Hailed as the most comprehensive of all the JFK biographies, this book tried to stay on issue rather than be distracted by Kennedy's family life (the Kennedy dynasty or even his relationship with Jackie). It didn't get caught up in his lasting achievements (peace corps, Green berets, National Institute of Health, etc.), but rather apolitically laid out the challenges he faced growing up Kennedy until his assassination. The in-depth knowledge of Kennedy's health issues, however, show cased JFK's legacy as one of true service.

A great book indeed. The author wrote well and very exhaustively. It presents an answer to every question one has in mind. For anyone who is a stranger to the events obtaining at that time (like me who is a Filipino, and born just as Kennedy was elected President of the US), the book is informative.

To record what I thought are worth remembering about the subject, I wrote a summary. Thus:

Pres. Kennedy's ancestors, both from the father side and the mother side, were Irish Catholics who were driven to America during the great famine in their country.

From being poor, Jack's ancestors worked their way up to be at par with the rich in the US.

Jack's knowledge of his Irish ancestry was limited because of his parents' "upward mobility and their eagerness to replace their Irishness with an American identity".

His grandfather to his father side, Patrick Joseph Kennedy became a leading figure in Boston's liquor trade; later, he served five one-year terms in the Massachusetts Lower House, followed by three two-year terms in the state Senate. When he retired from politics he held various appointive offices. By the time he died, he held an interest in a coal company and a substantial amount of stocks in the Columbia Trust Co.. His grandfather in his mother side, John Fitzgerald or Honey Fitz, served three terms in Congress, later became Mayor of Boston, and became a publisher of a local newspaper, The Republic.

His father, Joseph or Joe, went to Harvard and decided on a career in banking, and was successful. He also became Ambassador to Britain. His mother, Rose was educated in Catholic schools and lived a privileged life.

Jack was the second in a brood of 9. Joe Jr, the eldest, would be groomed for an extraordinary future, and as Honey Fitz would tell a reporter during his christening, would become the President of the United States. Jack's birth was greeted with less fanfare, and without any prediction of his future.

While Joe Jr. excelled both in academics and sports, Jack was quite ordinary and sickly.

Despite the material benefits the family enjoyed, they were not without ambitions. With the help of their father, Joe Jr. entered the Navy as an officer, while Jack got drafted in the Navy.

As a PT commander, whose boat capsized, and saved 10 of his crew members, Jack became a war hero, a popular one. What made it so special was that Joe, a very wealthy and influential father, volunteered his son in harm's way and did the country proud.

Later, Joe Jr. volunteered for a dangerous mission of flying a Navy bomber loaded with explosives, but before reaching its target, Joe Jr's plane exploded in the air. Joe Jr's death devastated his father whose future plans depended on Joe Jr's future, resulting in his father's antagonism to America's involvements abroad, for the rest of his life. For Jack, his brother's death evoked a terrible sense of loss.

For Joe who succeeded in making money, a business career for his children to add to their multi-million dollar furtune was pointless. Politics would be a logical alternative. He declared: "in the next generation, the people who run the government, would be the biggest people in America.

The death of Joe Jr. put Jack in his stead. In 1945, he announced that he'd go into "public service". Joe set up the stage for Jack's political career. His money permitted a successful campaign. Jack would serve the Congress three terms before he got his Senate seat.

Jack concentrated on foreign policies more than on domestic concerns during his stints in both houses. Most prominent of his pronouncements was the defense of the West against a communist advance. Later, he also focused on Asian problems in that they were susceptible to Soviet exploitation.

Bobby, Jack's younger brother, who was a lawyer, run Jack's campaign for the Senate. It was the most organized state-wide campaign in Massachusetts.

While a Senator, Jack married Jackie, who, like Jack hails from a wealthy family too. They had two children, John Jr. and Caroline.

While in the Senate, Jack's health condition worsened: the pain had become unbearable, and after a battery of tests and consultations, Jack finally decided to undergo operation even if it posed a grave risk of a fatal infection, and the risks were 50/50. He said he'd rather be dead than live on crutches and paralyzed by pain. Jack went into a coma, and a priest was called to administer the last rites. Joe thought he would lose his second son and wept openly. After another operation, Jack recovered and went back to his Senate duties. He was warmly welcomed by his Senate colleagues who admired his determination to maintain his career despite his debilitating health condition.

