Mr. President HOW JUDGMENTS of EISENHOWER In the WHITE HOUSE HAVE CHANGED

By IRWIN F. GELLMAN The following excerpts are fromThe President and the Apprentice: Eisenhower and Nixon, 1952–1961, by Irwin F. Gellman, published this summer by Yale University Press.

ver since the 1952 presidential election, authors who opposed Dwight Eisenhower on philosophical and political grounds have Edominated the discussion of his White House years. At the same time, a number of misconceptions about those years have gone unexam­ ined. For too long, the fable that Eisenhower spent more time playing golf than governing was accepted as fact. It was said that Secretary of State John Foster Dulles, for example, shaped American diplomacy and White House chief of staff Sherman Adams took on such an outsized management role that he earned the title assistant president. In reality, Eisenhower formulated foreign policy in the Eisenhower administration; Secretary Dulles dutifully carried out Ike’s directives. Eisenhower was a skillful, hands-on President (he had, after all, overseen the invasions of North Africa, Italy, and France during World War II) who set his own agenda. Adams managed the President’s schedule and protected him from unwarranted intrusions, but did not act for him or enforce his decisions.

Opposite: President Eisenhower and Secretary of State John Foster Dulles. The secretary provided valuable advice on foreign affairs, but the President formulated foreign policy. Below: Dwight Eisen­ hower served as president of Columbia University in the late 1940s amid complaints that he governed only part-time due to failing health and extensive travel. Historical consensus has been especially unkind to Richard Nixon, who is thought to have played a minimal role as Vice President, in an administration that accom­ plished so little that there was not much for a Vice President to do. Besides, the President neither depended on nor liked Nixon. The reality is that the President and his appren­ tice respected and trusted each other. Nixon was deeply involved in many far-reaching initiatives and emerged as one of the most important presidential advisers. The negative portrayals of Eisenhower be­ Recent studies of the Eisenhower presidency have reversed the general image that the President spent more gan before he became President and changed time playing golf than governing. slowly after his death. After World War II, both major political parties tried to draft They remained unconvinced after quenched at home.” The former President him as their presidential nominee. He re­ Eisenhower defeated Stevenson again in 1956. received a copy of the book and scribbled on fused and in 1948 accepted the presidency Columbia historian Richard Hofstadter, in the dedication page: “the author is not a good of Columbia University. Many faculty mem­ Anti-Intellectualism in American Life, de­ historian. . . . in those events with which I am bers, especially those in the social sciences scribed Ike as having a “conventional” mind personally familiar he is grossly inaccurate.” and the humanities, considered a military and “fumbling inarticulateness.” William Morison co-wrote with Leuchtenburg and man unsuitable to lead the university, and Leuchtenburg’s 1993 book In the Shadow of Henry Steele Commager (also a Columbia throughout his tenure the complaints, rang­ FDR (written after he had decamped from professor until 1956) a widely assigned col­ ing from petty to serious, grew more vocal Columbia for North Carolina) provided a lege textbook, The Growth of the American and intense. Historian Travis Jacobs, in his negative assessment of Eisenhower’s presiden­ Republic, in which the authors downgraded book Eisenhower at Columbia, wrote: “Some cy, stating that he left the Oval Office with the Eisenhower presidency with a backhand­ faculty members criticized Eisenhower be­ “an accumulation of unsolved social prob­ ed compliment: “Eisenhower had made an cause he did not seem interested in the lems that would overwhelm his successors in important contribution toward unifying academic needs of the university, but their the 1960s.” the nation, but not a few asked whether the major complaint was that he never was a Up at Harvard, historian Arthur Schlesinger, price that had been paid was too high.” full-time President due to his failing health Jr., who worked on Stevenson’s staff dur­ The academic criticism was not limited and extensive travel schedule.” Neither ing the 1952 and ’56 campaigns and would to Cambridge and New York. Before Ike’s posed any threat to his tenure. later be a special assistant to President John first term was finished, Norman Graebner, Kennedy, charged that Eisenhower had ac­ a diplomatic historian at the University of  cepted McCarthyism “with evident content­ Virginia, argued that the President was During the 1952 presidential campaign, ment.” Throughout his career, Schlesinger returning the United States to a “New the faculty and staff split into warring regularly belittled Eisenhower. As late as 1983 Isolationism.” Several months before Ike camps: those who supported the Democratic he described the former President as “a genial, left office, Graebner concluded that the candidate, Adlai Stevenson, and others who indolent man of pied syntax and platitudi­ President’s advocates had “measured his suc­ backed Eisenhower. According to reports in nous conviction, fleeing from public policy to cess by popularity, not achievements.” Two the New York Times, some grew so hostile bridge, golf and westerns.” years later, in the preface to an edited vol­ that they refused to talk to colleagues on the In his prestigious Oxford History of the ume of chapters by well-known authors, his­ other side. After Ike’s convincing triumph, American People, published in 1965, Samuel torian Dean Albertson wrote that “informed some Stevenson loyalists refused to accept Eliot Morison used his chapter on the reaction to the Eisenhower administration defeat and used undergraduate lectures, Eisenhower years to highlight the President’s was unfavorable.” graduate seminars, and writings to trivialize failures: “Peace and order were not restored the winner. abroad; violence and faction were not 

