ding, ding, ding - we have a winner. not sure about johnson but we do know about kennedy so maybe he was a true leader and, well, we know what happend to him - don't know personally, maybe some of you unbiased older people on here that lived during the kennedy and johnson times can weigh in as i can read about history, but there is nothing like the history from somebody who has lived it.
fwiw, i have read some history and seen some documentaries and it has been claimed that kennedy was our last legit president - i can't remember the sources just remember the statements. so after the kennedy example others fell in line and just do what they are told. our president is just a puppet position after all, at least now, it use to mean something.
If you have a questionabout Kennedy or Johnson, I can try to help. I'm a longtime reseracher on Kennedy.
One thing to note is that all these guys are 'their own guys' to varying degrees, and all have people who have help them to varying degrees and sometimes people they've helped if not become obligated to.
When Nixon was out of power, he became a corporate lawyer, for Pepsi. When left-wing democracy won in Chile - a very good thing - the US corporations who wanted back corrupt control talked and had Pepsi represent them and call Nixon to say 'do somethig about Allende'. Nixon told Kissinger to do something and the rest is history. That wasn't Nixon being owned, controlled, ordered, he was his own man, but that was his orientation and loyalty.
Kennedy had some unique qualities - he was the best in a way of the 'rich kid' situation in that he had to do less begging for money and was freed to do what he wanted without the obligations. He also had a remarkable history of gong asround the world from embassy to emabassy, courtesy of his father's having been Ambassador. learning a lot.
He understood beter than most 'how things worked', how to challenge the corrupt power structures.
He wasn't perfect, but he was a presodent for the public interest in many ways against many interests more than few people understand and taking on battles other presidents did not.
Some of that is more clear, like his change the nation's course from blind backing of Europe's colonization of third world colonies, and others are long forgotten like his battles with Wall Street.
He'd planned to completely overhaul the US intelligence apparatus - just over a decade old when he got it - but didn't get to; a decade later it was trashed in the Church committee hearings exposing all kinds of wrongdoing, and after that it's repeatedly been faulted and there have been calls for reorganization that haven't gone well.
I've said he was our last 'great' president; I'm not sure the word real president quite gets it.
As far as being a puppet, unfortunately, there are real filters tha make it far harder for someone to become president. A Dennis Kucinish lacks the military or industry backing and has little chance.
We could use another John Kennedy, but outside of the Kennedy brothers, any of them, we seem not to have many.
One of the things giving me higher hopes about Obama was that he was recognized early by Kennedy's top aide who knew him best, Ted Sorensen, as the presidential candidate most like Kennedy since.
I haven't heard how Sorensen feels now, it wouldn't be too plitically correct if he has criticism, but I wonder if he's disappointed in the alliances Obama has made.