Because of Jack's long absence from the Senate, the Kennedys had no choice but to divulge Jack's illness. The revelation benefited, rather than undermined his image- he came through as courageous and fit rather than unfit for higher office.

During this time, he was inspired to write, Profiles in Courage, which recounts the the careers of eight Senators who showed uncommon courage in risking their political careers by taking unpopular stands. For this book, he was awarded the Pulitzer Prize in 1957. For Jack, the prize would advance his ambition, the Presidency.

In 1956, Jack lost in the Vice Presidential nomination at the 1956 Convention, but he considered it a stoke of luck because he, along with Stevenson would have been beaten.

In mulling over the Presidency, "Jack believed that his youth, Catholicism, limited support from party leaders, and questionable health, made him far from a sure bet for president in 1960". But according to his father: this country is not a private reserve for Protestants. With his own ambition, self-confidence, and his father's money, Jack was hopeful of success. But his chronic health problems might undermine his candidacy, so the state of his health would be a closely guarded secret.

His loss in the nomination in 1956, taught him a lesson: that he can't get far in politics if one doesn't become a total politician.

Jack's probe of labor unions, although drew criticisms, won him wider public approval, as a senator who, like the heroes in his book, put the country above personal political gain.

Jack's forte would be foreign affairs.

Jack's good looks, charm, and wit gave him more public appeal. In his 1958 Senate reelection, he won 73.6% of votes cast. Thus, "the flowering of another great political family, like tha Adamses, the Lodges, and the La Folletes".

To explain his decision to run for President he said that effective leadership came largely from the top. He had no patience with being second, so he dismissed the advice for him to run for Vice President.

Jack won the presidential nomination, and Johnson, whom he chose as running mate also got nominated.

Jack's acceptance speech was "a memorable appeal to the country to renew its commitment to larger goals than personal, self-serving ones".

Bobby as a campaign manager was blunt, hard and tough. A Counterattack Sourcebook was produced to answer derogatory assertions about Kennedy's religion, health, inexperience,profligate campaign spending, voting record on labor, civil liberties, etc. Rumors of his womanizing surfaced, but dismissed as outdated and unsubstantiated. Against the advice of Bobby and the campaign staff, Jack made an appearance before a group of Protestant ministers in Houston, Texas, to confront the issue of his Catholicism. He showed no sign of nervousness. His sincerity converted some opponents and persuaded some undecided voters that he had the "maturity and balance to become a fine president". In his speech he declared his belief in the separation of church and state, that the President's views on religion are his own private affair, and that he is not a Catholic candidate for President but the Democratic party's candidate for President.

Jack tackled next the issue that he is young or inexperience. The surest way was to compete directly with Nixon in a debate. Jack came across as a leader while Nixon appeared as someone trying to gain an advantage. While Nixon looked tense, almost frightened, Jack was "calm and nerveless".

As to foreign policy, Jack proved himself capable, as shown by his service in the Foreign Relations Committee, his Foreign Affairs article in 1958, "A Democrat Looks at Foreign Policy", and the Strategy of Peace, a compilaton of speeches on international affairs and national security.

Jack won the presidency with only 49.72 % of the popular vote. The analysis fo the narrow victory was: the fear of a Catholic in the White House. He was the youngest president ever elected to the presidency.

The outgoing President, Eisenhower was impressed with Jack, saying he is one of the ablest, brightest minds he ever come across.

Jack's inaugural speech was one of two most memorable inaugurals of the 20th century. Many were impressed by his speech; it thrilled the crowd.

Early in his presidency, the Bay of Pigs incident shattered Jack. He blamed himself for having been misled into a Cuban invasion. The incident which cost more than a hundred lives, drove him to tears. He would later say: "never to rely on the experts". This taught him a lesson enough to arm him with the skills and conviction to deal with crises later.

The Cold War which had been looming for years already gripped America with fear. A hostile Soviet had been slowly spreading communism and intimidating the US with a show of force. Bent on resolving the conflicts in Cuba, Berlin, Vietnam, Jack showed great leadership in resolving the missile crisis in Cuba, which, if not handled well would have resulted in a nuclear war.

Jack's health problem did not undermine his presidency. He proved himself sincere and serious in resolving conflicts in the hemisphere and in the domestic front. He described himself: "the idealist without illusions".

