Review: Eisenhower in War and Peace

Eisenhower in War and Peace by Jean Edward Smith
My rating: 4 of 5 stars

This is where my presidential biography journey will end. It is a fitting one, since this is a president I knew little to nothing about. 

It is refreshing to have a biographer who is straightforward about when the subject was in the wrong. All too often I feel like they make excuses for the person they are writing about. 

Interesting how, having experienced war as a general, Eisenhower was dead against starting new wars, entering Indochina, using the atomic bomb with china and Vietnam (as he was advised to do), because he was against these. But then let himself get manipulated into subverting democracy and have the CIA carry out coups in Iran and Guatemala.

I feel like the second presidential term and later years were rushed through, with little to no detail. 

But all in all a great biography of a very interesting man, going through a pivotal time in United States history. Between the Korean war, desegregation, the cold war, in addition to Eisenhower's accomplishments during WWII, a lot of ground is covered here. 

View all my reviews

Review: Truman

Truman by David McCullough
My rating: 4 of 5 stars

The background on Missouri during the John Brown / Jim Crow era was fascinating and deeply disturbing. 

I hadn't realized how many things happened during Truman's presidency:

The end of World War II, including the dropping of the atomic bombs

The creation of Israel

The Truman doctrine

The Marshall Plan

The Berlin Airlift

The Civil Rights Commission (the first one ever) was set up

The Truman balcony

And apparently his election to a second term was the biggest upset in presidential history

The Korean war started

The Cold War started

NATO was established

General Macarthur's firing

I was curious about this biography for several reasons. First of all, I knew that the switch of Southern Democrats to Republicanism occurred during Truman, but I wasn't really sure why. Also, I know President Biden keeps a bust of Truman in his office. This biography answered the first question, but I'm not sure it answers the second. The closest analogy I can find is that Truman had to deal with WWII when entering into office, while Biden has COVID. 

Truman was definitely a unique president. He was truthful and naive almost to a fault, but in a good way, and was convinced the truth would win out in the end. I thoroughly enjoyed this book. 

View all my reviews

Review: Traitor to His Class: The Privileged Life and Radical Presidency of Franklin Delano Roosevelt

Traitor to His Class: The Privileged Life and Radical Presidency of Franklin Delano Roosevelt by H.W. Brands
My rating: 3 of 5 stars

I've decided I prefer biographies that dedicate a large portion to the subject's childhood and formative years. I think most, if not all, of the decisions and actions taken later on in life, are somehow tied to how the person was raised, and who his/her influences were, etc. 

Unfortunately, this biography didn't seem to dedicate enough time to FDR's childhood, in my opinion. We do get a decent idea that he was given everything he could possibly want, and was possibly kept in too sterile an environment as a child (the author infers that the polio that struck him later may have had something to do with this), and was oozing self-confidence. Still, I would have appreciated more. 

Of course, when someone has gone through all that FDR has gone through, there is plenty of material from later on in life, so this book was by no means tedious or boring at any point. 

I had been curious to read it also because Herbert Hoover's biography painted a picture of FDR that was less than flattering; as someone who was more politically motivated than inclined to do what was right. I can't say this biography refuted that. FDR seemed very much to be an "end justifies the means" type of person. Of course, when the "end" is an end to the great depression or world war II, then it is difficult to disagree. 

Eleanor Roosevelt's role also seemed suspiciously vague. She obviously didn't like his affairs, and never really was close to FDR in a personal sense after a certain point, but she achieved a great deal in her own right. This wasn't her biography, so I didn't expect a play-by-play of her activities, but she seemed to come off as rather weak, and I suspect that wasn't really the case. 

View all my reviews

Review: Hoover: An Extraordinary Life in Extraordinary Times

Hoover: An Extraordinary Life in Extraordinary Times by Kenneth Whyte
My rating: 4 of 5 stars

One of the more interesting presidential biographies. Hoover reminded me a lot of John Quincy Adams. He was extremely prepared for the presidency in many ways, including a huge amount of international experience, from Shanghai to Burma to England. He and his wife spoke Chinese, and he was in Belgium during WWI and headed up relief efforts to get American aid through the German blockade to the Belgian population. 

