The Unmaking of the President
Lyndon Johnson believed that his withdrawal from the 1968 presidential campaign would free him to solidify his legacy
- By Clay Risen
- Smithsonian magazine, April 2008, Subscribe
(Page 5 of 6)
Flying home from Memphis on Friday evening, Attorney General Clark and his staff had asked the pilot to circle Washington before landing at Andrews Air Force Base. Roger Wilkins, then an assistant attorney general, recalled seeing fires everywhere, obscured by billowing smoke. "As I'm looking out the window, I see a great big orange ball with a needle in it," he told me. "All of a sudden I said...‘That's flames, and the needle I'm seeing is the Washington Monument.' The city looked like it had been bombed from the air."
Along with the riot response, Johnson's aides went to work on the speech the president was scheduled to give to Congress that Monday. The address, Johnson told Busby, "can make or break us. The [withdrawal] speech Sunday was good and accomplished what we wanted, but King's death has erased all of that, and we have to start again."
Proposals poured in: LBJ's Congressional liaison, Harold "Barefoot" Sanders, suggested a bigger income surtax. The Labor Department suggested a renewed effort to rehabilitate ghettos. Gardner Ackley, chairman of the Council of Economic Advisers, suggested a "bill of economic rights" that would give priority to programs for housing and income assistance. Doris Kearns Goodwin, then a White House fellow assigned to Labor, recalled working late into the night on the speech, then "driving home exhausted through uncanny, deserted streets, halted periodically at barricades where armed soldiers looked inside the car." At one point, Califano's staff tallied $5 billion (the equivalent of almost $30 billion today) in new plans to include in the speech. "One thing people were of a single mind about," McPherson told me, "was that it shouldn't be any small measures."
But as Friday gave way to Saturday and then Sunday, the mood in the White House soured. The speech was repeatedly postponed. By April 9, the Washington Post noted, "Neither Congress nor the Administration appeared in a mood to plunge headlong into massive new urban spending programs now."
What had happened? In part it was simple realism. Even as Johnson was drumming up his list of new programs—an expression of his unalloyed New Dealer faith in government—he was hearing new levels of criticism and anger from his friends in Congress. Georgia Senator Richard Russell, one of Johnson's fellow Democrats, phoned and fumed because he had heard that the soldiers guarding the Capitol were bearing unloaded arms. (They did, however, carry ammunition on their belts.) West Virginia Senator Robert Byrd, another Democrat, called for the Army to occupy Washington indefinitely.
It was "extraordinary that there should have been such a vast difference between the conversations in the White House and attitudes on the Hill," McPherson wrote in his memoirs. "On the Hill, and probably for the majority in this country, [new social spending] seemed dangerously like a protection racket."
On Sunday, Johnson saw the destruction in Washington firsthand. After attending church with Luci, he accompanied Gen. William Westmoreland—who had flown in from Vietnam for a meeting—on a helicopter trip to Andrews Air Force Base. On the way back, he had the pilot fly up and down the riot-torn streets. In the daylight, recalled Tom Johnson, a White House aide (and future president of CNN), the passengers could still see fires burning.
With America in flames, Johnson realized that he would do better to focus his efforts on a single piece of legislation, preferably one with few costs attached. He chose the fair- housing bill, which would ban racial discrimination in housing sales and rentals for some 80 percent of the residential market. It was, noted Senator Sam Ervin, a Democrat from North Carolina, the first civil rights bill to challenge discrimination outside the South. For that reason—combined with the national cooling on civil rights since the 1965 Watts riot—it had been stalled for two years.
Single Page « Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 Next »
Subscribe now for more of Smithsonian's coverage on history, science and nature.









Comments (6)
Read the book "LBJ: The Mastermind of JFK's Assassination" to get an accurate vision of who this man really was. One must go beyond the good sentiments toward this man that are based solely on the fact he managed to become president.
Posted by Alexandre Boucher on December 31,2010 | 03:06 PM
Sounds a lot like an apologist of LBJ writing the whole story. Personally, LBJ always struck the middle and lower classes as an arrogant, boisterous thorn in the country's side. If he was not linked to JFK's assassination, it would be surprising to hear those arguments. This man was one who could be vile,vulgar and perhaps evil. Much was evidenced by transcripts and audiotapings of his dialogue. All power corrupts, and absolute power corrupts absolutely; LBJ loved power, and hence was a principality in this country who many think did more harm than good. I knew several middle class guys who died in Nam thanks to his wish to be idolized just as FDR was, but look at what they have done to our war on poverty and tax structures. It is over for them. . . let us find new ways to correct our wonderful country.
Posted by L.Mark on May 19,2008 | 09:10 AM
My largest negative regarding LBJ, that I hold in mind, is that LBJ campaigned for election on peace platform, although he never, seemingly, had intended to deliver peace and withdrawal of our troops in Vietnam, but had intentions to escalate the war in Vietnam, later calling it a peace offensive. LBJ, for all intents and purposes, was determined to not be the president who lost a war. Present day, we currently have two democratic candidates that are promising the same sort of thing, essentially, in relation, to Iraq. The dems are promising to draw down the troops and bring our troops home. To myself, I just totally make those issues a null void box in my mind because I know in history we have had candidates/presidents who promised peace, and who promised we would not get involved in foreign wars (FDR), but who never delivered on these things. Inspiring words, campaign promises, moving speeches and rhetoric are not actions. Even Woodrow Wilson was considered a oratorical phenom.
Posted by Mercey on April 20,2008 | 12:09 AM
History will look back at LBJ's incredible courage in civil rights, and read such speeches as he gave to a joint session of Congress after the horrors in Selma, invoking Dr. King's words, "And We Shall Overcome", reportedly bringing Dr. King to tears as he watched Johnson on national TV. Johnson will be remembered as a great President for what he achieved, and what he tried to achieve, in his civil rights and his entire domestic agenda.
Posted by David E. Whitten on April 19,2008 | 12:10 AM
I found this article extremely interesting. I had forgotten many of the details of what happened at the time, and was glad to be reminded, and to hear information about the inside workings of the Johnson administration that I hadn't heard about before. My only criticism would be that the author jumps about in time, so that the sequence of events is muddled and hard to get straight in one's mind.
Posted by Ms Troy Parker Farr on April 12,2008 | 02:15 PM
I sat in that meeeting at the whiite House on April 5, 1968 with President Johnson. To this day,I wonder why Floyd McKissick of CORE, who was in the building, was not permitted to join us in the Conference Room. Paranoia was running rampant in the White House that day.
Posted by IRichard Gordon Hatcher on April 8,2008 | 12:05 AM
What better testimony to Johnson's magnificent civil rights accomplishments then, 40 years later, we have an African-American candidate who may well become president. While obsession with race and injustice because of it is the sorriest part of the American story, it has also brought forth moments of great courage, from people of all colors.
Posted by Fred Ripley on April 8,2008 | 09:09 AM
Except for Abraham Lincoln, has any President held office in more turbulent times in America than LBJ? He took over for a President that after his death all of a sudden became the greatest President we ever had in many peoples minds. He had to deal with racial tension, Vietnam and the assasinations for MLK and RFK. LBJ was a big man with big faults, but I would like to see history treat him more kindly than it has to this point.
Posted by Pete Iseppi on April 3,2008 | 08:13 AM
We need that kind of unifying spirit from our current leaders. Too many of the same attitudes of 40 years ago still persist.
Posted by jim jordan on April 1,2008 | 05:18 PM
A very good article. Useful to remind people president Johnson was a sincere new dealer.
Posted by Claude Julien on March 28,2008 | 06:10 AM