28 Prologue Fall 2015 Many journalists criticized Eisenhower bully pulpit effectively, continued to be ac­ theme: the President, he wrote, “was once as­ for his lack of leadership. Marquis Childs, cepted without careful analysis. This impres­ sumed to have been a well-intentioned politi­ a syndicated columnist, enumerated his sion still lingers. cal innocent, but he emerges from the histori­ subject’s weaknesses in his 1958 book cal record as a self-consciously oblique political Eisenhower: Captive Hero. New York Times  sophisticate with a highly distinctive leadership reporter James Reston found in Ike a sym­ Cracks in the concrete began to appear style.” Though this interpretation gained pop­ bol of the times: “Optimistic, prosperous, when the well-respected journalist Murray ularity, the book outraged Arthur Schlesinger, escapist, pragmatic, friendly, attentive in Kempton wrote in the late 1960s that who wrote in his journal on February 12, moments of crisis and comparatively in­ pundits had underestimated Eisenhower’s 1981, that Greenstein was “a nice fellow—but attentive the rest of the time.” Columnist acumen. After the Dwight Eisenhower his thesis these days—Eisenhower the Activist Richard Rovere summarized Ike’s lackluster Presidential Library opened in the spring President—is a lot of bullshit.” achievements: “The good that Eisenhower of 1962 and the National Archives started Despite Schlesinger’s objections, docu­ did—largely by doing so little—was accom­ to release thousands upon thousands of ad­ mentation of the efficacy of Eisenhower’s plished . . . in his first term.” ministration documents, Herbert Parmet management inaugurated a trend toward Political scientists painted their own un­ became one of the first historians to exam- a more positive view of his presidency. In flattering portraits. James Barber, who ana­ Stephen Ambrose’s 1984 book Eisenhower: lyzed presidential performance according to The President, Ike emerges as a brilliant lead­ a four-part matrix—active/positive, active/ er. Ambrose later called him “the American negative, passive/positive, and passive/nega­ of the twentieth century. Of all the men I’ve tive—put Ike in the last box and asserted studied and written about he is the brightest that he left “vacant the energizing, initiat­ and the best.” ing, stimulating possibilities” of his office. A Unfortunately, this assessment is tainted counselor to John Kennedy during his con­ by scandal. While some Eisenhower schol­ gressional years, Harvard professor Richard ars questioned Ambrose’s research after the Neustadt, used 160 pages of his 1960 book book’s publication, the enormity of his fal­ on presidential power to enumerate how sifications was not revealed until after his poorly Eisenhower had governed. death. Ambrose lied about his relationship to In the 1960s, Eisenhower responded to Eisenhower. He claimed that Ike was so im­ his detractors with two volumes of memoirs, Harvard historian Arthur Schlesinger, Jr., who pressed with his book on Civil War General The White House Years, in which he defended worked on the Adlai Stevenson campaigns, was Henry Halleck that he called Ambrose out one of the harshest critics of Eisenhower, describ­ his record on such controversial subjects as ing him as “a genial, indolent man . . . fleeing from of the blue and asked him to write his biog­ Wisconsin Senator Joseph McCarthy and public policy to bridge, golf and westerns.” raphy. Two Ambrose letters contradict this his refusal to aid Britain and France during account. On September 10, 1964, the his­ the 1956 Suez invasion. Those recollections ine them and was surprised by what he un­ torian wrote to Ike that he was thrilled to be and later books by close associates—such covered. His Eisenhower and the American appointed associate editor of the Eisenhower as Sherman Adams’s Firsthand Report and Crusades, published in 1972, represented papers and thought “it only fair that you Ezra Taft Benson’s Cross Fire—emphasized the first time a serious scholar suggested that have an opportunity to see some of my writ­ the administration’s achievements. Attorney Eisenhower had accomplished far more than ing.” One sample was the Halleck book. On General Herbert Brownell, Jr., years later, previous writers had allowed. October 15, Ambrose informed the former commented in his memoirs: “There was Others followed. In the early 1980s, po­ President that he was editing World War never any doubt in the Eisenhower admin­ litical scientist Fred Greenstein examined II documents and wanted “to begin a full- istration about who was in charge and who the recently opened files of Ann Whitman, scale, scholarly account of your military ca­ made the decisions. The President did.” the President’s private secretary, and deter­ reer.” He was not considering “a complete Such testimonials did little to overcome mined that Ike had employed a “hidden biography, as I know little about politics and the consensus on Ike’s mediocrity. The fic­ hand” to manage the federal bureaucracy. In have even less interest in them.” tion that Eisenhower had governed incom­ The Hidden-Hand Presidency and Presidential petently, and that he had failed to use the Difference, Greenstein elaborated on this 