However, like with Adams, his presidency was lackluster at best. He was hit with the great depression, which pretty much put a halt to all his plans. 

But after the presidency he went back to work, eventually working closely with Truman, Eisenhower and even Kennedy into his 80s. 

Some of my notes:

Smoot Hawley seems to have been the beginning of his downfall.

It will be very interesting to see how the FDR biography I will read treats the Hoover administration, the great depression and the New Deal. This book seems to infer that the depression was well into reversal by the time FDR entered office, and in fact, he actively kept out of a smooth transition since a continued fall under Hoover's watch would only benefit him later on. In other words, FDR is seen as an opportunist with few scruples, while Hoover's administration is "one of the cleanest" on record, with Hoover refusing to mention FDR's invalid state seeing it as a personal attack (my impression is it would have backfired regardless). 

Regardless, it is true that Hoover was probably the only cabinet member who preached moderation throughout the 20s and was probably one of the earliest to say there would be a reversal in the booming economy. So it is somewhat ironic that it happened during his presidency, and it is unlikely he could have done much more to combat it. In fact an FDR administration "insider", Rexford Tugwell, apparently said "The New Deal owed much to what (Hoover) had begun". Although the author goes on to say how FDR actually went much further than Hoover ever did with these policies. 

Another statement made by this book is that FDR's nationalization (and retreat from the gold standard) sent a message to other countries that they "had nothing to gain or fear from America". So Japan dropped out of the League of Nations and assaulted China, while Hitler assumed absolute power in Berlin. I'm very curious to see what an FDR biography says about that. 

Hoover was also dead against including the Soviet Union in the Lend-Lease act. 

This biography gives the impression that his reputation was vindicated by his death, but I confess all I knew about him before was that the great depression happened under his watch, Hoovervilles and the Hoover dam were named after him, and FDR followed him with a 4-term act. 

View all my reviews

Review: Coolidge

Coolidge by Amity Shlaes
My rating: 4 of 5 stars

First off, as far as biographies go, this is, without doubt, the definitive one of Calvin Coolidge. The author did an excellent job compiling the information, collecting it, and telling us about his story. 

Having said that, this is hardly an exciting ride. It sort of seems like the story of a slight better-off-than-average fellow who is slightly smarter than average, and how his sense of duty leads him to politics and, pretty much by luck, to the white house. Once there he cuts spending more or less as much as humanly possible, while saying as little as possible. 

He is undoubtedly one of the most principled of the presidents, and more or less the polar opposite of Harding. 

All in all a good read, but nothing really riveting. 

View all my reviews

Review: Warren G. Harding

Warren G. Harding by John W. Dean
My rating: 3 of 5 stars

Edit: Revising my rating down to a 2, just based on what I've been reading about Harding after having finished this book. As just one example, his parentage of a child during his extramarital affair has apparently been proven conclusively with DNA tests, (https://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-can...), and yet this was dismissed in the book pretty vehemently by discounting Nan Britton's accounts: "All that her papers show is a lifetime fixation with Harding and her undending effort to have him as the father of her child" (wouldn't this be her attitude if he were the real father as well?), and also stating his smoking gun: "Harding lamented to his friends and relatives that he was sterile and sadly could not have children". Well, the DNA evidence begs to differ.

This entire book has the goal of "setting the record straight" for this president, who has been much maligned.

However, without having read anything else about Harding, I couldn't help having the feeling that this book doth protest too much. Every single moment in which Harding had been criticized is torn apart in its details to try to deflect the blame, while other points seem to be totally glossed over.

