tv John F. Kennedys White House Campaign CSPAN July 17, 2017 12:00am-1:31am EDT
he talks about it as an experiment. rather, i think he wanted his readers to first have the sort awed response to the remarkable facts of man and nature the way thoreau put it. if leaders take that away that was good enough for him. if they thought about the relationship between what they do to to get living and what their life consists of, then i think he would've counted that as success. >> our city's staff recently traveled to massachusetts to
learn about its rich history. learn more at c-span.org/citiestour. you are watching american history tv at a weekend every weekend -- a weekend of the -- on c-span3. >> next former boston globe journalist discuss their book the road to camelot. inside jfk's five-year campaign. the john f. kennedy presidential library marks the centennial of the 45th presidency. -- the 40 grit residents birth. >> welcome, we are so thrilled you are all here. this is part of our centennial activities. this is part of the special week of activities. i am the executive director of the john f. kennedy library foundation. on behalf of all of my colleagues at the library we are thrilled that all of you are here. you are in for a special treat tonight.
before i talk about the book there is a couple of things first. first to thank our sponsors for tonight and for upstairs. the bank of america, and our media sponsors the boston globe. in addition to tonight in your chair is a brochure of different activities. as you know one week from today the actual birthday for jfk we will be having a variety of things happening. that will all be on the schedule. we also want to welcome those who are watching this streaming or those who are on c-span. we appreciate that as well. after the presentation tonight our authors will have a meet and greet. you can also have books for sale and the gift shop that they will
be signing. this is a treasure. this book is a treasure. i know a little bit about this. when i read this and i saw how they put together their deep research and told a fascinating story of the road to camelot inside jfk's five-year campaign. before i introduce the authors i want to welcome back ellen fitzpatrick. she is both a moderator and a scholar in so many ways. each of these three i could tell so much about their background. i will just do a few sentences. ellen is a professor of history at the university of new hampshire. she has written eight books including many bestsellers.
thomas is a pulitzer prize journalist. he has been reported for the globe for 40 years. as the author of the book he was named as one of 50 most influential journalist by washington magazine. curtis was a national correspondent for the globe who now teaches journalism in mississippi. he covered a presidential campaigns. he also served as a white house correspondent. they have so much knowledge between them, please welcome the three of them. thank you so much. >> i feel like a school marmot with my two pupils over here. good thing classes over because they were actually nervous.
yet out the academic historian being here, this is such a wonderful book. many suspect we are ready no bid how many of you remember the 1960 campaign? quite a few of you. i can tie you that you do not know anything about it. you will learn so much. as i did it is absolutely fascinating. i have had the advantage of reading the book and i am sure most of you have not. i thought instead of drilling these two i would really ask some open ended questions to give you a sense of what the story is and that way they have to tell about this remarkable campaign. in some sense i think the
punchline is given away in the subtitle. this was a five-year undertaking with a very young john f. kennedy. when we think about the 1960 campaign i think very few people appreciate that it began as early as it did. that kennedy set his sights on the presidency as early as he did, and that it was as methodical as it was. very instrumental not only and getting him to the white house but it affected his time in the senate. it affected the whole political world that we inhabit today. this was one of these really transformative moments in american political history. that is my plug for you guys. >> you know what is coming now. i want you to begin by telling
all of our wonderful attendees tonight what i learned when i get to the acknowledgments which is how this came about. >> i guess i can start with my beginning, i was fascinated by the 1956 democratic convention which i watched as a teenager in mississippi. there was such drama in that campaign with and lie stephenson , an example of his indecisiveness. instead of taking his own running mate and doing to the convention. and enormous fight which went on with some very prominent democrats in new york from tennessee.
they ultimately won the nomination and there was this unheard of senator from massachusetts senator kennedy. it was a brawl, it was the last time the convention have multiple people. john davis to 100 some ballots. it is fascinating, i did some work and i would to the kennedy library in 2002 and i did some research and interviewed some people who are no longer with us. dollar,ike john siggins and i had a postal.
