Was My Father the Reason JFK Got Shot?

The president had come to end a fight my dad had started. Yet the tragedy reshaped his life — and mine — for the better.

  Family idyll: The author and her father. Family idyll:The authorand her father.  
National Journal
Sophie Yarborough
Add to Briefcase
See more stories about...
Sophie Yarborough
Nov. 11, 2013, 6 a.m.

I al­ways heard about the ma­gic bul­let that killed Pres­id­ent Kennedy and wounded Texas Gov. John Con­nally. But it wasn’t un­til a few years ago that I real­ized the same bul­let also shattered the polit­ic­al dreams of my fath­er.

My fath­er was Don Yar­bor­ough, a cha­ris­mat­ic, lib­er­al law­yer who ran for gov­ernor of Texas three times. He wanted to make a dif­fer­ence, hop­ing to end the kind of en­trenched poverty and ra­cism he’d seen in Mis­sis­sippi when he was a boy pick­ing cot­ton on his aunt’s farm. He had the self-con­fid­ence, cour­age, and am­bi­tion to be­lieve he ac­tu­ally could — and that, if everything fell in­to place, he could even be pres­id­ent. He em­braced JFK’s New Fron­ti­er policies and was the first white South­ern politi­cian to voice sup­port for the civil-rights bill, ac­cord­ing to The Texas Ob­serv­er.

My fath­er had nev­er held elec­ted of­fice when he stunned pun­dits by for­cing the con­ser­vat­ive Con­nally, the can­did­ate of big oil, in­to a white-knuckle run­off in the Demo­crat­ic primary for gov­ernor in 1962. With the back­ing of labor uni­ons, blacks, and His­pan­ics, my dad won 49 per­cent of the vote. Sup­port­ers were ur­ging him to run again in 1964 (Tex­an gov­ernors were then elec­ted every two years) when Kennedy showed up in Dal­las, partly to pa­ci­fy the in­terne­cine war­fare. Then Lee Har­vey Os­wald fired the shot that altered Amer­ica’s des­tiny — and my fath­er’s as well.

A chain of events that began at Dealey Plaza even­tu­ally pushed him out of polit­ics and con­vinced him that he could make a great­er dif­fer­ence through sci­ence, lead­ing to a ca­reer as an en­tre­pren­eur. And in­stead of a child­hood defined by polit­ics, a na­tion’s tragedy gave me a de­voted and in­spir­ing fath­er.


I was born in 1967, just a year be­fore my fath­er’s fi­nal run for of­fice, so I nev­er got to see him on the cam­paign trail. But he was such a nat­ur­al politi­cian that, even after he’d aban­doned the pro­fes­sion, he ex­uded warmth to every cab driver, waiter, and cash­ier he met. In­stead of telling us not to talk to strangers, he en­cour­aged it.

Luck­ily, he was a great storyteller about life in polit­ics. One time, he said, he moved to greet a con­ser­vat­ive politi­cian he knew while TV cam­er­as fol­lowed him at the state Cap­it­ol build­ing in Aus­tin. Not want­ing to be filmed with a lib­er­al, the man turned and ran as my fath­er chased him, hand out­stretched, cam­er­as rolling. Dad also told us how he puddle-jumped between small towns around Texas in a tiny, stom­ach-churn­ing Cessna.

I thought he would have been a phe­nom­en­al pres­id­ent, and it seemed im­possible to me that someone like him could lose at any­thing. I hated that, when friends asked me what my fath­er did, I had to tell them he had run for gov­ernor three times and lost. I fi­nally began just de­scrib­ing him as an at­tor­ney.

Of the de­fin­ing event in his pro­fes­sion­al life, he talked sur­pris­ingly little. After fail­ing to end poverty and ra­cism as a politi­cian, his pas­sion be­came sci­ence, which he be­lieved could help more people than polit­ics. As al­ways, he dreamed big — set­ting out to cure aging, which he called “the only dis­ease that kills every­one.” We had moved to Cam­bridge, Mass., where my fath­er be­friended Har­vard sci­ent­ists, rais­ing money for their re­search and, even­tu­ally, help­ing to launch a bi­otech com­pany. He oc­ca­sion­ally men­tioned wist­fully that, if he wanted to, he could still run for pres­id­ent. But he nev­er did.

The first time I con­nec­ted my fath­er to Kennedy’s as­sas­sin­a­tion, I was a sopho­more in a Cam­bridge high school. My his­tory teach­er, who was ob­sessed with JFK, paused his les­son one day to ask if I was one of the “Texas Yar­bor­oughs.” Yes, I told him, my fath­er was Don Yar­bor­ough. “He’s the reas­on Kennedy got shot!” my teach­er ex­claimed. I knew it was prob­ably a joke, but the pos­sib­il­ity hor­ri­fied me.