For instance, in Woodrow Wilson's biography it mentions how Harding acted with great disrespect toward the ex-president, but none of that was mentioned here. And whenever members of his staff accomplished great things, he was given credit for having hired them, but whenever they were corrupt, involved in scandals and/or received payoffs, it merely says he wasn't involved personally. Not to mention an affair he had is just alluded to at the very end, when trying to discredit another person who claimed to have had an affair with him.

Despite all that, however, it is still interesting to read about his story.

View all my reviews

Review: Wilson

Wilson by A. Scott Berg
My rating: 4 of 5 stars

It is refreshing to read about probably the most intellectual president since John Quincy Adams, if not Thomas Jefferson.

A man of letters, he attended Davidson, Princeton and Johns Hopkins, became the dean of Princeton and 'modernized' it, and was also one of the most popular historians in the country.

Herbert Hoover's reputation after WWI was excellent. He convinced Americans to save and be sparing, and people would "Hooverize" gladly for the war effort. He probably should have never run for president.

Very interesting to notice the parallels with today. Americanism, Jingoism and "America First" all featured prominently in the US during this time. However, Wison was an intellectual dealing with it, so the response was very different.

Also interesting to see how he, a very intellectual and academic president, is followed by Warren Harding, one of biggest failures of a president.

Also, Henry Cabbot Lodge deserves a lot more vitriol and hate from history books. He obviously didn't cause WWII, but I'm starting to think that his dogged refusal to pass the League of Nations for purely personal political aims is what eventually led to the possibility of a second World War. But we'll see how these biographies progress. I may be wrong there.

View all my reviews

Review: William Howard Taft: The American Presidents Series: The 27th President, 1909-1913 (American Presidents

William Howard Taft: The American Presidents Series: The 27th President, 1909-1913 (American Presidents by Jeffrey Rosen
My rating: 4 of 5 stars

Taft is a very interesting president for many many reasons. It's too bad we only know him for being overweight (at least that's all I knew him for).

He never really wanted to be president, but always wished to be chief justice of the supreme court. So when he was elected president he approached it from a judicial (read: constitutional) point of view. He didn't care at all about politics or popularity. In a way this served him very badly. Just as generals who become president and refuse to partake in party politics tend to perform badly as a result, the same could probably be said of judges. Interesting also to see how a president who wasn't automatically campaigning for a second term wasn't praised more for it.

I guess being in between Roosevelt and Wilson doesn't help, but he is definitely someone worth reading up about.

Of course, he finally did make it to chief justice, and was a much better chief justice than president.

View all my reviews

Review: Mornings on Horseback: The Story of an Extraordinary Family, a Vanished Way of Life, and the Unique Child Who Became Theodore Roosevelt

Mornings on Horseback: The Story of an Extraordinary Family, a Vanished Way of Life, and the Unique Child Who Became Theodore Roosevelt by David McCullough
My rating: 3 of 5 stars

First of all, this book is excellent. It portrays Teddy Roosevelt with all his eccentricities, his privileged upbringing and his tragedies (losing both his wife and mother to different diseases right after his daughter is born, on February 14th). It also discusses his family, the people around him and the times he was living in.

Unfortunately, this is not a biography, but just a biography through his 29th year. It only ever mentions his presidency and Nobel peace prize (and mayorship) in the afterword, and just very briefly. Having the subtitle "The story of ... the unique child who became Theodore Roosevelt" isn't exactly clear about not covering his adulthood.

So this just seemed misleading. Of course, calling it Theodore Roosevelt's life up to 29 years of age, or Teddy's youth, might not sell as many books.

Now I'm wondering if I should tackle another biography to actually read about his presidency, or just continue on to Taft.

Anyway, 5 stars for content. 1 star for being misleading. 3 stars overall I guess.