no publisher was interested. i finally got an audience with associatedwho was with simon and schuster, i pitched it to her first. she stared at me and said it's not big enough. i packed up all of my notes and then i went home and fast-forward about four years -- about 12 years later. >> i was visiting curtis in oxford. i started talking about ted sorensen, who is a major figure. i think one of the last people in the game who combined intellectual work on the developments of ideas and formulation of policy on one hand and their expression in terms of rhetoric. i have been on this stage more times than i care to recall over
the years. still he would argue to the both of us that no one had ever taken the time to look at how this improbable event happened. let the ideas and the thinking was that went into it. and how they were adjusted and unfolding. out of them there came this idea and computers made it possible for us to practically live here and see what the record actually showed. >> it is interesting because many of you probably read the -- theater whites book on the making of a president. i think the 1960 book is the best of those. yet the story that he tells, and
i assign that to my students and now i will now assign your book. i teach a seminar on kennedy's presidency. in assigning that book they do not even get it. they do not get how this whole process works. the whole political culture of our country in some ways there is continuity and other ways there is a tremendous amount of change. >> that book changed the way political reporting went. everyone was influenced by that book. it was if book that came out in 1960. we became friends and we went out of our way to emulate. we start in 19 -- 1955 maybe
1956. we don't get the 19th 60 until halfway into our book. i would like to thank he was a influence and us writing this book. >> it is a very different approach that you have taken. i think a extremely rich one. before we get into the granular artifice. i wondered about your view on kennedy going into the book versus your view once you researched and put this piece into play. for me, my sense of him changed after reading your book. i wondered if your state as well. >> now that he is 100 -- [laughter] >> if only. >> to put that in perspective 100 years ago now american kids were being shipped to fight in world war i.
a little water has come under him since then. i did not have any appreciation for kennedy is a politician. one of the dangers of something like the making of a president is that it is one way of looking at a presidential campaign and it is a narrative. he went to milwaukee and said next and is a nut job or some other epicenter. then he would go to new york and there were all these people on broadway and his voice boomed in the canyons and that people would vote. it is a narrative. we took the approach heavily influenced in my case that a presidential campaign is a series of benchmarks.
a series of decisions about how to face the country and then they play out. the thing to focus on in that school of thought are these benchmarks and they are just a little unusual about how we looked at the five years together. >> what about you, curtis? >> i think is a better though i think i was so prized about ways the joe reception of civil rights and that he did that doxsee issue the court at some of the worst southern politicians. there were letters back and forth with george wallace and helping and the gubernatorial campaign. he walked a tightrope between the south and what you needed for a vote.
in doing that he and dangers his standing among african-american voters. it is a very interesting approach that he took on this issue. he was a real latecomer on civil rights. only at the very end did he have a dramatic part of the book. >> we ran into this ambivalence i guess you would say on several topics. cuba, many of the domestic issues. you cannot speculate about other peoples's motives. we were brought up in journalism believing that is not something you should do. with kennedy what makes him so challenging is that you see him approach a issue like say french
colonialism in africa. or even health care among older people. you are trying to separate out the political from the substantive. with kennedy they are so blended that it becomes a challenge. all you can do is say how he approached the issue and how he did. as well as other people advised him. there is always this mixture. >> it seemed to me that the democratic party there was once a time a solid democratic cell. -- democratic south. from that time forward most presidents had to deal with this unless they were attentive to the civil rights when it was not
on the radar screen for american presidents and in national politics was how to finesse this. really that became very difficult in the 20th century world. and i was wondering to what extent did you feel that was specific to kennedy, the president was going to get elected that did not try to straddle that fence, it does not make it admirable? >> i think the movement really started in 1955 with rosa parks refusing to go to the back of the bus. and there is that time with we are writing about. it is where the civil rights movement really a merged. eisenhower really did not have to worry about it. truman worried about segregating
the military. it was not at the forefront of the nation at this time. >> being a old hack journalist i rely on oversimplification. i think the trick with kennedy and civil rights is that the end would be martin luther king jr. with a further air's urgency of now. it takes a little bit more effort to take respect for kennedy's approach which i would say is the fears urgency of how. it is a different challenge. watching him change and he did change. as time wore on in the campaign
there are moments in the spring of 19 65 when he realized he would not get much help. on the other hand the movement has been heating up and thinks it been happening. we have found a guy who is working for walter reuther in the united auto care workers. all of a sudden one day kennedy stood up and said if i have the quote right, damaged the negroes are right. that was his approach to the issue. he was still straddling, he was very frustrated. on the other hand you can see this. >> you tell the story of how other democratic politicians are trying to navigate these waters after the brown decision. it becomes unavoidable after 1954. in your narrative you show that kennedy and johnson both struggled with how to respond to
this burgeoning civil rights movement and it is like pulling them along. if you go back early enough you are showing little rock and how they are being changed by both the pressure of the civil rights movement and the massive resistance to segregation occurring. kennedy and that larger story comes out i would say not entirely favorably. trying to find his way. >> ultimately he came out taking a direct path that he did. as president a got even better. >> use a -- you show the courtship of deep powerful southern democrats that would bedevil him through his administration.