I fol­lowed my moth­er in­to journ­al­ism but nev­er thought to re­search my fath­er’s role in the Kennedy tragedy un­til after he died in 2009. His life, and my own, had been mol­ded by that day, but I still knew al­most noth­ing about it. I scanned book in­dexes for my fath­er’s name and read what I could find on the In­ter­net. I even cor­res­pon­ded with some con­spir­acy the­or­ists, try­ing to re­con­struct what my fath­er went through on Nov. 22, 1963. But when I star­ted to delve in­to the as­sas­sin­a­tion, I found that his part in the story had all but van­ished. One reas­on was simple con­fu­sion: He shared a last name with Sen. Ral­ph Yar­bor­ough — a lib­er­al le­gend and a prom­in­ent fig­ure in the Kennedy tableau; al­though not re­lated, the two were close polit­ic­al al­lies and friends.

But I found out through my re­search that Con­nally, a protégé of LBJ, hoped to use his White House con­nec­tions to get my fath­er out of the race in re­turn for his help in plan­ning JFK’s tour to Texas, ac­cord­ing to James Re­ston Jr., au­thor of two books on Con­nally. More than once, Con­nally asked about Kennedy’s aides, “When are [they] go­ing to get Don Yar­bor­ough off my back?” Just be­fore Kennedy traveled to Dal­las, my dad had told me, the LBJ camp presen­ted him with an of­fer, tendered in a phone call from Sen. Yar­bor­ough: John­son would guar­an­tee my fath­er an un­op­posed seat in the House if he would agree not to run against Con­nally for gov­ernor in 1964. Mean­while, LBJ would en­dorse Sen. Yar­bor­ough, my dad’s lib­er­al ment­or, for reelec­tion, clear­ing the field. It was a deal aimed to heal the frac­tured Texas Demo­crat­ic Party: Each wing would have a prom­in­ent win­ner — the sen­at­or for the lib­er­als and the gov­ernor for the con­ser­vat­ives. The ap­pear­ance of unity would strengthen LBJ’s hand with Kennedy, who needed Texas to win reelec­tion.

A Wash­ing­ton Post head­line just two days be­fore the as­sas­sin­a­tion de­clared, “JFK to Look in on Brew­ing Texas Fight.” The art­icle said that even though the pres­id­ent, the vice pres­id­ent, the gov­ernor, and a sen­at­or would be seated at the head tables of a din­ner dur­ing Kennedy’s vis­it, the vi­tal de­cision to be made lay mainly with “a shrewd, evan­gel­ic­al Kennedy Demo­crat” — my 39-year-old fath­er, the tar­get of in­cred­ible Wash­ing­ton pres­sure to cede the race. He must have felt con­fid­ent he could win (a poll the day Kennedy ar­rived showed my fath­er ahead of Con­nally), be­cause he re­fused the deal.

The as­sas­sin­a­tion, ob­vi­ously, changed everything. It didn’t just kill the pres­id­ent; it made a mar­tyr out of Con­nally, who had been wounded while rid­ing with the na­tion’s fallen hero. Nev­er­the­less, my fath­er shocked every­one by fil­ing to run. He “was on the way to win­ning, but after Con­nally was shot, there was noth­ing but the as­sas­sin­a­tion in the news­pa­pers,” says Ron­nie Dug­ger, the au­thor of that 1963 Post re­port. “There was no way he could win after that — no way.” He lost 2-to-1, end­ing his best shot at the gov­ernor­ship. The as­sas­sin­a­tion also squashed the lib­er­al re­bel­lion in Texas for dec­ades. Re­ston writes that after Con­nally won in 1964, “there was talk of Os­wald’s gift to Con­nally of a ‘sil­ver bul­let.’ “


The as­sas­sin­a­tions of the 1960s — the Kennedy broth­ers, Mar­tin Luth­er King Jr. — sent a de­mor­al­iz­ing mes­sage to politi­cians: You could reach great heights in the pur­suit of your ideals, as Kennedy did, and then a bul­let could end everything. My fath­er’s brand of pro­gress­ive polit­ics had be­come dan­ger­ous. He told me more than once that, had he won in 1962, it could have been him in the car with Kennedy.