Mr. President Prologue 29 Historians have been divided on President Eisenhower’s leadership on civil rights. He met with civil rights leaders on June 23, 1958. Left to Right: Lester Granger, Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr., E. Frederic Morrow, the President, A. Philip Randolph,William Rogers, Rocco Siciliano, and Roy Wilkins.

Ambrose also claimed that he had talked source. No one has supplied any documenta­ By the first decade of the 21st century, with Ike alone for “hundreds and hundreds tion that confirms either statement. Ambrose most authors had rejected the notion of of hours” over five years; his footnotes record declared, also without any documentation, Eisenhower as ineffective. David Nichols, nine separate interviews. But Ike’s daily logs that “Eisenhower had no Negro friends, not in A Matter of Justice, has shown how show that the historian met with the former even more than one or two acquaintances. Eisenhower advanced the cause of civil President only three times, for a total of less . . . He was uncomfortable with . . . Negroes, rights, and in Eisenhower 1956 how he skill­ than five hours. They never met privately; one so much so that he did not want to hear their fully managed the Suez crisis. Journalist of Eisenhower’s aides was always present. side.” These assertions, which have no foun­ Jim Newton’s Eisenhower concentrated on The most damaging charge to result from dation in fact, lead to the expected conclu­ how well the President managed the White these phantom sessions concerns the issue sion: Ike “ignored the Negro community.” . . . House, and historian Jean Edward Smith Ambrose singled out as the major failure Ambrose’s fabrications received wide­ followed with Eisenhower in War and Peace. of Eisenhower’s presidency: civil rights. He spread coverage, but little changed. In this massive, full-length biography, a quotes Ike as saying he regretted “the ap­ Eisenhower: The President has not been quarter of which is devoted to the presiden­ pointment of that dumb son of a bitch Earl pulled from library shelves, and its publish­ cy, Smith concludes that next to Franklin Warren.” He also writes that Eisenhower er, Simon and Schuster, still sells it in print D. Roosevelt, Ike “was the most successful “personally wished that the Court had upheld and as an eBook, touting it as an outstand­ President of the twentieth century.” Plessy v. Ferguson, and said so on a number of ing reference work with “numerous inter­ While the narrative on the Eisenhower occasions (but only in private).” For the re­ views with Eisenhower himself.” Even the presidency has shifted dramatically, from mark on the chief justice, Ambrose cited an Eisenhower Library bookstore sells it. the story of an inept leader to that of a near- undated interview with the former President; great one, most accounts of the actual events for the opinion on Plessy, he did not provide a  during his administration have remained

