President Reagan, the original cowboy president, now rests in peace.
As I was a child of the 80's my recollection of the president is mostly contained in compartments of events. But I certainly don't need a television anchor to tell me how profound of an impact Reagan had on all of our lives.
I have three memories of President Reagan.
My first memory of a presidential race (of politics really) was in the fall of 1979. I read about it in some Scholastic newsletter for grade school children. Among the patriotic symbols and stories on how democracy works was an introduction to the two candidates: President Jimmy Carter and Governor Ronald Reagan. After reading about the two men I wanted to vote but found out from my father that I was too young.
Not wanting my appetite for participation to be crushed, my father went to his typewriter and stamped out an official ballot and gave it to me with instructions on how to vote. Making sure that no one was watching I took a pencil and marked the box next to Ronald Reagan — Republican. Months later I was very proud to discover that my choice for president had won the election.
Two years later, in the forth grade, class was interrupted by an unexpected crackle of the announcement system. You could tell it wasn't just for our class because the noise could be heard through the walls of the other classrooms — meaning it was going to be important. The voice said that the president had been shot and more information would be forthcoming. It was so hard to return to studies as my imagination ran wild with questions and scenarios. Being so young it was hard to imagine how it could have happened.
Later in the afternoon we crammed into another classroom to watch the news. The rest of the day was spent watching the the now famous clip over and over again (via the news) and asking the teachers questions about what had happened and why.
When I was sixteen I recall reading a Sunday edition of the Anchorage Daily News. On the front page, below the fold, was a feature about the potential of nuclear war with the Soviet Union. The story talked about what sort of destructive path a modern day nuclear blast would create. My family lived forty miles away from two Soviet prime targets: Elmendorf Air Force Base (which was a target in the movie Wargames) and Fort Richardson Army Base. Our house lay on the very edge of ultimate destruction — the kind where a house is turned into toothpicks in a matter of seconds. And because Alaska is right next door to Russia, we would be annihilated within minutes of launch. Whereas everyone else had at least a good half and hour. Not that it would help, but at the time it still seemed so unfair.
I used to lay awake at night with this fear, until I started seeing that perhaps Mother Russia wasn't the source of all evil in the land. My first hope of living past the age of twenty came with news that President Reagan had befriended Soviet President Mikhail Gorbachev. Later they would announce plans to radically decrease the number of nuclear weapons. And from there it became a spiral of activity which ultimately lead to the disintegration of the Communist Soviet Union and the Warsaw Pact. Indeed we are living in a better world today in part due to President Reagan's diplomacy and willingness to look for possibilities instead of traditions.
I feel for the Reagan family today. My grandmother suffered and died from Alzheimer Disease. She was an English college professor, sharp as a tack (as my mother tells me) and always signing hymns (from what I remember as a child). Grandma Warfel was the best back-scratcher in the whole wide world. I miss her as always.
It seems such a shame for a man who did so much for us — literally changed the world and ended the Cold War — to suffer so long from that crippling disease. A president like Ronald Reagan doesn't come around very often. I consider myself very fortunate to have at least lived during his time even if I was too young to appreciate all the details at the time. We should be so lucky to have another president like him within our own lifetime.
Join the fray by reading through and commenting at the end.
My grandfather suffered from Alzheimer Disease as well, I know firsthand the havoc it can wreak on someone, which is why I'm glad the Reagan family chose to keep Mr. Reagan out of the news during the last years of his life.
He was a great man, a great President, and deserves to be remembered as such.
American intellectuals don't give enough credit to Republicans, at least that's what it seem like, from over here in Romania. Sometimes being 'hip' and liberal is the wrong thing to do.
Reagan, for me, a non-american, is foremost a champion of laissez-faire capitalism and republicanism.
>> We should be so lucky to have another president like him within our own lifetime.
Are you really serious? I mean, yes I feel for his family for losing such a figure in their life. But Reagan was far, far from a great president. He directly ordered for more invasions of Latin American countries than I can count. Which directly killed millions of innocent civilians in as part of a larger effort to keep real power (beit full Democracy or Communism) out of Latin America.
1980 - Begin 10 year war in El Salvador, CIA trained the now infamous "Death Squads" and funded the military government.
1980 - Continue Carter's goals of subduing Nicaragua
1980 - Death Squads expand to Honduras to fight Honduran dissidents. US aid increased 14-fold from 1978 to 1982 ($16 million in '78 to $231 by 1982.