He pushed for the civil rights. Though thwarted many times, Jack, pursued. He aimed for equal rights and opportunities for all Americans, black or white.

Kennedy's death shocked not only America but the world! Jack's "sudden violent death seemed to deprive the country and the world of a better future".

*Rating for Audible abridged version.*

I listened to this through the audible version which condensed the book to 8 hours. It felt rushed and there was very little detail on major events.

It’s great for a quick take on JFK, but I will definitely need to read the full version since this didn’t cut it.

In my opinion, David McCullough and Ron Chernow are the greatest biographers out there. Dallek has a much narrower focus in what he writes (the 60's and early 70's Americana) but this biography is the best one I have found yet on the life of JFK. If you know a better, please give me suggestions below.

The author has done a great job of presenting the facts and information on JFK's life and presidency. He has clearly researched and knows his subject well and pulls from a rich variety of sources in presenting it to us. While I feel that he did have a slight pro-Kennedy bias, it did not bias too much his writing here. I do think he did focus a bit more than I would have expected on JFK's continuing health problems while glossing over the potential effects the medications to combat these problems might have made on Kennedy's decision-making process. I also felt like he glossed over JFK's serial philandering. There is absolutely way the issue could have been completely ignored, but it sure seemed to me that he mentioned it as little as possible and not one iota more.

Dallek did do an excellent job of bringing the reader behind the scenes in many of the major events that defined Kennedy's 1000 day presidency. That presidency is possibly the most eventful single term anyone has had in the 20'th century. In some areas, JFK shines like gold. His handling of the Cuban Missle Crisis, founding the Peace Corps, and the nuclear test ban treaty is as good as it gets. In other areas, like the Bay of Pigs, Civil Rights legislation (or continual ignoring of the need for), and Vietnam, JFK could hardly have done worse.

While I am certain it was not the author's intent, my opinion of Kennedy went way down in the reading of this biography. It certainly seems to me that JFK was a man with absolutely no moral compass. I am not talking just about his womanizing. Forget that. The more I read, the more it seemed that each and every decision JFK made was solely about what would best serve his career. Whether success or failure, my interpretation for his motives was not based on what was right but rather what was expedient (or popular). In this way, he does remind me a lot of another president, currently serving, who I desperately hope does not get a chance for a second term.

John F Kennedy is perhaps best known, for better or worse, for his assassination, and it is easy to understand why. Now, even over 50 years later, the public at large is still unsatisfied with the answers provided, as many do not believe that Lee Harvey Oswald killed him with a rifle from the book depository.

Still, there is much to learn about Kennedy. He came of political age as a senator when the Cold War was just approaching, and he would lead the fight for America and the West as President. There was the Bay of Pigs invasion of Cuba, the fight for Vietnam internationally, and the fight for Civil Rights here at home.

With all this in mind, I began his biography by Robert Dallek. Dallek’s biography is unique in that it is the first biography to be released since Kennedy’s medical records were made available to the public. Dallek makes full use of this by exploring Kennedy’s medical problems in great detail. But did this make for an engaging biography? Overall, I would say no.

Not to say that Dallek doesn’t try. He uses the medical records to explore many of Kennedy's issues in early life. One thing that surprised me was how his medical problems started when he was very young. I had always believed that Kennedy’s problems with his back started after his service in the Navy and the infamous PT 109 episode, but I was wrong. Many of his medical issues happened before then, and his father had to convince some people to let him into the Navy despite his health issues. Kennedy had many medical issues that are only now being understood, among them being a variation of Addison’s disease, which he would suffer from throughout his life. This is something that Dallek covers to a great extent and should be commended for.

Dallek also covers Kennedy in the White House very well considering how short a time he had in office. Dallek outlines all of the major issues Kennedy faced and how he dealt with them. This includes why Kennedy would have started various projects, and how he sold them to the public to gain their support. Dallek minces no words when it comes to Kennedy. He was a politician, through and through, with motives behind motives for everything he did, and, for better or worse, many of these were kept from the public.