30 Prologue Fall 2015 Nigel Hamilton states: “Eisenhower had never liked or trusted Nixon, nor did he feel confident about Nixon holding the reins of America’s imperial power.” Hamilton claimed that Ike censored Nixon’s speeches, rarely allowed him to enter the Oval Office, and prevented him from participating in “Cabinet and senior government meetings, save as an observer.” These statements do not deviate at all from the mainstream view among historians; none of them are accurate. The President with five of his advisers on January 13, 1956, to discuss his Atoms for Peace program. Left to A former presidential speechwriter, Emmet right: Secretary of the Treasury George Humphrey, the President, Secretary of State Dulles, National Security John Hughes, in The Ordeal of Power, released Adviser Dillon Anderson, Secretary of Commerce Lewis Strauss, and Secretary of Defense Charles Wilson. Initiatives and policies were Eisenhower’s, even when others appeared to be the prime movers. in 1963, claimed: “The relationship between Eisenhower and Nixon, at its warmest over the unchanged. (One recent exception was Evan his department’s sprawling bureaucracy while years, could never be described as confident Thomas’sIke’s Bluff, which describes how the the President shaped military policy. In eco­ and comradely.” A pre-publication excerpt that President thought about nuclear weapons nomic matters, the President depended on appeared in Look magazine in November 1962 from a strategic vantage point and analyzes Secretary of the Treasury George Humphrey alleges that Eisenhower told Hughes before how Ike combined his generalship and his and other advisers to help formulate fiscal the 1956 Republican national convention that civilian authority to maintain a fragile peace policy. Although Ike admired and respected Nixon “was not presidential timber.” Reporters during the height of the Cold War.) If we Attorney General Brownell, the President asked the former President to comment, and no longer see Eisenhower as the golf-playing nevertheless played a major role in the Justice he denied ever making that statement. No one innocent happily ignoring the nation’s prob­ Department’s direction. He valued these indi­ has acknowledged Ike’s disclaimer, and the de­ lems, we do not yet have an unclouded pic­ viduals but kept them in their place, emphasiz­ rogatory characterization is regularly used to ture of how the man actually governed. The ing whenever necessary that he was in charge. describe the two men’s relationship. mythology still obscures our vision. In many important aspects of his administra­ Partisan biographers like Earl Mazo and President Eisenhower’s organization re­ tion, including critical areas where historians Bela Kornitzer published sympathetic ac­ volved around the team concept. To Ike, a have depicted him as passive or disengaged, the counts about Nixon during his vice presi­ military professional who became the civilian initiatives and policies were Eisenhower’s, even dency, and after leaving office, Nixon de­ commander-in-chief, the use of the team ap­ when others appeared to be the prime movers. fended himself in Six Crises. Many authors proach emerged logically from his West Point cast these works aside in favor of less compli­ experience. The picture that will emerge in  mentary depictions. The New Republicserial­ this book is of a military man at the top of Depictions of Eisenhower’s connection ized a book by William Costello, The Facts the pyramid; his subordinates worked in lay­ to Nixon have followed a particularly dark About Nixon, just before the 1960 presiden­ ers below him and provided information. He path. The relationship between the two men tial election. Costello declared that Nixon listened well and assimilated a wide variety of is variously described as ambivalent, loath­ had failed to assist GOP candidates in the material before arriving at a decision. some, or hateful. In the spring of 1960, 1954 elections and that the Vice President Eisenhower took charge of the budget­ columnist and commentator Joseph Kraft was “was widely blamed for the Republican ary, civil rights, legal, defense and diplomatic wrote in an article in Esquire entitled “IKE party’s reckless flirtation with the treason is­ issues that he thought needed his personal vs. NIXON” that “it is remarkable that sue.” These accusations were without merit. attention. To reach the best solutions to anyone could even suppose a close rap­ Most Republicans applauded Nixon for aid­ complicated problems, he designated others port between the President and Nixon.” ing the party’s candidates, and they support­ inside his administration to carry out specific The two men’s linkage puzzled Ambrose, ed him in his efforts to remove subversives assignments. Secretary Dulles, for instance, who described them as at best ambivalent from the federal bureaucracy. provided valuable advice on foreign affairs. toward one another. More recently, in his Secretary of Defense Charles Wilson managed 2011 book American Caesars, British author 

