arthur schlesinger used to call my father conservative. what he had was integrity. when i served in the center, we weren't democrats, republicans, right, left, for the country. we were products of the enlightenment, ideology didn't play much of a role. but to -- to your point he did not tell this to me, but i did hear from a very, very, very close friend that he was planning to resign from the united nations at the end of the year largely because he was very uncomfortable advocating policies that he spend, you know, vietnam and he, of course, died of '65, july of '65 but i think he was planning ton resigning. can i etly, that would not have been his way at all but because he couldn't continue to advocate policies that he didn't support. that has to be the last word. adlai ii is buried in bloomington, illinois. senator adlai stevenson, iii, thank you for being here with us this evening, newton minnow and richard norton smith and we leave you with the contenders from the 1956 convention. >> i say trust the people, their good sense, their decency and fortitude, their f

my wife and i would take hikes away carry arthur schlesinger's biography, i would read it when we pausedheight. so i ran for the senate in 1990 and was ahead in the polls but charles schumer it also geraldine ferraro so it was a strong lineup. but there was a lot of scandal whiff t12 but he was the better candidate as a force of nature. >> i don't think i am dead interesting that so many forces are freaks of nature like chuck schumer was so smart and driven knowing how to raise money. he brought himself to the edge of majority leader. >>host: what does that mean he bought himself to the edge? >> the very good question but god only knows we know it when we see it and check had that. and with bill buckley. and then to have a talent. to have a lot of lies but ended up running against blumberg, schumer, bloomberg and they did what it takes to win. but do whenever you have to do. just don't get caught. to be tough as nails. there are moments of my public life that was edgy ethically but what i listened as a successful politician but ralph nader is the uncompromising purist. i would be more ne

tell you that the night before kennedy was killed, i was strategizing what we would do with arthur schlesinger we spent a half-hour strategizing about philadelphia and i said that night with kennedy that the league would be with him. i think it's he was fairly confident that he would endorse him since i left the next morning during the primary because i had its work to do here i watching this speech on television would to bed and at 4:00 in the morning got a phone call backs its this is for caulking morning kids' it wait? the reporter said he's been shot. i cried. i prayed and then i fell asleep. but i believe now if daily would have been there that would have greatly and he sensed his stance is that we will never know. we will never know what could have been. >> since nobody can prove me wrong i will add one of l.f. -- another. [laughter] it's been back in those days, do we have a question if? >> you describe that hierarchy of the kennedy brothers what was the relationship of john and bobby to teddy? >> in the hierarchy of the brothers what was the relationship of the kennedy brothers is wher

[laughter] annette: arthur schlesinger junior asked me to do the american president series. a short thing. i thought i could venture into that but i did not like him. i would not want to spend seven minutes with him let alone seven years. jon: good thing it was a short book. ron: a short presidency. annette: he was a pivotal president though. you have to step back from the like or dislike and think about why every american should know about him. because this was an era of missed opportunities. a lot of things we are dealing with now, we may not be dealing with if he had been a different man. it is not about your bff -- it is who and how did they affect the progress of the american nation. there is no question that he did. he wasn't worried about being a pleasant person or not. ron: i spent more time thinking about who will be the subject of the book than any other question. whenever i speak to writing students about this, i always say that writing a biography is a lot like marriage. to pick the right person, and nothing can go wrong. if you picked the wrong person, nothing c

arthur schlesinger used to call my father conservative. what h h

gordon-reed: arthur schlesinger junior asked me to do the american president series. i did not like him. i would not want to spend seven minutes with him, more or less seven years. i'm saying that, but he was in a .orm asleep important person you have to step back from the like and dislike and think about why every american should know about him, because this was an era of missed opportunities. a lot of what we are dealing with now we might not have been dealing with if he had been a different man. it's not about your best friend, it is who and how they affect the progress of the american nation, and there's no question that he did, but he is worth knowing about, if he is a pleasant person or not. chernow: i find i spend more time thinking about who will be the subject of a book than any other question. whenever i speak to writing students about this, i always say that writing a biography is a lot like marriage. to pick the right person, nothing can go wrong. if you pick the wrong person, nothing can go right. you are trapped with this person for many years. i think t

second thoughts about this and an interesting article was written in "fortune" magazine by arthur schlesinger jr., a new deal progressive historian, harvard man. he writes this story and he divides the court up into two contending groups. first group he calls the lions of self-restraint. they are frankfurter and the others. and the other group he calls judicial activists. the first time we know that the term judicial activism was used in the article by schlesinger jr. it was associated with the yale law school and the legal realism of the yale law school. this is in the article. in there he says that what the yale people had decided is they were starting to reconsider this restraint idea. that it turns out they said that the problem before wasn't the judges were acting politically and getting in the way of popular legislation. we were off base on that. but the problem is it's inevitable that the judges would act politically. but the question is what are they acting politically for and in the problem on the old court they were acting politically for the wrong things, like economic liberty and

i did do a tiny biography of andrew johnson which -- i didn't like him. [ laughter ] arthur schlesinger, jr., asked me to do the president, the american president series, 40,000 words. but i didn't like him. i would not want to spend seven minutes with him. more or less seven years. >> it was a short book? >> it was a short book but he was an enormously important person, a pivotal president there you have to step back from the like and dislike and think about why every american should know about him. this was an era of missed opportunities. things we're dealing about now we might not have dealt with if he had been a different man so it's not about who your best bff, your best friend, it's, you know, who and how did they affect the progress of the american nation. so he's worth knowing about whether he was the pleasant person or not. >> i find that i spend more time thinking about who will be the subject of a book than any other question -- i spent months agonizing over that. wherever i speak to writing students about this i feel that writing biography is like marriage. you pick the righ

i heard arthur schlesinger once call -- we always called jack, jack, john f. the american people and they were substantiative, he used half-hour blocks of time for eloquent, subsequent speeches. they were also aimed at the world, and it listened. >> you talked about the '52 and '56 campaigns. your father lost about a million or so between those and a couple more states. what did he not do as well in '56 or what do you think, did he make mistakes? >> i think -- first of all, eisenhower's enormously popular. remember, these were years of economic prosperity and growth. ike was popular, the war was getting -- i can't remember when exactly, but ended -- no, that would come later in korea. no, what happened -- one of the things that happened, i think eisenhower would have gotten reelected probably anyway, was the uprising in hungary and the invasion of suez by france, britain, and israel. these international crises rallied the country, as they always do, behind the president, and, you know, from then on, there just really wasn't much doubt about the outcome. >> ric

i heard arthur schlesinger once call -- the late, great historian -- we always called jack, jack.ot only at the american people -- and they were substantive, he used half-hour blocks of time for eloquent, substantive speeches. they were also aimed at the world, and it listened. >> senator receivenson, you talked about the '52 and '56 campaigns. your father lost about a millio about the '52 and '56 campaigns. your father lost about a millte about the '52 and '56 campaigns. your father lost about a millved about the '52 and '56 campaigns. your father lost about a millen talked about the '52 and '56 campaigns. your father lost about a millnsd about the '52 and '56 campaigns. your father lost about a million or so between those and a couple more states. what did he not do as well in '56 or what do you think, did he make mistakes? >> i think -- first of all, eisenhower's enormously popular. remember, these were years of economic prosperity and growth. ike was popular, the war was getting -- i can't remember when exactly, but ended -- no, that would come later in korea. no, what happene