# Pres. Kennedy v. Pres. Johnson. **URL:** \ **Category:** Great Debates\ **Created:** [November 27, 2013, 10:03am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/pres-kennedy-v-pres-johnson/674906 "2013-11-27T10:03:48Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 19\ **Page:** 3
**Author:** ![Qin\_Shi\_Huangdi](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/q/f04885/32.png) [@Qin\_Shi\_Huangdi](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Qin_Shi_Huangdi)\ **Post date:** [November 28, 2013, 10:59pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/pres-kennedy-v-pres-johnson/674906/41 "2013-11-28T22:59:43Z")
> [@ralph124c](#): > > Did any of these guys launch a war that killed over 65,000 Americans, over 1,000,000 Vietnamese, and maimed hundreds of thousands for life? You are far too charitable with this monster (Johnson). I think Johnson did have something of a conscience…which is why he dropped out in 1968. LBJ didn’t “start” the Vietnam War-it had already been going on for a decade when LBJ deployed US troops in 1965. Also what’s up with you talking like Jane Fonda all of a sudden? ---
**Author:** ![puddleglum](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/puddleglum/32/137_2.png) [@puddleglum](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/puddleglum)\ **Post date:** [November 29, 2013, 2:28pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/pres-kennedy-v-pres-johnson/674906/42 "2013-11-29T14:28:42Z")
> [@Qin\_Shi\_Huangdi](#): > > The primary reason crime went up in this period was leaded gasoline. Not police tactics, not poverty, not birth-rates: [http://www.motherjones.com/environment/2013/01/lead-crime-link-gasoline](http://www.motherjones.com/environment/2013/01/lead-crime-link-gasoline) Lead in the environment was definetly a cause but most likely not the primary reason. From your cite the lead levels were the same in 1937 and 1986 but the violent crime rate twenty years later was 300% higher for 1986. The lead levels were the same in 1951 and 1963 but crime levels twenty years later were 44% higher. ---
**Author:** ![John\_Mace](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/john_mace/32/185_2.png) [@John\_Mace](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/John_Mace)\ **Post date:** [November 29, 2013, 2:40pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/pres-kennedy-v-pres-johnson/674906/43 "2013-11-29T14:40:58Z")
> [@Qin\_Shi\_Huangdi](#): > > LBJ didn’t “start” the Vietnam War-it had already been going on for a decade when LBJ deployed US troops in 1965. Also what’s up with you talking like Jane Fonda all of a sudden? True, but not really relevant to the point. He escalated the US’s involvement from a minor role to a major role. And largely on the fabricated Gulf of Tonke\in “Incident”. ---
**Author:** ![puddleglum](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/puddleglum/32/137_2.png) [@puddleglum](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/puddleglum)\ **Post date:** [November 29, 2013, 2:45pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/pres-kennedy-v-pres-johnson/674906/44 "2013-11-29T14:45:26Z")
> [@Little\_Nemo](#): > > If giving black people civil rights had been a politically valuable move then it would have happened decades earlier. Every politician wants votes. If you got free votes for helping black people, every President and every Congressmen back to the 1870’s would have been first in line to do it. > > Obviously that didn’t happen. Every politician saw that civil rights was an issue that cost you votes. That’s why even politicians who had no personal animosity towards black people avoided civil rights. > > Johnson was unique because he genuinely cared about civil rights, he was willing to pursue it despite being aware of the cost, and he was able to muscle Congress into enacting it. The civil rights bill of 1957 passed the house 285 to 126, it passed the Senate 72 to 18. The Civil rights bill of 1960 passed 311-109, and 71-18. Eisenhower was a very popular president who sent it troops to desegregate schools, desegregated the military, and signed in to law two civil rights bills. Civil rights bill by the late 1950s were very popular nationwide. What had always stopped civil rights bills before was Democrat party politics. FDR’s new deal coalition was between Southern Democrats had ruled practically unopposed since the end of reconstruction and the ethnic urban machines of the northern cities. Civil rights legislation had threatened this coalition and so Democrat pary bosses, including Johnson, had always maneuvered to keep those bills from being voted on. When Johnson was running in Texas he was always against civil rights, as soon as he had to run nationally he reversed course and became pro-civil rights. He managed to get the bill passed in an election year and won in a landslide. Civil rights legislation was a vote winning position nationally. ---
**Author:** ![John\_Mace](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/john_mace/32/185_2.png) [@John\_Mace](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/John_Mace)\ **Post date:** [November 29, 2013, 2:51pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/pres-kennedy-v-pres-johnson/674906/45 "2013-11-29T14:51:32Z")
Truman desegregated the military, not Eisenhower. ---