And this leads me to another thing I like about this biography: Dallek doesn’t let Kennedy off the hook as President. With many Presidents it can be easy to make them into legends, ignoring their more off-color qualities. This is not so here. Dallek does not let Kennedy slide when it comes to the things that were wrong at the time and should not have been done. One of which would be the fact that Kennedy’s brother, Robert F Kennedy, may have had a hand in covering up his many affairs while John was President. Also, there is Kennedy’s viewpoint on Civil Rights. Kennedy himself would see African Americans as people who needed their rights to be protected, and he showed his support in speeches, but that was as far as he got when it came to giving them equal rights. They would have to wait for Johnson before the Equal Rights Amendment was passed. Kennedy was just too afraid of losing Southern support for the other bills he wanted passed so he had to keep the rights of African Americans to a minimum.

However, there are some times when this biography falls short. One of which is the very thing I praised it for earlier. Remember how I mentioned that Dallek used Kennedy’s medical records in the first fourth of the book? Well, there were times when I think he tended to focus a little too much on his medical problems. Kennedy spent most of his teen and early adult years in and out of hospitals with the result that Dallek’s writing becomes tedious on this point. We hear multiple times about how Kennedy winds up in a hospital…again. He has problems with his back and digestive tract…again. His doctors can’t seem to find out what is wrong with him…again. This all made me wonder, early on, if this book was worth reading. I am happy to say that after the PT 109 episode, Dallek seems to taper off the discussion of Kennedy’s medical problems so that they have minimal intrusion on the rest of the book, only popping up here and there when necessary.

But that leads me to another point: Dallek writes with a certain detached exactitude which I feel leaves me wanting more. Perhaps it is because the Kennedys have always been private with the press, but there is not the feeling like I knew Kennedy the man from the public persona of Kennedy the President. Even despite this, Dallek’s writing is not on the same level as McCullough or Meacham. He does not seem to be telling you a story focused on people, but rather a historian focused on certain events, something that I found disappointing.

So, I would say that this book is good if you want to know more about Kennedy’s medical issues in his life, but not so much beyond that. I give it a three out of five.

I can’t decide if I am more disappointed with JFK’s “unfinished” presidency or with Robert Dallek’s pedestrian account of his tragic life. I must have set my expectations too high. Historians rank Kennedy as one of the ten best and “An Unfinished Life” is the highest rated single-volume biography of America’s 35th president.

Dallek does a solid job of chronicling Kennedy’s early life. Like TR and FDR, Jack trod a path of Northeastern wealth and privilege that led to Harvard. Like both Roosevelts, he would have to overcome formidable health challenges. Dallek speculates that Jack’s father Joe most likely pulled some strings to allow his ailing son to see action in the South Pacific as the captain of PT-109. This was when I began to struggle with Dallek’s narrative. Dallek allows his access to newly obtained medical records to overshadow Kennedy’s wartime exploits in Ch. 3. After wading through all the medical diagnoses and treatments, I had a good sense of the sinking of Jack’s boat and his heroic rescue of his men, but Dallek subsequently relates, “And for the next six weeks he got in a lot of fighting and, to his satisfaction, inflicted some damage on the enemy” (p. 100). What fighting? What damage?

Dallek makes it clear that for all his charisma, quick wits and eloquent speeches, Kennedy accomplished little during his 12 years in Congress, with his father playing a crucial role at every turn. Kennedy’s most notable (and controversial) action was to not vote to censure Sen. Joseph McCarthy for his Communist witch hunt. Kennedy did become a celebrity and launched his presidential run with the publication of “Profiles in Courage,” but as one of his colleagues put it, “Why not show a little less profile and a little more courage?” (p. 217). Even though JFK’s election in 1960 was every bit as close as Truman’s in 1948, Dallek’s account lacks the drama or verve of David McCullough’s “Truman.”

JFK was in the poorest health of anyone to become president. He was always taking at least ten different drugs, including pain killers, to treat a range of ailments, led by Addison’s disease and a bad back. As one doctor reviewing his medical files put it, Kennedy was “doped up” (p. 471). This makes it all the more amazing that JFK was competing with LBJ to be the most promiscuous president. Indeed, Dallek spends more time discussing Jack’s affairs, ranging from Marilyn Monroe to a White House intern (thinking of you, Bill!), than he does Jackie Kennedy and his two children.

