Historian Michael Beschloss has written a new book, Presidential Courage: Brave Leaders and How They Changed America, 1789 -1989. The International Herald Tribune published a review of the book that's by Albert R. Hunt.To those dismayed about the state of the American presidency, which is many people in the United States and abroad, there is some small comfort: Michael Beschloss's new book on courageous leadership.
OK, a bit of a hint.Beschloss, a leading historian on the presidency, chronicles nine acts of brave statesmanship, from George Washington and John Adams avoiding war with England and France in the earliest days of the United States to Harry Truman's recognition of Israel and Ronald Reagan's dealings with Mikhail Gorbachev and the Soviet Union.
The book . . . is a companion to John F. Kennedy's 1956 work, Profiles in Courage, which chronicled great acts of political fortitude by eight members of Congress.
And may have been the work of a ghostwriter.. . . Beschloss captures the complexity and competing claims of presidential decision-making. In most of these instances, other choices would have been easier and politically safer - and devastatingly wrong.
Does the book include a profile in courage of the Hero of Tehran?Unattractive elements abound. Those who think politics is petty today might feel reassured after reading about Thomas Jefferson and Alexander Hamilton sniping at one another in the Washington and Adams sagas, or the towel-snapping banter between Franklin D. Roosevelt and Joseph Kennedy, the patriarch of the clan, who disliked and distrusted each other.
Many of these great men were duplicitous. Teddy Roosevelt leaked a false report about John D. Rockefeller to help his war against the trusts; four decades later, his cousin, Franklin, told the attorney general to ignore the U.S. Supreme Court when ordering secret, warrantless wiretapping.
So, let's cut to the chase.Without asking the author, I very much doubt this book is intended to give comfort to President George W. Bush's White House and its efforts to cite historical analogies to justify the unpopular war in Iraq.
I doubt Beschloss even had that in mind, asshat.In almost all of Beschloss's illustrations, the issues were hotly debated by powerful protagonists with a deeply involved president acutely aware of the stakes. None of those elements have been present in the current crisis.
Where was the hot debate when FDR chose to ignore the Supreme Court?It is difficult to see how in 20 or 30 years, in Beschloss's phrase, that the Iraq war will be seen "as not only daring but historically wise."
Like the predictions made by neocoMs about Ronald Reagan's decision to confront the Evil Empire?