Mr. President Prologue 31 Anthony Summers, in his 2000 bestsell­ reasons. Hutschnecker’s records of his ap­ Presidents combined, there is no chapter on er The Arrogance of Power, garnered head­ pointments with Nixon reveal that the doc­ Eisenhower and Nixon. Instead, the authors lines by claiming that Nixon went into tor met with the Vice President for several repeat the misinformation that “Eisenhower psychotherapy sessions with Dr. Arnold annual checkups and on a few other occa­ . . . never felt much warmth toward his Vice Hutschnecker, who, according to Summers, sions for stress-related illness. President.” They also state that the Ike had gave the impression that he was a practicing Time magazine editors Nancy Gibbs and Nixon fire cabinet members, even though he psychiatrist. The New York Times, a decade Michael Duffy, in The Presidents Club, looked never had that authority. later, blithely embraced Summers’ allega­ at the relationships among the Presidents Jeffrey Frank’s 2013 book Ike and Dick tions in Hutschnecker’s obituary. The news­ since Harry Truman. They include chapters magnifies the factual and interpretative er­ paper did not mention that the doctor was on Eisenhower’s association with Truman, rors. Frank is a well-respected journalist and not a board-certified psychiatrist and never Kennedy, and Lyndon Johnson, as well as novelist but untrained as a historian, and his claimed to be one, or that he testified un­ Nixon’s association with Johnson, Gerald book shows evidence of insufficient research. der oath at Senate and House hearings in Ford, Jimmy Carter, Ronald Reagan, and The small number and limited range of writ­ November 1973 that he had never treated George W. Bush. Although Ike spent more ten sources cited suggest that he may have Nixon for psychological or psychiatric time with Nixon than with the other three spent a month in the Eisenhower and Nixon

President Eisenhower delivering his Atoms for Peace speech before the U.N. General Assembly on December 8, 1953.

32 Prologue Fall 2015 President Eisenhower campaigning for reelection in 1956. Eisenhower had offered Nixon a cabinet post, but Nixon chose to run for a second term as Vice President. presidential libraries; each contains millions as well as he could without losing his integ­ eight years. At first they did not know each of documents that would take years to ex­ rity. The relationship that emerges is that of other’s strengths and weaknesses. As Nixon amine properly. In addition, Frank did not a son trying to win the affection of a distant, became familiar with how Ike governed, he cite any of the thousands upon thousands of bullying father. Ike’s opinion of Nixon, ac­ was better able to adapt the President’s ideas documents readily available on microfilm, in­ cording to Frank, changed over time “from to practical proposals and make himself a cluding Eisenhower’s diaries, legislative con­ the mild disdain that he felt for most politi­ trusted part of the administration. This evolv­ ferences, and cabinet meetings. On the basis cians to hesitant respect.” ing relationship is almost completely absent of the tiny sample he cites, Frank advanced Authors have routinely failed to under­ from most accounts. Instead, incorrect infor­ the proposition that the President could be stand that the relationship between the mation has been repeated for so long that it cold blooded or worse and that Nixon reacted President and Vice President matured over has been converted into fact.

To learn more about • Eisenhower’s health during the 1960 election, to go www.archives.gov/publications/prologue/2012/fall/. • The “thaw” bet ween Ike and Harr y Truman after both left the presidency, go to http://www.archives.gov/publications/prologue/2013/fall-winter/. • Historians’ evolving view of Franklin Roosevelt, go to www.archives.gov/publications/prologue/2006/winter/fdr-emerges.html.