View all my reviews

Review: President McKinley: Architect of the American Century

President McKinley: Architect of the American Century by Robert W. Merry
My rating: 4 of 5 stars

McKinley is probably the most underrated presidency thus far (n.b., I wrote "presidency", not "president", which I still think is Garfield), especially as regards international expansion (colonialism?). Cuba, Puerto Rico, Hawaii, Guam, the Philippines and Samoa were all added/conquered during his presidency. Not to mention the meddling with China along with the Europeans and Japanese. To his credit, he disavowed colonialism, and actually tried to promote independence and elections in Cuba and the Philippines. NOT to his credit, he did no such thing in Hawaii, Puerto Rico or Samoa.

To be fair, it seems as though if the US hadn't taken control of Hawaii, Japan almost certainly would have (much like they did with Okinawa), with 30,000 Japanese immigrants already in Hawaii. And apparently Germany and Britain were also eyeing it.

This biography was excellent, in that it delved into much detail with regards to his presidency. In fact, I probably didn't need to know the maneuverings behind each and every bill and every trip he took to Canton. However, in some areas it seemed remarkably lacking. The taking over of Samoa only gets one paragraph and is never mentioned again.

Also, Mckinley's assassin, Czolgosz, isn't even mentioned until 10 pages before the end of the book (aside from a brief dramatic cameo in the introduction). It says he hung out with anarchists and was inspired to assassinate McKinley based on a speech by Emma Goldman, but almost nothing else about her. I can't understand why these points would be basically brushed aside.


Some interesting notes I took:

During the Spanish American war, combat deaths for Americans were only 281, while nearly 2,500 died from diseases (p. 320)

Interesting also to note how protectionist the Republican Party was back then. "Since its inception, the Republican Party, Mckinley's party, had been the party of protectionism" (p. 7). At some point it became the party of open markets and free trade, although now I guess it has come full circle back to protectionism.

Another interesting passage:
"Indeed Republicans were the progressive party, comfortable with the application of federal power in behalf of major national goals: protecting the voting rights of blacks..." (p. 106) Times have changed.

Apparently Mckinley was the first president to make his own campaign speeches (not write, actually make them, which wasn't done back then).

The author also doesn't seem to like Roosevelt, who apparently downplayed McKinley during his presidency, and presumably this is why we barely remember him nowadays. He may be right.


Edit:
After reading up a bit more on Leon Czolgosz and Emma Goldman I'm all the more perplexed as to why they didn't feature more in the book. Czolgosz had a history of mental illness and, while he identified as an anarchist, he wasn't accepted in anarchist circles. In fact, he showed up once at Goldman's house asking odd questions, so they assumed he was a government infiltrator and sent around notices to other anarchists to beware of him.

Once he was arrested he stated Goldman's speech inspired him, so Goldman was arrested and held for 2 weeks, but no ties were found between her and Czolgosz, so she was released. After release, however, she wrote an article comparing Czolgosz to Brutus, and so she was shunned not only by the public, but by other anarchists as well, and withdrew into seclusion.

At Czolgosz's trial, he refused to talk to his lawyers, so Loran L. Lewis, his defense attorney, made a 27 minute address, not defending Czolgosz, but defending his own status in the community (he didn't want to be villified for defending Czolgosz).

View all my reviews

Review: Benjamin Harrison

Benjamin Harrison by Charles W. Calhoun
My rating: 4 of 5 stars

A president who is known only for being sandwiched in between the terms of another unknown president, despite being the grandson of a third (semi-)unknown president.

Despite this, however, he was a pretty capable individual, although certainly not singular. The author seemed to gloss over Harrison's whole Hawaii annexation (which basically turned the U.S. into a colonial empire), and I would've enjoyed more gossip about his marriage to his niece, which the author seemed keen to avoid.

I find it very curious to read about how the Republican party during this time is Northern, pro-civil rights (and anti-slavery) and pro-big government. In many respects the complete opposite of what it is today. It will be interesting to see how this all becomes inversed over the next century.


View all my reviews

Review: Grover Cleveland

Grover Cleveland by Henry F. Graff
My rating: 4 of 5 stars

A good, concise book about a rather uninspiring president. The first democrat in the white house since Buchanan, prior to the civil war. Probably best known for serving two non-consecutive terms.