Foreign affairs-wise, Kennedy is best known for approving the CIA’s botched invasion of Cuba in 1961 and the Cuban Missile Crisis a year later. Dallek is strongest in relating these two events, but he fails to convey the public’s widespread fear that the world was on the precipice of a cataclysmic nuclear war. Dallek and most analysts have praised Kennedy for standing up to Khrushchev's dispatch of nuclear weapons to Cuba, but what if the mercurial Soviet leader hadn’t turned back his ships once Kennedy imposed the blockade? Yes, the missiles violated vague notions of the Monroe Doctrine, but did they qualitatively change the nuclear threat posed to the U.S.? No. Besides, Soviet troops remained even after the nukes were removed.

American also became a little bit pregnant in its military commitment to Vietnam on Kennedy’s watch. I would pinpoint the moment of conception as 15 November 1961 when Kennedy announced a tripling of the number of military “advisers” in Vietnam. Dallek does not provide the figures, but according to militaryfactory.com, more American soldiers died during Kennedy’s first year in office (16) than during the previous five years under Ike. The U.S. went from having several hundred to 16,000 troops dispatched when Kennedy died. Based on my reading of Ambrose's "Eisenhower," Ike saw Vietnam as a fool's errand. Kennedy also failed to listen to his policy coordinator at the State Department. Kennedy's failure to reject the hawks and conventional wisdom showed poor judgement and a lack of leadership on the critical issue of the decade--just as W, Hillary and Biden would do the same 40 years later.

Dallek does make a strong argument that JFK would not have escalated like LBJ did in 1965 because he was more skeptical and would not be facing reelection. Still, Kennedy started America down a disastrous track that LBJ failed and even Nixon would struggle to take America off of.

Kennedy’s unambiguous accomplishments were more modest. He did sign the first nuclear arms control agreement with the Soviets and pledged to take Americans to the moon by the end of the decade. Amazingly, Dallek doesn’t even mention Kennedy’s famous “We Choose to Go to the Moon” speech at Rice University in September 1962. My favorite accomplishment? Kennedy created the Peace Corps. I wanted to join when I was at U.C. Berkeley, but when I discovered they had pulled out of South Korea several years earlier, I chose a different path. Kennedy’s ambitious domestic agenda, particularly expanding civil rights and social welfare, would have to be accomplished by his successor. To my great surprise, Dallek provides only a cursory account of Kennedy’s assassination, devoting only a few sentences to the event itself.

Reading about JFK made me realize that I have had the good fortune of meeting three of the most important people from Kennedy’s inner circle. Chief speechwriter Ted Sorensen gave a talk to my fellow interns at the World Affairs Council in SF when I was a senior. Ten years later, I made a point of introducing myself to Defense Secretary Robert McNamara at a conference in Washington, D.C. because we both went to Cal. And I interviewed key adviser Arthur Schlessinger for a Korean newspaper a few years after that. How I wish I had asked them about Jack!

This review makes me realize that I am more disappointed with Dallek than JFK because I still want to read much more about Kennedy and those around him. To his credit, Dallek mentions his favorite previous biographies of Kennedy, especially those by Richard Reeves and Seymour Hersh. I was surprised that Kennedy relied heavily on advice from Dean Acheson, which moves him up my supporting roles reading list. One of the joys of reading about so many presidents is discerning the thru-stories of folks who serve multiple presidents, like like Lincoln's John Hay and FDR's Henry Stimson. I had planned to read “Profiles in Courage” until I learned it was written primarily by Sorensen. First I plan to read Chris Matthews’ “Bobby Kennedy” (2017). Bobby was Jack’s closest friend by far. Next will be McNamara’s “In Retrospect” (1997) as much to better understand the Vietnam tragedy. That means I should also read Max Hastings’ “Vietnam” (2018).

A reasonable and fair-minded biography of the late 35th President of the United States. A flawed, complex leader who made mistakes and learned from them, who struggled with his health but overcame suffering, and who never allowed private suffering or indulgence to interfere with his duties as president. This biography deals in facts and verifiable information, deals with rumor and allegation but does not market innuendo or outrageous scandal, acknowledges and attempts to explain conspiracy theories but does not take any sides in those arguments. The JFK biography any American should be reading.