**Author:** ![puddleglum](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/puddleglum/32/137_2.png) [@puddleglum](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/puddleglum)\ **Post date:** [November 29, 2013, 2:55pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/pres-kennedy-v-pres-johnson/674906/46 "2013-11-29T14:55:02Z")
> [@Qin\_Shi\_Huangdi](#): > > LBJ didn’t “start” the Vietnam War-it had already been going on for a decade when LBJ deployed US troops in 1965. Also what’s up with you talking like Jane Fonda all of a sudden? US troop levels went from 900 in 1960 to 16,300 in 1963 to 184,000 in 1964, to 536,100 in 1968. The Vietnam war went from the US helping the South Vietnamese in a limited way to having half a million soldiers there, all under LBJ. This is despite the fact the LBJ did not believe they could win the war. ---
**Author:** ![puddleglum](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/puddleglum/32/137_2.png) [@puddleglum](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/puddleglum)\ **Post date:** [November 29, 2013, 3:02pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/pres-kennedy-v-pres-johnson/674906/47 "2013-11-29T15:02:21Z")
> [@John\_Mace](#): > > Truman desegregated the military, not Eisenhower. Truman issued the order, but five years later when Eisenhower became president the military was still not desegregated. Eisenhower implemented the order and in two years totally desegragated the military. ---
**Author:** ![Siam\_Sam](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/d78d45/32.png) [@Siam\_Sam](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Siam_Sam)\ **Post date:** [November 29, 2013, 3:11pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/pres-kennedy-v-pres-johnson/674906/48 "2013-11-29T15:11:11Z")
What many posters here have said syncs with one of my history profs. He said Kennedy’s getting killed was a shrewd move history-wise and that it was Johnson who did the heavy lifting afterward. If Johnson just hadn’t gotten into that whole Vietnam thing, he truly would be remembered as one of the greatest presidents, and a two-term president to boot. ---
**Author:** ![Dissonance](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/85f322/32.png) [@Dissonance](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Dissonance)\ **Post date:** [November 29, 2013, 5:15pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/pres-kennedy-v-pres-johnson/674906/49 "2013-11-29T17:15:21Z")
> [@puddleglum](#): > > Truman issued the order, but five years later when Eisenhower became president the military was still not desegregated. Eisenhower implemented the order and in two years totally desegragated the military. No he didn’t. The Army dragged its heels implementing desegregation, but the Korean War changed that. Eisenhower, who didn’t enter office until 1953, had nothing to do with it. [Cite](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Desegregation): > [@](#): > > At the end of June 1950, the Korean War broke out. The U.S. Army had accomplished little desegregation in peacetime and sent the segregated Eighth Army to defend South Korea. Most black soldiers served in segregated support units in the rear. The remainder served in segregated combat units, most notably the 24th Infantry Regiment. The first months of the Korean War were some of the most disastrous in U.S. military history. The North Korean People’s Army nearly drove the American-led United Nations forces off the Korean peninsula. Faced with staggering losses in white units, commanders on the ground began accepting black replacements, thus integrating their units. The practice occurred all over the Korean battle lines and proved that integrated combat units could perform under fire. The Army high command took notice. On July 26, 1951, the US Army formally announced its plans to desegregate, exactly three years after Truman issued Executive Order 9981. > [@Alessan](#): > > I think that it wasn’t for Vietnam Other than that, how was the play Mrs. Lincoln? You may consider Vietnam’s place in American history to be overblown, and you may even be right, but it was the defining and divisive event of the era, and it was LBJ who committed US combat units to Vietnam. Personally I think JFK would have as well had he not been assassinated; he certainly dramatically increased the number of US advisors, but that’s neither here nor there. ---
**Author:** ![John\_Mace](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/john_mace/32/185_2.png) [@John\_Mace](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/John_Mace)\ **Post date:** [November 29, 2013, 5:24pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/pres-kennedy-v-pres-johnson/674906/50 "2013-11-29T17:24:18Z")
Indeed. Maybe **Alessan** is too young to remember. I was 13 in 1969, so barely old enough to appreciate it myself, but those years make the Bush/Iraq years look like child’s play. Other than the civil rights struggle, I can’t think of anything that tore the US apart in the latter half of the 20th century like the Vietnam War. ---
**Author:** ![Little\_Nemo](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/little_nemo/32/3120_2.png) [@Little\_Nemo](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Little_Nemo)\ **Post date:** [November 29, 2013, 5:29pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/pres-kennedy-v-pres-johnson/674906/51 "2013-11-29T17:29:49Z")
> [@puddleglum](#): > > The civil rights bill of 1957 passed the house 285 to 126, it passed the Senate 72 to 18. The Civil rights bill of 1960 passed 311-109, and 71-18. Eisenhower was a very popular president who sent it troops to desegregate schools, desegregated the military, and signed in to law two civil rights bills. Civil rights bill by the late 1950s were very popular nationwide. Yes, as I recall there was a Senate Majority Leader in the late fifties who was really pushing for those bills. Seriously, Eisenhower was a good President. Maybe even a great President. But he never pushed for civil rights - it just wasn’t an issue he felt any connection to. Giving Eisenhower the primary credit for civil rights is as ignorant as giving him the primary blame for the Vietnam War - anyone making either of these arguments is distorting history to make a political point. ---