Some interesting tidbits:
One of his daughters, Ruth, died young, but Baby Ruth candy was named after her.
Built a house in a park North of the White House, now it's Cleveland Park.
The city, Cleveland, was named after his ancestor.
The whole story of the tumor in his mouth and having it removed in secret on a boat seemed fascinating.
He was against taking possession of Hawaii.



View all my reviews

Review: The Unexpected President: The Life and Times of Chester A. Arthur

The Unexpected President: The Life and Times of Chester A. Arthur by Scott S. Greenberger
My rating: 4 of 5 stars

All in all a very good book about a not very good person (turned better later on).

Having been brought up by an ardent abolitionist, and then having left the fold for the more profit-seeking clique of stalwarts and politicians who took "voluntary" payments from employees and bestowed offices as favors, he found himself pretty much by accident as a vice president. And then Garfield was shot by a lunatic, and he found himself president. But at that point he changed, left his crony friends behind and enacted reform to make political positions more merit-based, etc.

Aside from that turn-about, there isn't much that is fascinating about this man's life. In fact, the book talks at great length about other big names of the era, namely Roscoe Conkling, President Grant and President Garfield. It takes 2/3 of the book for Arthur to even become president.

I found the most intriguing bit to be the part about Julia Sand. I think every president could use someone like her.

View all my reviews

Review: Destiny of the Republic: A Tale of Madness, Medicine and the Murder of a President

Destiny of the Republic: A Tale of Madness, Medicine and the Murder of a President by Candice Millard
My rating: 5 of 5 stars

Wow. This book was an extremely interesting look at an extremely interesting man, shot in his prime, before he could really accomplish anything, by a deranged psycho, and then actually murdered by his doctors (mainly one, Dr. Bliss), who made mistake after mistake when caring for him. It's infuriating to think of what could have been accomplished by this man had he been given the chance.

The section about him getting picked as a nominee at the convention was out of this world. So much so that I went to Wikipedia to make sure the author wasn't making it up. He went to the convention to help someone else get elected, refused to be nominated, and still ended up winning.

Before giving his inaugural address he read every single past inaugural address ever given.

After having been shot, while he was "recovering", it was an extremely hot summer in DC, and, since he couldn't leave his room, a new device was invented to keep his room cool, which turned out to be the first air conditioner.

After his death, his wife also opened what turned out to be the first presidential library.

I'm extremely glad I read this biography, and I hope to learn more about this president. At this point I'd say he's the most underestimated president thus far (in the chronology of presidents that I'm reading).


View all my reviews

Review: Rutherford B. Hayes: The American Presidents Series: The 19th President, 1877-1881

Rutherford B. Hayes: The American Presidents Series: The 19th President, 1877-1881 by Hans L. Trefousse
My rating: 3 of 5 stars

Probably the least objectionable president thus far, in that he worked hard and diligently, seemed quite optimistic about everyone, was against slavery from the start, volunteered for the civil war and seemingly didn't even want to run for president. It might be telling that he isn't remembered at all.

I can't really tell if the author was being biased, in that there are hardly any bad points here about Hayes. Having read this author's biography of Andrew Johnson (which was excellent), I doubt he was. Although I was still disappointed in this book since it seems rather superficial and rushed compared to the book about Johnson.

One bad point mentioned about Hayes is the compromise wherein he withdrew Republican troops from the South, ending reconstruction, but then the author seems to excuse the reaction to the great railroad strike, mainly because Hayes seems to regret his actions later in life.


3 stars



View all my reviews

Review: Grant

Grant by Ron Chernow
My rating: 5 of 5 stars

Wow. Ok, Grant is the most underrated president I've read about thus far (I'm reading in chronological order). I'm not saying he's the best, but just the most underrated. I knew he was a stellar general, but the only other things I new about him before were that he had a drinking problem and (I had assumed) was a failure as a president.