1981 - Invade Libya
1982 - Iran-Contra affair anyone? CIA sells weapons to Iran and uses the money to fund the Contras in Nicaragua.
1982 - Invade Lebanon
1982 - Continued involvement in Vietnam in the name of democracy.
1983 - Invade Granada and overthrow leader.
1982 - Military dictator seizes control of Guatemala, in his 17 month tenure over 400 Inidian villages were destroyed. Reagon paid a personal visit and stated his full support of the dictator highlighting "he was totally dedicated to democracy".
The list goes on and on, I literally have to restrain myself from filling up this blog with facts. Reagan's military budget is second only to GWB's.
>> Reagan, for me, a non-american, is foremost a champion of laissez-faire capitalism and republicanism.
Not to mention Imperialism. At the time of my childhood, I remember actually liking Reagan (mostly because my parents did). I mean, everybody loved Reagan. It wasn't until all the Iran-Contra scandal came out, among many other cover-ups, when people really started to question the ethics of this "all-american" president.
Having been to El Salvador and Guatemala, and being able to talk with people who lived through these horendous events, have I really come to realize the uncanny similarities between Reagan an GWB.
Reagan's death hit me a little harder than I thought it would. He was a great man, and he inspires me to be a better person. I've heard innumerable stories about his "warmth" and just how incredibly nice he was as a person, even while taking such hard-line positions as a leader, which is a rare thing. The stories are now being retold all over the country; hearing them again makes me resolve to try and emulate that civility, sincerity and candour. I too hope we will see more leaders like him.
i am not american but i can understand your feelings.
Those of us old enough to have lived when Reagan was president remember both the good and bad — and there was both in ample quantity. What's fascinating to me is that the time that has passed, and the sheer quantity of TV-quality material available, makes his retrospective tributes quite remarkable. He was a powerful presenter, and keenly aware of it. What certainly comes through is his personal charisma, charm, commitment, and an extraordinary relationship with Mrs. Reagan.
While President Reagan eager embraced leadership of the devolution of the Soviet Union it is only fair to share the majority of that accomplishment with Mikael Gorbachev, who really drove the process.
Unfortunately, we are still battling another lasting legacy from his administration: his non-response to the AIDS epidemic. AIDS was first reported in 1981, but President Reagan could not bring himself to address the plague until 1987, at which time there were 60,000 reported cases of full-blown AIDS and 30,000 deaths.
Undoubtedly, Mr. Reagan was an extraordinary man. His administration however was all too much like each we have seen since. While the Reagan Whitehouse was nearly unbeatable at PR, they would be lucky to be judged breaking even on policy. Spoken by one who was there, with an open mind.
He was an actor who became a politician in the world's 5th largest economy (California) before becoming President of the U.S. Delivering a line like "... bring down this wall' came after '...win one for the gipper' and he performed flawlessly for the cameras, that's all. The script was already written. He was there at the right time and place to be chosen for a role on the 'global' stage.
Now this state has a politician who also used lines from his movies to get elected: 'I'm a cop, you idiot!', this one repeated over and over again by a high-school junior, member of the young republicans club.
Truth be told, I'd choose jelly beans over strudel or Linzer tortes 9 times out of 10.
Greg,
I went straight to Airbag the day of Reagan's death to see if you had posted anything. Here it is, a couple days after. Thanks for taking your time. Once again, a well-thought out piece of writing by Greg Storey. Reagan was certainly one of the top three presidents maybe of all-time for the US.
Keep writing.
Ben Potter
I wasn't old enough to remember the details of Reagan's presidency, and don't even live in the States but from what I know I don't understand why he is credited with the collapse of communism. He massively overspent on nuclear and military programs that the Soviet Union wouldn't have been able to compete with even if they had wanted to, referred to the Soviet Union as the evil empire and reignited the anti-communist feeling that had been dissapating during the period of detente throughout the 70's, sat and masked his ignorance of the issues with the USSR by making grating communist jokes to the point where Gorbachev asked that the meetings be kept as short as possible and blundered through his presidency with one liners. I fail to see how, with Gorbachev's intiatives and the collapsing Soviet economy, Reagan should be credited with bringing about the end of communism, and with his escalation of military spending he can be credited with forever furthering world peace.
Anyhow I'm sure there were plenty of positive aspects to his presidency and Reagan himself and I would also like to pay my respect to him.
President Reagan did lay on the rhetoric pretty thick to get some blood boiling and push for resolution. The past two-to-three presidents did nothing more than keep ice on the Cold War, where as Reagan turned a blow torch to it.