there is a traditional view of kennedy's life and politics that his quest for the presidency was imposed upon by a overbearing father. with his brother dying in the world war, it was only trajectory for him. i think he was blasted out of the water by your study where you tell a much more complicated story. it is a story about a in different congressmen and a not very effective senator. somehow that changes, it changes early. then he suddenly decides that the presidency is the thing to go for. he talks a little bit about what were the moments there. >> the volume opens, there is not a actual moment.
the only cardiac double-header in the history of american politics. lyndon johnson followed by the heart attacks. his father comes right into it, he has this notion that eisenhower may not run again. what should happen is despite these heart attacks that he will bankroll it and his son would be the running mate. a preposterous idea, of course. johnson dismissed it out of hand. that is the moment when you see kennedy reacting to politics.
there is this look at the vice presidential nomination. it starts there. from that moment in the fall of 1955 every time he was faced with some issue that makes it impossible to know if you are going to go forward or backwards always forward. >> one of my favorites moments from the fall of 1955, one of the things we used to do is in a presidential election year. we would speculate about the running mate. in the spring of 1955 there was a item in newsweek where they had a lot of gossip. there was a list and mention on that list were running mates for stevenson. kennedy's name was on that list. this intrigued in the hell out of him. he called the editor at newsweek -- a reporter many of us knew and asked who is doing the mentioning. the reporter said me. which is how we used to do it.
you would pull one of these lists out of thin air and then all of a sudden somebody was being mentioned for this list. as we talked before the book listening and a couple of years ago he had this ambition that had nothing to do with ideology, we are certain of that. he did not want to run minimum wage or achieve world peace. he had this off the record conversation on a tape which was found any years later about wanting to be in the arena and be in the center of things and deal with the huge issues of the day. obviously making a difference in a positive direction that it is being there and being in the most important spot. from the tape recording it is like the harvard-yale game. a odd parochial reference for him.
i think it sums up what the nature of his ambition was. in other words he ran for president because he could. >> he was seeking the presidency at a time when it was changing in american political life and becoming a much more important institution than it had been certainly in the 19th century. it becomes this cult of the presidency by the 1950's and 60's when it is seen as the master institution into the political life. i wonder to what extent did that 1956 experience of getting really be seen as a credible candidate to be back close to the presidency make him think i could actually do this. how important do you think that was?
>> i think in the 1956 convention even though he lost he come out of it is this attractive young guy who people would sit up and notice for the first time. that was clear. in the beginning and surely there after there was a meeting down at the place in palm beach. i'm sorry, it was in cape cod. poppa joe and jack would turn on the tv and decided he would run and announced it to the family. they announce he was going to run formerly. things were already going on. for all of the years that i worked and people had never heard about this. it was urged by dave powers and
he said if you really want to be a player you have got to get control of your own state party. having a knockdown drag it out for all in which kennedy's people seize control of the party. they took control of this onion farmers party, much of the material he found comes from a old boston globe account of this battle. that led to the 1956 convention. by the time all of that was in place and his aides were clearly for it.
he had talked with ted a lot about it in the office early. aat he thought he could be formidable candidate. >> i don't want a single person to leave tonight without knowing burke.nions this is a great story. he was from western massachusetts. i am i going to tell the story but what of the wonderful things in the book is the way in which all of these figures in politics who were in the shadows of history coming to the forefront. kennedy emerges as a really hard-nosed scrapper in this. he as he attempts to gain control. >> he manages to show just the right amount of phony reluctance. to get dragged into this thing. at the last minute he says ok, i will break guys legs.
also what made it such a entertaining thing is that there are these two aspects. first off the final moments that occurred on a weekend coincided with the wedding of his sister. you have the next president of the united states going back-and-forth on this shuttle and the same day. he went to saint patrick and solemnly help her get married and that he would get back in the shuttle and go back up to boston to help his henchmen bust some chops. that would go on all day, it is like one of those old comedies. the other thing was there was a national element where they got kennedy's participation.