My fath­er sat out the 1966 elec­tion. He had al­ways wanted to see Europe, so in 1966 he moved my moth­er and three older sib­lings to Tours, France, where I was born, and then to Denia, a tiny Span­ish town on the Medi­ter­ranean, where he could study Span­ish and my moth­er could write. Dur­ing this time, he began to shift his fo­cus to sci­ence. Yet, urged by his sup­port­ers and pulled by dreams he hadn’t en­tirely giv­en up, he re­turned to Texas to run for the fi­nal time in 1968. But by then, his mo­mentum and his pas­sion for polit­ics were gone, and he lost for the last time as Lone Star lib­er­al­ism faded away. “I got it out of my blood,” he told me.

The morn­ing after my fath­er’s fu­ner­al in Hou­s­ton, I went to a book­store to pick up cop­ies of his ob­it­u­ar­ies from the na­tion­al and loc­al pa­pers. As I walked out with a tall stack of news­print, an older man re­garded my pur­chase curi­ously. I told him I was the daugh­ter of Don Yar­bor­ough, who had just died. He hes­it­ated and then told me this: “Someone like your fath­er wouldn’t be ne­ces­sary today, be­cause he gave a voice to the people who didn’t have one back then — blacks, His­pan­ics, and the poor. Now they have a voice of their own. They can win elec­ted of­fices and speak for them­selves. It wasn’t like that back then.”

Back then, speak­ing up was cour­ageous. Des­pite in­tense pres­sure, my fath­er re­fused to sur­render his ideals and cut a deal, be­cause he be­lieved Con­nally would nev­er sup­port civil rights — and, in per­sist­ing (yes, my his­tory teach­er was on to something), he may have in­ad­vert­ently caused Kennedy’s death. I’m still amazed that he nev­er showed a trace of bit­ter­ness about be­com­ing a vic­tim of cir­cum­stance, and I’m in­cred­ibly proud of his polit­ic­al cour­age. This helped shape my per­son­al­ity, too. If he could fight for his be­liefs against such long odds, then surely I can tackle my own con­sid­er­ably more mundane chal­lenges. As one per­son wrote in the com­ments sec­tion of Texas Monthly after he died, “Don Yar­bor­ough stormed the gates of Hell with a buck­et of wa­ter.”

I al­ways con­sidered the Kennedy as­sas­sin­a­tion to be an Amer­ic­an tragedy. In some ways, I now see it as a per­son­al tragedy, too. Os­wald killed polit­ics for my fath­er. But when his polit­ic­al life ended, an­oth­er life began, and that is the one that I re­mem­ber. Sci­ence be­came his greatest love, and the bi­otech com­pany he helped to launch is still search­ing for cures for Alzheimer’s, can­cer, and oth­er dis­eases. He liked to say, “We are either the last gen­er­a­tion to die, or the first one to live forever.” Also, his new pur­suit let him spend nights and week­ends with his fam­ily. Mean­while, al­though my dad nev­er stopped ra­cism, ended poverty, or cured aging, he brought hope and in­spir­a­tion to people who needed it, and the lib­er­al co­ali­tion he helped to build lives on. The mes­sage of his life is: Big dreams are nev­er wasted.

One of the most mean­ing­ful let­ters I re­ceived after my fath­er’s 2009 death from Par­kin­son’s dis­ease came from an ed­it­or at The Texas Ob­serv­er. He said his own fath­er had urged him to read about my dad and oth­er lib­er­al Tex­ans when he was a young boy in the 1960s, and that my fath­er would al­ways be one of his polit­ic­al her­oes.

He’s one of mine, too.

What We're Following See More »
Rybicki Departs FBI
11 hours ago

"FBI Director Chris Wray will change his chief of staff in the coming weeks, multiple sources told CNN Tuesday. James Rybicki, who served Wray's predecessor, James Comey, in the same role, will soon leave, the sources said. Zachary Harmon, a white-collar lawyer, will take on the role." Rybicki played a "role in crafting a statement that exonerated Hillary Clinton in her email server investigation." In related news, the Washington Post reports that "Dana Boente, the U.S. attorney in the Eastern District of Virginia who is acting head of the Justice Department’s national security division, has been selected to be the FBI’s next general counsel."

Mueller Seeks to Interview Trump
12 hours ago

"Special counsel Robert S. Mueller III is seeking to question President Trump in the coming weeks about his decisions to oust national security adviser Michael Flynn and FBI Director James B. Comey, according to two people familiar with his plans. ... The president’s legal team hopes to provide Trump’s testimony in a hybrid form — answering some questions in a face-to-face interview and others in a written statement."

Feinstein, Schiff Call on Facebook, Twitter to Investigate “Release the Memo” Campaign
17 hours ago
Mueller Interviewed Sessions
18 hours ago
Trump Signs Spending Bill
1 days ago

Welcome to National Journal!

You are currently accessing National Journal from IP access. Please login to access this feature. If you have any questions, please contact your Dedicated Advisor.