And to match his anti-Communist propaganda, he spent massive amounts of money on the military and the USSR took the bait. The Soviet Union did try match tank for tank — they had too, or at least had to try. That's the way the Cold War worked. The result helped create a collapse of the Soviet economy.
No one can deny that Gorbachev was instrumental in change but Mikhail didn't want Communism to end in Russia. He knew that the USSR had to quit worrying about the world and spend all it's focus on domestic issues, like the failing economy. That's why he didn't send in tanks with Communist Block nations like Yugoslavia and Romania fell. And why he did nothing to stop the fall of the Berlin wall.
Greg's correct. The Reagan strategy of massive military spending had a two-fold effect: 1) Destroying all hope within the USSR of being able to keep up with American spending and address internal social issues, and 2) Pumping up the American economy with massive government funds pouring back into aerospace and defense contractors. It took a Gorbachev to choose the right response and together, the world was changed. Perhaps most importantly, Reagan's disposition was vital medicine for a bruised America — an America still emerging from the haze of a disasterous, polarizing war in Vietnam, the resignation of a crooked President, and an OPEC-driven economic battering. A president who can make Americans feel good about themselves again is indeed something we all hope to see in today's trying times.
Sorry Greg, except for the part about his and his family's suffering at the end (I agree, no one's last days should be ignoble), you whiffed on this one. I am a bit older than you are, so I was old enough to appreciate all the details at the time. Unfortunately, they do not paint as pretty of a picture as yours.
By reciting scripted one-liners and riding horses, Reagan diverted attention from his flawed (and often corrupt) policies; he made us "feel good to be Americans again" (sheesh) by telling us happy lies and marketing himself like a box of cereal.
This approach was canny, but he lowered the bar for presidency and politics in this country. Like Clinton, he was (to paraphrase Salinger) a charm boy and a fake.
Beerzie, you can't make a statement like that without some details. Come back and pretend you're taking a swing at Boysen.
...and with his escalation of military spending he can be credited with forever furthering world peace.
Exactly -where do you think all the 'older' weapons end up?
Nobody is all bad or all good, but Raegan's majority did not lie in the good. Any rational, literate person can understand that. Any rational, literate person who cannot is unfortunately mired in denial. Such is life.
Call it lazyness -- I call it busyness -- but I don't have time to document details. However, you can start here:
Slate
Slate
Zmag
Billmon
This Modern World
...He massively overspent on nuclear and military programs that the Soviet Union wouldn't have been able to compete with even if they had wanted to...
It had the desired effect, so I wouldn't call it "overspending."
...reignited the anti-communist feeling that had been dissapating during the period of detente throughout the 70's...
I don't see this as being a problem. Pro-capitalist is necessarily anti-communist. Everyone's entitled to their own beliefs as an American, but promoting a general sense of anti-communism is entirely appropriate in a nation that functions because of capitalism.
...making grating communist jokes to the point where Gorbachev asked that the meetings be kept as short as possible...
I'd call this effective negotiation. The USSR was our enemy, after all. You don't win wars, cold or otherwise, by coddling your adversary.
I fail to see how...with his escalation of military spending he can be credited with forever furthering world peace.
Simple, by making it clear that the U.S. was the strongest military power in the world, and that picking a fight with us would have dire consequences.
Reaganomics worked eventhough it had many side-effects (rising national debt, imbalanced budget, etc) because it accomplished what it set out to do: beat the communist sytem to the ground. Soviet Union was the greatest threat to America and Reagan shattered that reality.
I find it sad and disheartening that nobody even cares to comment on the huge military aid, training, weapons forced on any Latin American country who was even the slightest bit anti-American. These actions directly caused the death of millions of civilians in and practically wiped out many countries remaining indegenous tribes and their peaceful communities.
To be soley concerned on the Cold War appears to be a form of denial in itself.
Greg,
I really love your site and read it very often.
I think you are talented and intelligent.
But, in Politics I couldn't disagree more.
That's ok Javi. Comments on this website would suck if everyone always agreed with my point of view.
Tom D: Let's put things in perspective regarding HIV/AIDS in the US (much like you, I suspect, this is a pet peeve of mine because it is always rolled out as evidence of "failure" on the part of various political factions -- most likely because of its early association with the gay lifestyle). Obviously, when you are talking about human deaths, it can seem cold to focus only on the numbers, but a little perspective is in order to understand how fiscal priorities might be determined.