it was the advice from his pals they you cannot go to the national scene without controlling your own. that got his attention. although it to this fight he was very careful behind the scenes to keep stevenson informed all the way through. i am sure that stevenson was appalled with what he was hearing. on the other hand he had to sit up and take notice. >> father joe was also involved. he said do not get involved with those hacks and you will spoil your hands. it is dreadful. he ignored his father's advice. >> they were counting delegates in this point of the game. >> even better than that. one person and think and we had donahue who passed away, he was a bona fide member of the party. his job the day of the vote was
counting. which is a very important job in politics. if it is the old hotel and downtown, the meeting was being conducted at a ballroom that was just covered with mirrors all the way around. technically they were a secret ballot. so he told us that he positioned himself using the mirrors so that every time a member of that state committee marked a ballot for the chairman it was behind recording the vote. one thing about the family is that they were very attentive to detail. it was a hallmark of one of
their operations. even in 1956 they do not know every member of the state committee. >> at this point the kennedy organization -- much as been written about it. the attempt to bring and family and how bobby kennedy was so capable and strategic. the creation and even at the present level of tracking all of these people. this old-style politics, it is interesting the storyteller's we needed to create this infrastructure of their own outside of the party. in that sense they anticipate to some degree i think the insurgent candidacy of our own
time. i wondered if you could say a little bit about that. >> it goes other way back to his first congressional campaign in 1946 were people were ready for that seat. they went out and basically they started early. they formed these close independent avenues such as it was and they had loyalists in the precincts. they did the same thing when he ran statewide. kennedy had his leaders called secretaries instead of executive director or chair or whatever. not to sound egalitarian but they were totally independent. he did it again when he ran for reelection in 1958. he did the same thing when he
went national. they changed up the whole party structure and party bosses. the old man felt that 40 bosses could do at the nomination. he would say all you have to do is cozy up to tammany hall and these people. that's all you have to do. they ignored him and they created the very first grassroots campaign. then it was emulated by various people throughout it -- 1964, 1972 to 1934, 1976 and he goes all the way to donald trump. >> it was necessary for kennedy to go this route, right?
because of the liability -- >> it is so hard to understand that to call him a underdog was an exaggeration in 1959. the number of people who saw this coming was a very short list. the reason was is that he broke the rules. it is outside the party. just because everybody since then has done it. he was the first to run this way. he was viewed inside the party is a indifferent democrat. from time to time he could be a little bit republican with his conservatism. sided with- he president eisenhower on cultural
issues that created problems for him that lasted through the presidential campaign. acenik at all. he started off with his foreign-policy approach. and we devote a entire chapter to that. they made all of that work unnecessary. he said kennedy was stevenson with balls. it may be a little gross but it is accurate. >> he was also a catholic. he was 42 years old. by your description he had not done much to distinguish himself as senator. this is a moment when the democratic elite, the primaries are nowhere near as important in 19 50 as they have become in our
time. yet he was forced into the primaries. >> the primaries are only one side of the story. kennedy accepted the challenge, but of having all of them. in addition to the remedies he -- in addition to the primaries, he did something that no one else it done before he had a holster on his staff. lou harris was hired in 1957 and through his research in the states including those who are not holding primaries kennedy that he could use in states that were not having primaries to attract support. so while he slept all the primaries he also got states simply because he was able to
take the numbers in some of his office and say you really ought to support me and say i will come into your jurisdiction and kick your ass. and it work. again and again. i think our favorite example is the state of arizona which under normal circumstances you never would have expected kennedy to win the nomination. lyndon johnson thought he had it because he was senior and most revered at the time. we discovered that by 1960 karo -- carl hayden would have had trouble fixing a parking ticket. there were these two brothers in tucson stewart and mo and he built a campaign around these mavericks. arizona had these conventions
and he was able to get the vote even though he never should. >> another example of the people that are brought in to the center of american political history really making these things happen are figures of the time. let's go to lyndon johnson and how johnson is his vice president it is one of those historians that have written about this and there are many versions of this is where our people writing about it. people say kennedy had no intention of picking lbj, that this was the sort of gesture that was made to offer the vice presidency. much to his regret johnson accepted. he was certain that he would turn it down. others say that is not so. i think one man suggested that kennedy and his brother may have been at on.