"Americans today know little about the terrorism that engulfed the South during Grant's presidency. It has been suppressed by a strange national amnesia. The Klan's ruthless reign is a dark, buried chapter in American history. The Civil War is far better known that its brutal aftermath." (P. 857)

I remember a TV show in the 80s called North and South, which discussed two fictional families, one from the North one from the South, during the civil war. It seems like they could have just discussed Grant's family. He married a Southern belle, in all senses of the word, and her father was a slave owning fervent southern democrat, while Grant's father was extremely anti-slavery. Of course, Grant didn't just fight in the civil war, but was the chief general, so his story is a lot more interesting than the TV show's.

I'm amazed at how quickly the North was ready to appease the South in order to make sure that their reintroduction back into the Union went smoothly. Lincoln didn't want any celebrations in the Northern camp after the treaty signed in Appomattox, he also allowed Confederate commanders to retain sidearms, the farmers to go back to work with their horses, and played Dixieland back at the capitol (saying "It's our country's song now"). All in all a sound strategy, probably, until Johnson went to his extremes I guess.

The sections talking about white mobs killing, lynching and massacring blacks and white republicans right after the war in the South are some of the most maddening things I've read.

On the other hand I was very interested to read about Akerman. A confederate soldier who then turned Republican, served under Grant, and was a whole-hearted defender of reconstruction.
I also sort of want to read more about Ferdinand Ward, the wall-streeter who swindled Grant out of his family's life savings. And apparently Ward's great-grandson has written a biography of him.

Interesting tidbits:
Grant was dead against violence. He said he never looked forward to battle, and apparently couldn't stand to see animals mistreated or hunted.
Grant acted as a go-between between China and Japan during the Ryukyu islands debacle, apparently helping both to come to a peaceable conclusion and avoid war (although Japan still took over the islands, which became Okinawa).

http://4201mass.blogspot.com/

View all my reviews

Review: Andrew Johnson: A Biography

Andrew Johnson: A Biography by Hans L. Trefousse
My rating: 4 of 5 stars

My vote for the worst president ever. It's crazy to think a Civil Rights Bill came before him and he vetoed it, basically setting the country back 100 years (until the next President Johnson would sign the next Civil Rights Bill in the 1960s). So the South got to basically continue slavery (Black employees could be forced to work and were dragged back to their employer if they escaped).

Voted against the Smithsonian. Voted against salary increases for troops. Was pro-slavery but voted against many pro-slavery issues (including the 3/5 law), since his district of East Tennessee was mountainous and had very few slave-holders. He also voted against funding the railroad (at first) and against funding for a statue of George Washington.

He was also the only Southern Democrat politician to side with the Union, being dead against secession. After the war, many Northerners wanted to relegate the South to the status of territories (and not states). Lincoln's choice of Johnson as VP showed that he still supported statehood for the South.

Interesting how Eastern Tennessee remained more or less for the Union side throughout the war, and in fact almost became a separate state (like West Virginia split off from Virginia).

After having turned away from the Democrats to side with the Union, he basically sided with the Democrats after the war, granting statehood and amnesty to more or less everyone (stating that, due to states' rights, it was impossible to secede so they hadn't actually seceded). This made the unionists hate him, while the democrats still didn't trust him much.

The biography itself was excellent. I hope to read more by Trefousse.