According to the 2004 World Almanac, the top 10 causes of death in the US (in 2001, the most recent data available) resulted in the deaths of about 2.4 million people. #10 on the list (Septicemia) killed roughly 32,000 people. #5 on the list (Accidents) killed over 100,000 people. Of those accidents, about 49,000 were auto-related deaths -- and roughly half of those were caused by drunk drivers.
In 2001, HIV/AIDS killed about 15,000 people in the US (a little more than half of the number of people killed by drunk drivers). Homicides and suicides each killed more people in the US than did HIV/AIDS -- and they weren't anywhere near the top 10. The #2 cause of death in 2001 (various Cancers), killed nearly 100,000 *more* people in *one year* than have cumulatively died from HIV/AIDS since 1981 (which, incidently, is estimated to be around 470,000 people).
I would certainly hesitate to define Reagan's tenure based on his response to HIV/AIDS.
Scott, with all due respect, yours is a specious argument. While 30,000 deaths (10x September 11th — also not about the numbers, right?) in 6 years is a big number, the impact of AIDS — both in the US and across the developing world, has been incalculable, in both financial and personal terms. While I wouldn't (and didn't) "define Reagan's tenure" based on his response to AIDS (or more appropriately his lack thereof), I find this issue a clear illustration that the Reagan years were not all about a sunny Morning in America(tm). The Reagan administration's failure to address AIDS in their first term was a profound issue of mismanagement which only compounded the catastrophic costs of the epidemic that we are all still paying. The fact that this lack of response largely sprung from the administration's medieval (and just plain stupid, especially from a medical perspective) opinion, voiced by Press Secretary Pat Buchanan, that "AIDS is God's punishment for homosexuals," makes it all the more reprehensible. I do not seek to minimize Reagan's achievements or personal positives, but likewise, having lived through it, I refuse to look upon his years in the Whitehouse through the gauzy, golden lens that his most ardent admirers gaze. It simply just wasn't like that.
This article on the "Independent Gay Forum" (first published on National Review Online) paints a slightly different picture of Reagan had his apathy towards AIDS -- take it with a grain of salt, but it is always nice to hear the other side fo the story:
http://www.indegayforum.org/authors/murdock/murdock4.html
I was also pretty young during the Reagan administration, but I've always considered him to be amongst our greatest presidents.
Sure, criticize him for not responding to AIDS. He could have saved hundreds of thousands - if not millions - of lives. But he saved hundreds of millions by defeating the USSR in the cold war.
Reagan's approach to the cold war is similar to Bush's war on terror. They said he was leading us to disaster by spending so much on military development. They said he was too bold when he said "Mr. Gorbachev, tear down this wall!" And they said his branding the USSR as the "Evil Empire" would lead to our doom for sure.
Well guess who turned out to be right?? That's right: Ronald freakin Reagan! And Bush will prove correct to because just like Reagan would have said: "You're with us, or the terrorists." Sorry guys, but there's no other way about it.
As far as domestic policy goes, yeah, we had a big deficit. Big deal. Personal incomes rose to all-time highs. I for one care more about my balance sheet than the federal government's.
Reagan carried 49 states for good reason. He was, and is a hero!
Thanks for this wonderful commentary on the Grandfather of our Country.
Although I was born during his tenure in the White House (1982), I remember him. I can remember my mom telling me, "that's your president" and feeling sad when he left office. Although I was six when he changed guards, I vividly remember watching it on television as he walked to the helicopter with Nancy by his side, waving and smiling as he always did. Because of his influence I decided to work in politics and am now a Legislative Aide to a Senator.
It's sad that the liberals don't even let his body get cold before they attempt to throw vitrol on his largely untarnished reputation. They seem to ignore the fact that Reagan carried 44 states his first presidential election and 49 state his second presidential election. To call him incompetent is to say that the American people are unable to cast an intellegent vote. To say he duped them is to call us a nation of fools.
It's interesting that the majority of those posting in emphatic support of RR were too young to actually experience the man as president. Like JFK, Reagan's legacy (and his ability to provide good video clips) perhaps comes across as more wonderful than the actual item. I think in the end, this says more about us, our deep desire to want a great leader — especially as children — and our willingness to not look to closely, than it really says about the charming and telegenic RR or JFK. I respect everyone's opinion and everyone's right to feeling strongly about things. Beliefs are important. Motivating people is indeed a sign of a great leader, and by that measure Reagan is among the best.
Well said, Tom. (Note: I think we will be including Mr. Clinton on that list.) What is interesting -- and frightening -- is that in our "democracy," image matters more than substance. Politics and the attendant celebrity share the same patterns of mania and hoopla as mass-media imbecilities like "American Idol."