John F. Kennedy was born into a wealthy, politically connected Boston family of Irish Catholics. He and his eight siblings enjoyed a privileged childhood of elite private schools, sailboats, servants, and summer homes. Unfortunately, “Jack” Kennedy suffered frequent serious illnesses during his childhood and youth. Nevertheless, he strove to make his way, writing a best-selling book while studying at Harvard University and volunteering for hazardous combat duty in the Pacific during World War II. Kennedy’s service made him a hero. Kennedy entered politics, serving in the US House of Representatives from 1947 to 1953 and the US Senate from 1953 to 1961.

Kennedy was the youngest person elected US president and the first Roman Catholic to serve in that office. For many observers, his presidency came to represent the ascendance of youthful idealism in the aftermath of World War II. Unfortunately, he did not fulfill the promise of this energetic and telegenic leader, as he was assassinated near the end of his third year in office. For many Americans, the public murder of President Kennedy remains one of the most traumatic events; countless Americans can remember exactly where they were when they heard that President Kennedy was shot. Moreover, his shocking death was a period of political and social instability.

Source: https://millercenter.org/president/ke...

I have now completed the third biography on my list of US Presidents who have been in office during my lifetime: Truman, Eisenhower, and Kennedy. It appears that to be taken seriously a presidential biography must be a door-stopper no matter how long their lives or how many terms they served. John F Kennedy only lived for 46 years and only held the Presidency for 1000 days but he still got 711 pages of text from Robert Dallek.

This reading about presidents' lives is probably the most difficult of my various reading projects but also hugely satisfying in terms of an overview of American federal government and politics. Who they were and how they became presidents is a mirror on American life. But the main idea I have come to is that the news media gives us a distinctly skewed view of our presidents and the disconnect between who they really are and what they have to deal with as the leaders of our country compared to what we are told about that while it is happening only grows wider as the new media keeps up with technological changes over the years.

Despite huge swaths of boring day by day depictions of JFK's nomination and election campaigns as well as the major crises he faced during his term, I learned much more about the man than I was ever taught in school. I gained an understanding of why he was and continues to be so revered. He was THE man for the times in 1960; young, handsome, intelligent, and forward looking. He was also a consummate politician with an inborn sense of how to advance his career, complemented by what he learned from his father. He was far more ill for his entire life than was publicly known. Medicated to his eyeballs much of the time, his health was a risk and a big long story covered fully in Dallek's book.

Though I suspect the author down pedaled it to a large degree, Kennedy was an unrepentant and continuous womanizer. As a teenager I was infatuated with the romance between Jack and Jackie. In An Unfinished Life, Jackie only gets about 20 pages, so now I will need to read some books that give more of her side of the story. I was left feeling it was all a political show.

I wonder if I could have or should have read a different Kennedy biography. Robert Dallek's dull and pedestrian writing style certainly did not match his flamboyant subject.

In a New York Times Book Review article on the 50th anniversary of JFK's assassination, Dallek's book was described as the best biography about the president. "Dallek, who spent five years researching and writing, has a deep appreciation of Kennedy's operatic story. The book has rich detail about the president's persistent and serious health problems, which serve to make the life seem genuinely heroic as well as swaddled in troubling cover-ups."

Slightly boring one-volume account of the late American President's life and career. Boring because instead of information about JFK's personality and mindset, the author assumes the reader is as interested in the intricacies of local American politics as he is. You are treated to dry accounts of state politics, and when JFK ascends to the Presidency, you are treated to an equally dry account of the day-to-day minutiae of his work life.
Besides that, the book had some good information regarding the immensity of the medical problems that JFK faced, his complex relationship with his domineering father (the author theorizes that the late President's womanizing had to do with an inferiority complex vis a vis his father), and some aspects of his personality and beliefs. The high point of the book is the Cuban Missile Crisis, when the two K's (Kennedy and Kruschev) both held the fate of the world in their hands. The author gives JFK credit for not listening to the hawks in his administration, who wanted to launch a land invasion of Cuba ; which would have certainly caused a retaliation from the Soviets, and a nuclear war.

I picked up this book after finishing a biography on LBJ. I was interested in learning more about the "1000 days of Camelot", JFK's family dynast, the womanizing, his politics, the 60's, the cold war, Castro, the assassination, and legacy. I was interested in the dynamic between LBJ and JFK. They couldn't be more different from each other, in temperament, style, friends, governance and outlook.

I was just over a year old when Kennedy was assassinated, so I don't personally remember it. But my parents loved him and his memory and work were very much alive in the 60's. I do remember RFK's and MLK's death/s very clear, which in many ways were extensions of the same issues that surrounded JFK.