**Author:** ![puddleglum](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/puddleglum/32/137_2.png) [@puddleglum](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/puddleglum)\ **Post date:** [November 29, 2013, 7:50pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/pres-kennedy-v-pres-johnson/674906/52 "2013-11-29T19:50:20Z")
> [@Little\_Nemo](#): > > Yes, as I recall there was a Senate Majority Leader in the late fifties who was really pushing for those bills. > > Seriously, Eisenhower was a good President. Maybe even a great President. But he never pushed for civil rights - it just wasn’t an issue he felt any connection to. Giving Eisenhower the primary credit for civil rights is as ignorant as giving him the primary blame for the Vietnam War - anyone making either of these arguments is distorting history to make a political point. LBJ never pushed for civil rights bills when he was majority leader, from “Master of the Senate” page 955. he told another Senator: > [@](#): > > These Negroes, they’re getting pretty uppity these days and that’s a problem for us since they’ve got something now they never had before, the political pull to back up their uppityness. Now we’ve got to do something about this, we’ve got to give them a little something, just enough to quiet them down, not enough to make a difference. For if we don’t move at all, then their allies will line up against us and there’ll be no way of stopping them, we’ll lose the filibuster and there’ll be no way of putting a brake on all sorts of wild legislation. It’ll be Reconstruction all over again." It is to his credit he saw the way the wind was blowing, but it doesn’t mean he was pushing for the bill. Unlike Eisenhower, who did push for that bill and the Civil Rights bill of 1960, and the desegregation of Washington DC, and the desegregation of the military which was not accomplished unitl 1954 ---
**Author:** ![Siam\_Sam](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/d78d45/32.png) [@Siam\_Sam](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Siam_Sam)\ **Post date:** [November 29, 2013, 11:08pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/pres-kennedy-v-pres-johnson/674906/53 "2013-11-29T23:08:28Z")
From [Wikipedia](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Executive_Order_9981), we see: **“The last of the all-black units in the United States military was abolished in September 1954.”** and: **“Kenneth Claiborne Royall, Secretary of the Army since 1947, was forced into retirement in April 1949 for continuing to refuse to desegregate the Army nearly a year after President Truman’s Order.”** Now, just because the _last_ of the all-black units was abolished in 1954, that does not mean the entire military was suddenly desegregated in 1954. Rather it was the end of an ongoing process. And if Truman forced out the Army secretary in 1949 for dragging his heels on desegregation, it would be very unusual to replace him with someone who would do the same. I think _puddleglum_ is giving Eisenhower too much credit and Truman too little. Sort of reminds me of the staunch Reagan supporter back in the 1980s who was angry at the Democrats for limiting presidential terms and even angrier at me when I pointed out it was the Republicans who pushed through the term limit. He could not stand this “slight” on his beloved Republicans and let me know so in no uncertain terms. This wouldn’t be something along those lines, now would it? ---
**Author:** ![Dissonance](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/85f322/32.png) [@Dissonance](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Dissonance)\ **Post date:** [November 30, 2013, 12:12am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/pres-kennedy-v-pres-johnson/674906/54 "2013-11-30T00:12:06Z")
> [@puddleglum](#): > > Unlike Eisenhower, who did push for that bill and the Civil Rights bill of 1960, and the desegregation of Washington DC, and the desegregation of the military which was not accomplished unitl 1954 Wrong, as has already been pointed out to you. To reiterate, The Army dragged its heels implementing desegregation, but the Korean War changed that. Eisenhower, who didn’t enter office until 1953, had nothing to do with it. [Cite](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Desegregation): > [@](#): > > At the end of June 1950, the Korean War broke out. The U.S. Army had accomplished little desegregation in peacetime and sent the segregated Eighth Army to defend South Korea. Most black soldiers served in segregated support units in the rear. The remainder served in segregated combat units, most notably the 24th Infantry Regiment. The first months of the Korean War were some of the most disastrous in U.S. military history. The North Korean People’s Army nearly drove the American-led United Nations forces off the Korean peninsula. Faced with staggering losses in white units, commanders on the ground began accepting black replacements, thus integrating their units. The practice occurred all over the Korean battle lines and proved that integrated combat units could perform under fire. The Army high command took notice. On July 26, 1951, the US Army formally announced its plans to desegregate, exactly three years after Truman issued Executive Order 9981. The **last** all-black unit of the US Army was formally deactivated in 1954. Desegregation began in 1950 in Korea, and the formal plan by the US Army to desegregate was enacted on July 26, 1951. It had nothing to do with Eisenhower at all. ---