And when you say that
Motivating people is indeed a sign of a great leader, and by that measure Reagan is among the best
we should keep in mind that motivation without moral integrity is dangerous. There have been plenty of despots in history that have proven that.
Our democracy has been sliding downhill ever since the amount of money to campaign for President became dictated by the cost of television commercials.
Amen to that Greg, which started way, way before Reagan's election campaign.
There's a lot to be learned from Reagan's management style. He was a visionary and a delegator. He had a vision and a goal, and he brought in experts to get the job done. After that, details were secondary.
That's why children are probably more likely to view the president positively - they don't pay attention to the every day details.
No man can be perfect, especially the President of the United States. But he should be judged by the goals he set and whether or not he accomplished them. Reagan set out to restore national pride and win the cold war. He was victorious on both fronts.
NestleQuik, I don't agree with you. If a president sets a goal to murder people in other countries and he accomplishes those goals, does that make him a good leader? You need to judge him on the moral aspects of the goals he sets as well.
Also, saying "You're with us, or the terrorists," is just plain ignorant. I thought the US was about democracy and freedom of thought, and speech. Not agreeing with your point of view doesn't make me a terrorist.
I was going to try to avoid polluting this thread with a mention of GWB, but since Quik brings it to the table, here's Ron Reagan, Jr. speaking to Salon:
... Some observers have compared Bush's persona as an intellectually challenged but politically gifted leader to that of Reagan. But the younger Reagan vehemently rejects the analogy. "The gunslinging cowboy, the actor who just read his lines — that stereotype doesn't fit who my father really was. My father had decades of experience in public life. He was president of his union, he campaigned for presidential candidates, he served two terms as governor of California — and that was not a ceremonial office as it is in Texas. And he had already run for president, against Ford in '76, nearly unseating the sitting president in his own party. He knew where he was coming from, he had spent years thinking and speaking about his views. He didn't have to ask Dick Cheney what he thought. Sure, he wasn't a technocrat like Clinton. But my father was a man — that's the difference between him and Bush. To paraphrase Jack Palance, my father crapped bigger ones than George Bush."
Good piece from Slate on how RR did end of the Cold War, [with the good fortune of having a Gorby instead of an Andropov do deal with] complete with excerpts from previously classified docs.
Bush is a wannabe Reagan at best. While both men struggled with wars in unpopular regions, Reagan was also busy toppling the Soviet Union and ending a fifty year Cold War. While Bush's "other" project is to find fifty new jobs in Ohio.
Reagan's entire life was destined by the will of God. he never saw himeslf as great, but a common man of a great nation. Even his critics owe him. He not only saved America, but the world. He showed us that we have it inside all of us to guide our nation towards greatness and that our most vile enemy can be redeemed.
It's amazing that even after nearly 16 years out of office and a decade out of the public eye, the subject of Ronald Reagan still has such a divisive effect on people. Supporters like to credit him with the end of the Cold War. Detractors like to blame him for beginning the end of the New Deal, ushering in an era of less civility, and leaving the country in a fiscal mess.
My feelings about Reagan are ambiguous at best. I can't say whether I "liked" him because I didn't know him. I do know that I disliked most of his policies and in judgment of his Presidency that seems a more important criteria than the brightness of his personality.
Like many others, when he first came to office I certainly saw him as a breath of fresh air. But like many other Americans, after eight years I was certainly glad to see him go. I see his legacy as a paradoxical reduction of conflict between the world's superpowers and an increased tension between the have's and have-nots within our own country. He set the stage for ending the Cold War at the same time in put in motion the ending of the New Deal. That's a bit of a mixed bag to say the least.
As many of you have pointed out however, he was a man -- nothing more, nothing less. Just one man playing his part during a unique moment in time. I'm confident that the longer lens of history will show he was simultaneously given too much credit for the good and too much blame for the bad.
Hey Greg
While we may disagree at times on certain political issues, I really was pleased to see your writing on Ronald Reagan. He was a very strong President and very persuasive leader and communicator.
Thanks for your writing. I really enjoyed it.
c
I have a great deal of respect for people that can come out of a liberal or independant cocoon and give Reagan his due. You are a man that people need to hear and read about.
Remember Greg, You are better than any government program. You have the freedom to speak,eat,walk,design websites, and call a spade a spade my friend!
Stay strong and keep the faith in what is good and good will find you.
cp