While I haven't read any other bios on JFK, I would guess that if you were going to read one, this would be it. As I understand it, the many bios on JFK are different perspectives on the same information. In this book, Dallek has new information to add, most of it regarding JFK's health and medical records. I was quite amazed to learn about the incredible amount of pain and discomfort that JFK experienced throughout his life and how it was treated. He missed a lot of school and a lot of political life as a result of being in treatment or in the hospital. From Addisons, to colitis, to prostatitis, deteriorating spine, and more, he endured the pain and the treatments which made some symptoms worse, while numbing him to the affects of others. Dallek makes a somewhat convincing case that JFK's health problems did not get in the way of his decision making and governing, but I'm not so sure. Missing important votes in the Senate, shortness with his advisors, a sense of mortality that justified his womanizing (according to Dallek). In fact, if JFK had not been wearing a back brace in his last fatal ride, he would have slumped over after the first shot and the second bullet would have missed, giving him a chance to survive.

In reviewing the book, I would say it is well written and that it covered his life from cradle to grave quite well. Although Dallek is obviously a fan, I think he is fairly balanced about the man in examining his relatively short time on earth. I think I would have been interested in a bit more supposition from the author on what impact he really made politically and in advancing his ideas in a politically turbulent time. Further, it would have been interesting for him to speculate a bit more about the affect his death had on future leadership (for example, LBJ might not have been able to pass Civil rights legislation without invoking the memory of JFK as a martyr for the cause).

I think Dallek left a lot of conclusions about JFK's legacy to his readers. And I can't help but make a few of my own observations that Dallek didn't make, or made in roundabout ways - with the information provided.

To wit:
* JFK didn't accomplish enough in his 1,000 days to put him in the top 15-20 presidents of all time (despite the fact that many americans put him in the top 5). He handled the Cuban missile crisis well, but he flip-flopped on most issues (in some ways it was because the issues were difficult, in some ways he was worried about being re-elected more than in doing the right thing)
* JFK's enhanced legacy had a lot to do with his unfortunate assassination - people understandably loved him!
* JFK was popular in his time because he was good looking, well spoken, gave the impression of forward thinking, and he the first president who the people really related to.
* Like many of his time, JFK was obsessed with the threat of communism and he took great pains to fight it. He was beginning to understand that it was better to win wars with ideas and than it was to to fight them on the ground with men in Vietnam or Cuba. He was coming to terms with the idea that the US was guilty of not "walking the walk" around the globe and that it hurt our chances to be credible with Russia, China and many other governments.
* He was more interested and more adept in foreign relations than in domestic issues. LBJ (asshole that he was) was one of the most adept politicians at getting legislation passed but JFK didn't listen to him, take his advise or use him in that capacity. He ignored him and marginalized him. I wonder JFK's civil rights bills, tax cuts, and other initiatives would have passed with LBJ's help.
* The Cold war is a fascinating topic. The issues of mutually assured destruction, balance of power, and global responsibility to not kill millions of people is as relevant - and maybe even more precarious - today as it was in the early '60s. But Hiroshima and Nagasaki were still so fresh in 1960, that it was an obsession for Kennedy, the citizens of the US and the world. So many of his private and public discussions and decisions were centered around these themes. And while politicians still may be talking, thinking and acting with these fears and realities, it seems like main street isn't talking about it today. Is it too far removed? Have we cynically resigned ourselves to the idea that we are only one red-button push away from the end? In either case, Kennedy's actions seem out of step with today's consciousness....or perhaps we've just forgotten its importance.
* I looked up pictures of all the women he had affairs with, and I must confess, they were no Monica Lewinskys. He had good taste, even if he was lacking good judgement.

Finally, this is what Dallek didn't really say that I believe is most true about JFK: JFK (like Obama and I hate to admit, Reagan) gave voice to hope and the idea of a better future for Americans. He was smart, and he appeared (like those afore mentioned presidents) to be quite sincere. He had a humanistic touch and comportment, with a disarming sense of humor that made people feel comfortable in an age of uncertainty. I would argue that this is a leadership quality that is not only missing from most of our politicians today, but is a quality that is most needed. For us to take action, we need a voice and a vision. Who better to articulate it than the POTUS?