**Author:** ![Little\_Nemo](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/little_nemo/32/3120_2.png) [@Little\_Nemo](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Little_Nemo)\ **Post date:** [November 30, 2013, 1:44am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/pres-kennedy-v-pres-johnson/674906/55 "2013-11-30T01:44:57Z")
> [@puddleglum](#): > > LBJ never pushed for civil rights bills when he was majority leader, from “Master of the Senate” page 955. he told another Senator: > > It is to his credit he saw the way the wind was blowing, but it doesn’t mean he was pushing for the bill. Unlike Eisenhower, who did push for that bill and the Civil Rights bill of 1960, and the desegregation of Washington DC, and the desegregation of the military which was not accomplished unitl 1954 Are you serious? You have probably just made the worst cite in the history of the internet. Congratulations. Lyndon Johnson’s efforts to pass the Civil Right Act of 1957 was the main subject of _Master of the Senate_. Robert Caro wrote a 1200 page book about how Johnson pushed for civil rights and it’s obvious you’ve never read it. ---
**Author:** ![Qin\_Shi\_Huangdi](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/q/f04885/32.png) [@Qin\_Shi\_Huangdi](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Qin_Shi_Huangdi)\ **Post date:** [November 30, 2013, 4:25am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/pres-kennedy-v-pres-johnson/674906/56 "2013-11-30T04:25:15Z")
> [@puddleglum](#): > > US troop levels went from 900 in 1960 to 16,300 in 1963 to 184,000 in 1964, to 536,100 in 1968. The Vietnam war went from the US helping the South Vietnamese in a limited way to having half a million soldiers there, all under LBJ. This is despite the fact the LBJ did not believe they could win the war. Which doesn’t equate with starting the war. And I agree that sending troops to Vietnam was a mistake. ---
**Author:** ![drewtwo99](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/d07c76/32.png) [@drewtwo99](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/drewtwo99)\ **Post date:** [November 30, 2013, 10:04am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/pres-kennedy-v-pres-johnson/674906/57 "2013-11-30T10:04:44Z")
Lots of people who came around to civil rights eventually had said really terrible things about blacks and segregation. These men were products of their time. Their views evolved, and many of them worked their whole lives to try and undo the horrible things they said and did when they were younger. I think Johnson probably fits that bill, if he really did talk about uppity blacks and getting damn niggers to vote for Democrats for 200 years. That being said, I hope my comments were not trying to minimize Vietnam. I think it is single handedly the worst mistake our country ever made (other than slavery if you consider that a single event type thing). I don’t know the entire history of how responsible Johnson was for all that went wrong, for the draft, etc, but you can’t dump all the blame on him. As others mentioned, it seemed Kennedy was headed that direction already. ---
**Author:** ![septimus](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/septimus/32/410_2.png) [@septimus](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/septimus)\ **Post date:** [November 30, 2013, 3:34pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/pres-kennedy-v-pres-johnson/674906/58 "2013-11-30T15:34:18Z")
> [@drewtwo99](#): > > I don’t know the entire history of how responsible Johnson was for all that went wrong, for the draft, etc, but you can’t dump all the blame on him. LBJ had grave misgivings about that War, but eventually followed the lead of key advisers, such as McNamara (an auto executive) and Bundy (who spent WWII as a young intelligence officer). _Dwight D. Eisenhower, OTOH, was a man who had seen the dangers and costs of war first-hand._ Ike’s Presidency was preceded by the Korean War and followed by Vietnam but the eight years under Ike were relatively tranquil. \* I do not think that was a coincidence.\* ---
**Author:** ![John\_Mace](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/john_mace/32/185_2.png) [@John\_Mace](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/John_Mace)\ **Post date:** [November 30, 2013, 4:18pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/pres-kennedy-v-pres-johnson/674906/59 "2013-11-30T16:18:06Z")
> [@septimus](#): > > LBJ had grave misgivings about that War, but eventually followed the lead of key advisers, such as McNamara (an auto executive) and Bundy (who spent WWII as a young intelligence officer). I don’t think “auto executive” fairly describes McNamara in this context. From his bio on wikipedia: _…he entered the USAAF as a captain in early 1943, serving most of World War II with its Office of Statistical Control. One major responsibility was the analysis of U.S. bombers’ efficiency and effectiveness, especially the B-29 forces commanded by Major General Curtis LeMay in India, China and the Mariana Islands.[12] McNamara established a statistical control unit for XX Bomber Command and devised schedules for B-29s doubling as transports for carrying fuel and cargo over The Hump. He left active duty in 1946 with the rank of lieutenant colonel and with a Legion of Merit._ Not that I disagree with you about the war, but let’s not pretend McNamara was just some auto executive fresh from Detroit. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/pres-kennedy-v-pres-johnson/674906.md?page=2)