Mr. President Prologue 33 Such regularly repeated anecdotes affirm the unsubstantiated argument that Ike and Nixon were at odds. In reality, the two men worked well together. Ike grew to have great confidence in his Vice President and had Nixon express opinions during crucial meet­ ings and summarize those of others. Nixon depended on the President to provide these opportunities and put forward his best ef­ fort to become the versatile utility player on Ike’s team. More than anyone else in the ad­ ministration, he understood the President’s intentions on many different fronts and be­ came an articulate spokesman for his poli­ cies. Because of Nixon’s desire to advance the President’s initiatives and because Eisenhower recognized his Vice President’s talents, Nixon gradually assumed a more diverse set of duties than anyone else in the administration. The President considered Nixon knowl­ Eisenhower grew to have great confidence in his Vice President, and allowed him to gradually assume a more diverse set of duties than anyone else in the administration. edgeable in political matters. He provided valuable advice regarding interaction between mate. In the second case, Ike suggested to the executive and Congress, and during the  Nixon months before the 1956 Republican two campaigns. Nixon initially tried to curb Earlier authors have relied on three inci­ convention that he take a cabinet post to gain McCarthy’s excesses, and when McCarthy dents to demonstrate Eisenhower’s low regard experience managing a large bureaucracy. The angered the President by attacking the Army, for Nixon. The first starts with the 1952 fund President did not demand that Nixon leave Nixon assisted in the White House’s quiet crisis; the second is the unsuccessful “dump the vice presidency but told him to make the but effective campaign against the senator. Nixon” drive spearheaded by White House decision he thought best. If Ike had wanted a The Vice President became the administra­ disarmament adviser Harold Stassen a month different running mate for his second term, he tion’s leading spokesman on the civil rights. before the 1956 Republican convention; certainly had the popularity to choose some­ He chaired the President’s Committee on the third came on August 24, 1960, when one else. He did not approve and certainly Government Contracts, advancing minority Eisenhower answered a reporter’s question never championed Stassen’s initiative. Nixon employment and education. He also regularly concerning what contribution Nixon made saw a cabinet post as a demotion that would spoke out for equal rights and helped push the to the administration by saying “If you give damage his political future, and he chose to Civil Rights Act of 1957 through the Senate. me a week, I might think of one.” The com­ run for reelection. Lastly, the accounts of the While in Congress, Nixon had been a com­ ment made front-page headlines. August 1960 press conference did not men­ mitted internationalist. As Vice President Written records of the time show clearly tion that the President was leaving the po­ he traveled to Asia, Latin America, Europe, that the general did not try to oust Nixon dium because that was his final question. He and Africa, became one of Ike’s most trusted from the 1952 ticket, and the stubborn fact stated that he would respond the following forward observers and matured into an ex­ that he was not removed should give pause to week; he did not disclose that he was feel­ pert on world affairs. The President briefed those who stress a theme of discord between ing poorly. No press conference was held the him before he left and debriefed him upon the two men. This is an example of the inco­ next week, and at the one that followed, no his return. Nixon relayed both his findings herence that bits of lingering mythology give reporter asked the President to comment on and his discussions with Ike to the National to the standard picture of Eisenhower: he is the Vice President’s value. After Ike made his Security Council and relevant cabinet mem­ now seen as a strong leader—yet too hapless intemperate remark, he apologized to Nixon. bers. He learned a great deal in his travels to influence the selection of his own running Authors have omitted that fact. and met many world leaders, with whom he

