knew that he was in a constant struggle against the liberals who carried the torch for Camelot. Nixon was determined to use every weapon in his arsenal to save himself and his presidency - constitution de damned. Mr. Matthews is especially fluent in describing the step-by-step political destruction of Richard Nixon. The Kennedy-Nixon rivalry ends in 1974 with Nixon's resignation in disgrace. Kennedy had bested Nixon one last time. But in a true sense, both men were equal winners. It was their Cold War zealotry and political ruthlessness that defined Washington after 1960. Our communist-free world is largely their child. Our cynical political culture is largely their creature too. For better and for worse.

Of all the talking heads on television nowadays, the one I stop to listen to every now and then is Christopher Matthews, the Washington bureau chief for the San Francisco Examiner and a former aide to Tip O'Neill who delivers a fascinating chronicle of the interchange between the two most well known statesmen of the Cold War.<P...There is nothing special about his prose, his Salieri and Mozart analogy is a little tired and his word choice does not flourish or spellbind. But his insight and experience as a political insider gives the book a back room feel.

Matthew’s authoritative anecdotes stand out as the book's top selling feature. Further Matthews demonstrates the complex and vibrant nature of the Kennedy-Nixon rivalry and friendship. Booming with hubris, tragedy, and destiny, Matthew’s book reads something out of the Homer’s Iliad recast in American political theatre. Our heroes, both World War II Navy Officers, Class of 46 vets shared a common goal of American confrontation toward Soviet expansionism. One would be murdered for it and remembered as a hero, the other would die in old age whose reverent eulogies are stained with villainy.

Matthews alone stands out as the only scholar willing to look beyond the rivalry that still colors our perceptions of history today. He dares to see Nixon as who he really was and not a dastardly villain as his enemies would have one believe. He forthrightly portrays Nixon as a brilliant statesman who brought into reality the international order that his rival Jack Kennedy failed to achieve.

Owing somewhat to his patronage to Mr. Speaker, the man who would succeed Jack Kennedy’s Congressional seat, the author and democrat’s silence on the Kennedy-Nixon rivalry after the 60 election until the 1963 assassination is deafening. One cannot help but sympathize with self-made Nixon who does nothing to impeach the political fortunes of his Presidential rival where the rich kid Kennedy, like the illegitimate Richard III, engages is a whole array of ruthless buyouts, cheap tricks and petty jabs to secure his ill gotten throne and destroy his old nemesis.

This is a really good book for a serious reader interested in the history of this nation and the art of statecraft.

Every now and then you find a book that reads so easily and is so interesting that you surprise yourself at the end by learning something. Christopher Matthews' new book, Kennedy and Nixon: The Rivalry that Shaped Postwar America, is one such book. Christopher Matthews has written a story about hardball politics that reads like a dramatic novel. Kennedy and Nixon is about how two political careers became tragically intertwined. Beginning with their friendship as freshman members of congress in 1948, carrying through the presidential election of 1960, and ending with Watergate Christopher Matthews details the drama that would eventually lead to the latter president's downfall. He also provides an illuminating contrast of the two men's personalities: the charming, well-to-do Kennedy versus the shy, hard working Nixon. Two very different men who actually share very similar ambitions and beliefs. Kennedy and Nixon: The Rivalry that Shaped Postwar America stands above all previous works on the two men as it examines just how closely their careers were connected. It is the story of friendship both lost to competition and transformed into a haunting and persistent obsession. Kennedy and Nixon is the perfect book for anyone who loves history, politics, and great tragic drama. To quote Christopher Matthews, this book is "for anyone who loves this stuff as much as I do!"

I am very impressed with Chris Matthews's narrative on the political careers of John F. Kennedy and Richard Nixon. His book is well-researched, well-written, and his conclusions are well-proven. At first, I was suspicious of Mr. Matthews's claim that their jousting was "the rivalry that shaped postwar America." But in completing the book, I can appreciate that Kennedy and Nixon were the American version of Disraeli and Gladstone. They both served in the South Pacific during World War II and were elected to Congress in the same year, 1946. Nixon ran as a "pragmatic liberal." Kennedy ran as a "fighting conservative." Excuse me? But beneath the contradictory rhetoric lay an ideological similarity: a passionate hate of communism and a deep suspicion of the New Deal, Eastern Establishment. American leaders during the Cold War, they rallied their nation against Communist threats at home and abroad. They further overthrew the old Washington rules of political cordiality and fairness. To substitute, the first leaders of the G.I. Generation created a winner-take-all political culture that forever changed the Beltway. Kennedy started as the more ruthless pol. His early political career was filled with charges of bribery, vote-stealing, and other low-ball maneuvers. Nixon, of course, would not be outdone. His relentless pursuit of Alger Hiss gave him his first political break and cemented his fear that the Elite was out to break him. Similar in political style and ideology, Kennedy and Nixon became genuine friends in the 1950s. This surprised me but Mr. Matthews documents this point prodigiously. Nixon was invited to the Kennedy wedding in 1953. When Kennedy was near death in 1954, Nixon was in tears. "Oh God, don't let him die." Jackie Kennedy told friends that Jack admired Nixon more than any other man he knew. What forever changed the relationship was the 1960 presidential election. Kennedy beat Nixon by an incredibly narrow margin and the loser was forever convinced that the election was stolen. Mr. Matthews emphasizes the role of "imagery" in the 1960 campaign. All things being equal, Nixon should have topped Kennedy that year. But Kennedy's good looks and aristocratic style contrasted favorably with Nixon's common looks and straight talk. When Kennedy was assinated, the manufactured mythology of "Camelot" masked an average presidency. When Nixon was finally elected president in 1968, it was the ideal of Camelot that haunted him throughout his term. No matter what Nixon did, he could never measure up to Kennedy in the eyes of the American people. The Eastern Establishment viewed Nixon especially distastefully; they saw him as an illegitimate president. Nixon knew that he was in a constant struggle against the liberals who carried the torch for Camelot. Nixon was determined to use every weapon in his arsenal to save himself and his presidency - constitution de damned. Mr. Matthews is especially fluent in describing the step-by-step political destruction of Richard Nixon. The Kennedy-Nixon rivalry ends in 1974 with Nixon's resignation in disgrace. Kennedy had bested Nixon one last time. But in a true sense, both men were equal winners. It was their Cold War zealotry and political ruthlessness that defined Washington after 1960. Our communist-free world is largely their child. Our cynical political culture is largely their creature too. For better and for worse.