View all my reviews

Review: James Buchanan

James Buchanan by Jean H. Baker
My rating: 4 of 5 stars

Odd how the most prepared person "since James Madison" to run for president could end up being such a terrible president. His undoing seems to be due to:

1) Like previous presidents, he backed slavery (despite being a Northerner). This puts him on the wrong side of history, as well as being a testimony to how blind people can be to basic fundamentals of life. However, his obvious siding with the South and slave states appalled Northerners, making many of them more sympathetic to the Republican cause.
2) Extreme corruption in his cabinet. Here again, it seems odd, since he himself seems to have been so well-versed in law and politics. Although, maybe the "politics" part was a disadvantage. There seems to have been an attitude that "the ends justify the means" in order to get things done, which, in his case, was silencing the "vocal minority" of abolitionists. Of course, by the end of his presidency this was no longer a minority. He also let his cabinet members, all of whom shared his views, do more or less as they pleased.
3) Following these two points, his cabinet consisted in Southerners and dough-faced Northerners (Northerner sympathetic to Southerners). In the meantime, pro-slavery southerners were becoming a smaller and smaller minority, which is why they started getting louder and louder. He didn't realize the real "vocal minority" was the Southern slave-holders.

Some people say the Civil war wasn't about slavery. His presidency and this book show it very obviously was. States Rights are only brought up during these years in relation to slavery. Let's not forget that it's a small minority of white men who even owned slaves, but they seem to have had all the power. In fact, as can be been with the Missouri compromise, the Wilmot Proviso and the fugitive slave act, these same "pro-states rights" people suddenly wanted Federal law to supersede when it came to slaves going to other states.

I found this book quite good. I think it's often difficult to write a biography of someone like Buchanan. After spending so much time researching one person, you end up either justifying all their bad decisions, or just concentrating on their bad points and reviling them. But this book seemed to do a good job of pointing out how bad he was without covering up or pushing the matter too much.

View all my reviews

Review: Millard Fillmore: Biography of a President

Millard Fillmore: Biography of a President by Robert J. Rayback
My rating: 4 of 5 stars

This was actually a pretty enlightening book. I knew nothing about Millard Fillmore, but had the general impression that he was a failure as a president. He pretty much was a failure, but then again he's one of those people who had been successful until becoming Vice President and then, when Zachary Taylor died, was thrust into the presidency. To his credit he had no intention of ever running for another term. To his discredit, he got bullied into doing it anyway, and in a pretty hopeless situation to be used as a pawn.
Having said that, however, I imagine all presidents will be mediocre until Lincoln comes around. Slavery is obviously a pressure cooker waiting to explode (if that's an expression), and all these presidents keep trying to compromise and, frankly, pass on the buck. Fillmore certainly compromised, and I don't think it's wrong to judge him unfavorably for not taking a stand. People knew slavery was wrong and counter to everything the United States stood for, but they also were political, to the point of literally approving slavery (not sure how to make that point more obvious).
Anyway, aside from this, kudos to Fillmore for being against the annexation of Hawaii or Cuba (suddenly he had morals here). The book also mentions some apparently embarrassingly bad correspondence sent to the emperor of Japan, but doesn't say what was so embarrassing about it, which is a bit disappointing.
I got the impression from this book that the skills that landed Fillmore the Vice presidency are the same skills that made him a bad president and made him lose reelection. He was good at working with others and tried to mediate and compromise, without being boastful or showy or really making a stand for anything.

3.5 stars rounded up because I doubt a 5 star biography could ever be written for this president.

View all my reviews

Review: Zachary Taylor

Zachary Taylor by John S.D. Eisenhower
My rating: 3 of 5 stars

Going through some mediocre presidents now, and it shows. Taylor seems to have been a pretty good general who was unfortunately unprepared (or just not cut out) for the presidency. He wanted to be "The people's president", so he refused to become too entrenched with his own party (the whigs), and thereby lost out on a lot of goodwill, while not gaining much ground with the opposition (the democrats). This seems to be a trend with generals who become presidents (Eisenhower, Washington, etc.)

Interesting to note he coined the term "First lady", for Dolly Madison's death.

The book mentions a claim that, had he survived, he might have been able to avert the civil war, being a Southern slave holder who opposed slavery. I very much doubt it.

I don't like giving it 3 stars, even though it's a 3 star book, mainly because I doubt it could have been much better, given the material. Let's say 3.5 for now.

View all my reviews