34 Prologue Fall 2015 remained in contact. He and Dulles became the second term, he recalled, the President points to a fundamentally different relation­ intimate friends and shared ideas on the dip­ had him substitute for him at cabinet and ship. Ike entered the presidency ready to lomatic initiatives. NSC meetings as well as participate in many lead. Nixon was eager to follow. P The President’s heart attack in 1955 has critical decisions. Ike, Nixon concluded, had © 2015 by Irwin F. Gellman received a great deal of attention. During his treated him “extremely well.” Due to linger­ recovery that fall and winter, Nixon assumed ing partisan bitterness and the Watergate Author added responsibilities. Already overworked, scandal, Nixon remains an easy target. The Irwin F. Gellman has taught at he grew weary and suffered from insomnia; fable that Ike limited Nixon’s role in the ad­ several American universities and is physicians prescribed barbiturates to relieve ministration and that the two were antago­ now an independent scholar living in the Philadelphia suburbs. His books his symptoms. No one knew how inca­ nistic toward each other has permitted the include The Contender, an account of Richard Nixon’s pacitated both the President and the Vice selective rehabilitation of Ike’s reputation congressional years; Secret Affairs,which explores the President were during this period. without requiring a similar reexamination of relationship between Franklin Roosevelt, Cordell Hull Even in this troubling situation, Ike Nixon’s, and this selectivity blocks an accu­ and Sumner Welles; and Good Neighbor Diplomacy and and Nixon worked well together. The Vice rate understanding of the Eisenhower presi­ Roosevelt and Batista, which look at U.S. policy in Latin President’s two military advisers were among dency. The enormous weight of the evidence American and Cuba from 1933 to 1945. the many who refuted the allegations of dis­ cord between the leaders. Robert Cushman, Note on Sources who handled national security matters for The collections in the Dwight D. Eisenhower Ike: The Memoirs of Attorney General Herbert the Vice President, recalled that he never Presidential Library in Abilene, Kansas, con­ Brownell (Lawrence: University Press of Kansas, heard Nixon say anything critical of the tain historical records and papers relating to 1993); William H. Chafe and Harvard Sitkoff, President. Nixon’s appointment secretary, President Eisenhower and his associates. For eds., History of Our Time: Readings on Postwar this work, the author consulted a letter from America (New York: Oxford University Press, Donald Hughes, reported that no animosity Virginia and Holmes Tuttle to Eisenhower 1983); William Costello, The Facts About existed between the leaders. re the Morison book, May 4, 1965, B 5, F Nixon: An Unauthorized Biography (New York: GI- 2T, 1965 Principle File, Post-Presidential Viking Press, 1960); Norman A. Graebner, The  Papers; Stephen Ambrose to Eisenhower, New Isolationism (New York: Ronald Press Co., Three months after leaving office, Nixon September 10 and October 15, 1964, B 24, F 1956); Neil Jumonville, Henry Steele Commager: Am(1), Principle File, Post-Presidential Papers; Midcentury Liberalism and the History of the commented in a letter to a constituent, Mrs. Meeting notes, April 17, 1956, B 2, F legislative Present (Chapel Hill: University of North Barbara Berghoefer, that while he did not meetings 1956 (2), Legislative Meeting Series; Carolina Press, 1999); Murray Kempton, “The know how history would view Ike, “for de­ Eisenhower to Gross, April 27, 1963, B 4, F Underestimation of Eisenhower,” Esquire 68 votion to duty, for unshakeable dedication “Hu,” Post-Presidential Papers; and the Robert (September 1967); Bela Kornitzer, Real Nixon: Cushman oral history. An Intimate Biography (New York: Rand to high moral principle, for a determination The Richard Nixon Library in Yorba Linda, McNally, 1960); John Malsberger, “Dwight always to serve what he regarded as the best California, contains Nixon’s letter to Barbara Eisenhower, Richard Nixon, and the Fund Crisis interests of all Americans—on each of these Berghoefer, April 21, 1961, B 237, Eisenhower of 1952,” The Historian 73 (Fall 2011); Earl scores, Mr. Eisenhower ranks with the great­ ½, Series 320, and the Oval Office tape for July Mazo, Richard Nixon: A Political and Personal est leaders our nation has ever had.” He was 21, 1971, conv. no. 541-2. Portrait (New York: Harper, 1959); Richard In addition to the works cited within the E. Neustadt, Presidential Power: The Politics of privileged to have worked with Ike and to text, published sources include Dean Albertson Leadership (New York: Wiley, 1960); Richard have learned “that real leadership is not a ed., Eisenhower as President (New York: Hill and Rayner, “Channelling Ike,” The New Yorker matter of florid words or action for its own Wang, 1963); Stephen E. Ambrose, Eisenhower, (April 26, 2010); James Reston, Sketches in the sake. It is, rather, the undeviating applica­ vol. 1: Soldier, General of the Army, President- Sand (New York: Knopf, 1967); Thomas E. Elect, 1890–1952, vol. 2: The President (New Ricks, The Generals: American Military Command tion of the basic principles to the shifting York: Simon and Schuster, 1983–1984), and From World War II to Today (New York: Penguin details of day-to-day problems.” To America: Personal Reflections of an Historian Press, 2012); Richard Rovere, Final Reports: Sitting in the Oval Office on July 21, (New York: Simon & Schuster, 2002); James Personal Reflections on Politics and History in Our 1971, more than two years after Eisenhower’s David Barber, The Presidential Character: Time (New York: Doubleday, 1984); Arthur death, President Nixon reflected on his role Predicting Performance in the White House Schlesinger, Jr., “Ike Age Revisited,” Reviews in (Englewood Cliffs, N.J.: Prentice-Hall, 1972); American History 11 (March 1983); and Arthur in that earlier administration. He believed Taylor Branch, Parting the Waters: America in M. Schlesinger, Jr., Journals, 1952–2000, ed. he had made a substantial contribution to the King Years, 1954–63 (New York: Simon and Andrew Schlesinger and Stephen Schlesinger solving a wide range of problems. During Schuster, 1988); Herbert Brownell, Advising (New York: Penguin Press, 2007).

Mr. President Prologue 35