robert kennedy was no fan of lbj. jfk saw the merit of picking lbj, you guys come out somewhere in the middle of that. you do show what a chaotic event that it was. >> we hope we did, our version is tough because you are to separate narratives and different sides. with lbj and there is this selection of the kennedy people. there is a lot of information in this building about it. we are convinced that kennedy went to the convention clearly to pick stewart simon who we were able to talk to at the time
and they talked about how they had been told essentially both kennedys had leaked the choice to reporters that they liked. suddenly you are right, kennedy did think lbj would not accept. he was a natural. he helped deliver in the south. they did not think lbj would do it, and therefore they did not want to offer it to him. so kennedy gets a nomination and goes back to his house in los angeles and is having a late breakfast or whatever. in message comes in from lbj saying from now on, lbj stands
for let's back jack. jack begins to think. ok, this guy has control of twentysomething electoral vote and can certainly help in the south. it becomes very chaotic. he goes back to the hotel, how many electoral votes are there if we add texas. he said you are not going to do this. because crazy in a private bathroom arguing. he says you can't do this. bobby kennedy despised lbj. the scene at the hotel becomes
incredibly dramatic. you finish the tale. >> kennedy bungled this because he should have known that johnson's attitude towards the vice presidency was also dogmatic. there were plenty of signs along the way that somebody who is paid better attention to the situation would have realized there was a chance here. kennedy dogmatically told the story of flying to los angeles did he flew commercially. one of the people who sat on the trip was tony bradley. kennedy was under orders not to talk at that point because of
his voice. they were scrambling messages back and forth so what about johnson they said, is scribble comes back he will never take it. he was wrong and he should have known better. when he came back up from the private one on one with johnson and says you are not going to believe this. he really wants this. at that point our narrative is picked up by bobby kennedy. now again, here is a genius historian and we are up there and we are looking at 1600 pages of bobby kennedy and there are several pages of them after the president was murdered. all of them say the material is not to be used until bobby kennedy is dead of course not realizing what is going to happen. this is an narrative fashion,
one of the things kennedy is how to do is forget to put verbs and the sentence and make it a logistical and then every once in a while they will speak in absolutely crystal clear sentences. bobby kennedy was speaking very deliberately. he said it was the most indecisive. we made a promise that we would never talk about this to anybody ever. we take johnson back and forth and we decided that we did not want to. we decided that we did not want. jfk have a condition. johnson has to be happy, he has to be willingly part of the national effort because it is awful. bob kennedy narrative ends if we made the decision to try to get
rid of him and it just did not work. that is about as directed quotas you can have. there is no evidence to the contrary. grexit tells that story about trying to talk him out of it. he says he has this hang dog look great he said nobody has ever looked as sad as lbj. his eyes would fill up with tears. bobby kennedy saying this is kind of beneath you. i want to do it. >> that description is dripping with contempt from bobby kennedy. not to use a four letter word, they are trying to convince johnson to take something else. bobby kennedy says senator
johnson, you can be chairman for the democratic party. in the room is sam rayburn, speaker of the house and great friend and confidant of lbj, he did not like kennedy either. he looked at him and said shit. it got very nasty. the choice which with hindsight looks rational, even though it wasn't at time. consequences,he in places like vietnam, dallas and ultimately los angeles. they did not want to do it. they did it because they felt they had to. that is how we know about kennedy, he felt he had to. but last question bob kennedy dealt with in the 1600 page thing, could you have one without it? no.
>> i think that is probably right. >> i have a couple of more questions before we turn to the audience. what is your take on the kennedy nixon debate which is releasing as when the tide turns. everything begins going his way. you have a different story about this. you argued that it was not as a decisive win for kennedy. >> having people see it more of kennedy as a presence yes. beyond that most of the work on the debate has been overstated. we did see some things that have not been looked at before. one of the most important is that after each of the debates
for the first time there had not been debates before. after each of the debates scores of people went around the country to build a national sample of 700 cases after each debate. he spent the first day collecting the material and then analyzing it. what he found was that the public thought he would be great. it helps if you speak in complete sentences and look at the camera. people reacted to that. yes, nixon looked like he had been sleeping under a highway for a week read the numbers were so what. the horse race it did not budge a millimeter.
between the first and the second one and the first in the fourth wanted. hardly moved. we also looked into a example of something that gets repeated because it is true. nixon was fantastic and the radio and kennedy was then tested on television. that is exactly what happened. there is no evidence to support that contention. there was a audience survey that was not published until after the election. some indication shows the radio listeners tended to be more rural and more conservative. nixon was very good in the debates. he had points and counterpoints, that country was divided. there was cold war strength. right down the middle he made
some analogies in the general election to guys on a tear eeter-totter. t of course in those three or four months the things would move one inch or two in some way. that is it. debates need to be re-examined in that context because they are not the key to the election. >> it helps to explain how close the election was. kennedy one by like 1/10 of a percent of the popular vote, it is a amazing turn and one would of assumed it would not be so close. >> it was an incredibly close election. some of us forget that. >> the impact of television and advertising, this is the election we begin to see much of the modern faces of presidential politics. the story you tell is a remarkable hybrid of this
old-fashioned democratic precinct level organizing and this new moment where kennedy walks into as our first television president and this whole political career will really be affected by this. >> one of the things we bumped into which we have notice for decades was a very receptive look at politics from 1960. the writers thought that if they could show you what somebody was really like even though there was the danger of lying. there was a book on john kennedy, they put stuff all over the place. this was one of the things they did. it was astonishing. >> it was because of what he
said. is is a force for good or not? the role of television was undoubtably played from now on on americans taking the presidency. he said ultimately that will depend on the people. he says there is no question that it is going to give people a better sense of who the individual is. whether they then make the right decisions, this really is going to be a test of our democracy. jfk was saying this before he had ever become president. it is really kind of a remarkable thing. the other question that i wanted to ask before we open it up to the audience is the democratic party struggling a bit to find its way forward in the era of president trump. are there any lessons to be
learned from this, we always say like to tell our students they you are going to study history and you are going to take away important lessons from this did if those who are making the big decisions in the democratic party is there anything they can take away from the story that is relevant to our current moment. part is a detail about the past? >> it is when senator kirk is in the room. >> it is intimidating to be sitting here in front of governor weldon on one hand and a senator on another. either party. >> i think your observation is bipartisan. one thing we took away and it has to do with how kennedy operates. it is not chic but it is the limits of ideology. kennedy wanted to be in the room.
between the 40 yard lines he thought it was possible to move the country forward. so the minimum wage goes up in the first increment by not as much. or you have to tell a jim crow politician that he will not send any troops to the south for the first year grade how do you move the needle forward? when you see a political practitioner as good as kennedy was it makes you wonder if you have to be fewer all the time ideologically to move the country forward. >> interesting. i do not know how you ever factor in looking and evaluating at all of these different variables but you touch on this with your story how you factor
kennedy himself out because he was such a remarkable and political figure. he has this capacity to connect with the way that he did. there was something that people really responded to. i wondered, it you take the relative father's money and the media polling, the primaries, handing out money and west virginia. all of this, without that candidate with there have been a victory? >> i was a junior in college in 1960 and it was the first time i ever heard the word charisma. that is because he had such charisma. richard nixon did not have charisma. lbj did not have charisma but jack kennedy had charisma. i think i think that could've possibly tipped the balance.
plus he was smart as hell. >> here is something to close on. it is an ethical question in part. we look forever to figure out how much it costs to buy a boat te in westa vo virginia. we really worked on this. we finally got a little help from a man who was the point man on the company. as near as he could tell from dealing with that sheriff if you wanted a vote in the west virginia primary it is a tradition down there. it costs two dollars and a half pint of branded whiskey. if you used moonshine that was
a full pint. if that is what you want out of the west virginia primaries that is all it took. kennedy did it. >> papa joe sent money and suitcases, cash and suitcases into west virginia two keep under hotel beds. lbj was sending money to try to head off the kennedys. there is this money pouring into west virginia. it was probably the most dramatic of all primaries in west virginia. >> one of the paradoxes that is normal and politics is that kennedy became a early supporter of campaign financing. it was one of his early legislative maneuvers was advancing this idea. >> he was on the verge of converting and then he would say i'm ready that not just yet.
>> there is a wonderful democratic committee woman who had a wonderful passage where she was lighting up the candidates in the democratic primary she compared them to various barnyard animals. she said that lyndon johnson was a rooster and hubert humphrey was a duckling. i forget she may have said simonton was an owl, then she said john f. kennedy is a cardinal. i thought that was a wonderful touch to have that flash of red. and that really call to -- catapulted him into the center of american politics in american history. so, we have some microphones if you would like to come up and ask a question of our two authors.