There is a new documentary that I'm pretty excited for about Ronald Reagan, it premieres on HBO Monday night at 8pm. I'm particularly excited for it because I was born in 1985 and I have never formed an opinion on Reagan as a President. Both Conservatives and Liberals love to compare themselves to Reagan, and not being alive for his presidency I'm looking forward to wade through all the myths and legends that have been thrown about the last 30 years. I know he was a firm believer in God (and I'm an atheist), and I know he was pro-amnesty (which is the opposite of most of his conservative fan base), it should be pretty revealing to a lot of people. Here is a link.
Regan had the rare ability to bridge gaps and bring people together, ala Truman and Johnson. IMHO his first term was overall excellence but he seemed to fall asleep at the switch during his second term and let others do and run things improperly. Nonetheless he was a true force worldwide as President whether one liked his politics or not.
History and distance can often soften and put new light on a person. The only person I can recall more hated than Ronald Reagan by his political adversaries was Richard Nixon. Reagan was more hated in his time than George W. Bush. Ronald Reagan served as a rail switch. We had been going down a track more and more left, like that of Western Europe. The Soviet Bloc was on the march and foreign policy at the time was about how to accomodate Communism. He, Thatcher and Kohl not only stemmed the tide, but turned it and defeated the Soviets. Economically, we started to trust in the free market rather than the government. Where I will always criticize him was lacking the political will to cut government. He cut tax rates (although increased the payroll tax) and revenues doubled under Reagan, but spending increased by even more. He had an opportunity to crush deficit spending, but instead took it to a new level. His lasting impact, however was more a matter of the mind than of policy. He made us feel proud to be Americans again. Life under Carter felt like how life feels today: We're defeated, deflated, have little hope for the future and our enemies (China, radical Islam) are on the march. Reagan snapped us out of that mindset. Sadly, there's no Reagan on the horizon for 2012. Our leaders are not up to the challenges we face.
I was pre-teen when Reagan was in office. I only remember the war on drug stuff. There was a "Just Say No" splash screen on all the video games at the arcade (Operation Wolf!). It's hard to say if the war on drugs is a success. I'd argue 'no'. I personally know a dozen people who have died from overdosing on illegal drugs. I'd say I know a dozen more who died from abusing prescription drugs too. I think it should be treated as a health issue but the drug war culture is ingrained in our country.
I've been to the REagan museum a few times here in Simi Valley, great place. They're having events this weekend..streaming online.
Reagan was a P.O.S. as a person, an embarrassing corporate puppet as a President, and a pathetic joke as an actor. More than any American leader in history, Reagan is to blame for our current economic sterility.
[video=youtube;SCvhyE2k9Is]http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=SCvhyE2k9Is[/video]
I was in my 20s when Reagan was president, and I remember those times well. There is a lot of truth to maxiep's post about how today feels like the Carter years. There is also truth to his words about the USSR, through Cuba as a front, was stirring up shit in the 3rd world. See: Cuban intervention in Angola and http://www.brown.edu/Research/Understanding_the_Iran_Contra_Affair/n-sandinistas.php Shocking that Reagan was anti-communist! /sarcasm That aside, the legal question about the Boland Amendment always interested me. We have three branches of govt. by design - Judicial, Legislative, and Executive. There's supposed to be a balance of power between them. Congress cannot just pass anything and it's law - we're seeing the legal challenges to ObamaCare as proof. This amendment sure seems like congress way overstepping its bounds and trying to dictate through law what the president "must" do with respect to purview delegated to the president in the constitution. The Boland Amendment Constitution May Justify Reagan's Defiance
I don't really buy that Reagan was some kind of messianic personality that could single-handedly change the outlook of an entire nation from Carter-malaise to Reagan-euphoria. I don't have that much faith in government or government leadership. It always strikes me as silly that so many do. Especially those who are normally so suspicious of centralized federal leadership. I think America got cheerier when oil prices got lower, inflation dropped and the economy recovered. A leader can definitely shift the political spectrum from more liberal-leaning to more conservative-leaning though, which is what he did. He sold the idea that we didn't have to pay taxes to fund large government, and he sold it well. As Cheney said not long ago, "Regan proved that deficits don't matter."
The election results and polling data show otherwise. So do the economic data. I would point out his speeches were widely acclaimed as being among the greatest in US history, if not all-time. His style was quite different than any other president in my memory - he didn't go around making speeches in friendly venues and no cameras, he went around congress and the press and spoke directly to the people in nationally televised addresses. In 1984, he won 49 states. People of both parties (Reagan Democrats) simply loved the guy in far greater numbers than those who tried to destroy him then and now (after the fact). Obama had some of the same qualities as a campaigner. Just look at the sheer number of people who showed up to some of his campaign speeches. It's called being inspirational. And people inspired to go out and do bigger and better things.
I just don't think a political leader can do much to make people happier or more confident in the long-term just through charisma and intangible leadership qualities. A politician, no matter how dynamic or engaging, just isn't going to suddenly make you think you will soon be able to afford a nicer car or get a better job or get laid just because he gives fantastic speeches. Well, maybe for an hour or two he can whip up a nice fervor, but then you look at your bank account or you get a call from a collection agency or your girlfriend gives you herpes and that shit goes right out the window. An effective politician can steer people toward favoring certain kinds of policy decisions. And if those decisions work out, well, they become pretty popular. Reagan argued for deregulation and a drastic reduction in higher tax brackets, both of which were pretty sound ideas for that time. It seemed to work out, so he's remembered well. And those who love him go on and on about how Dear Leader ended the Carter Malaise with just the force of his personal magnetism. But if his measures had backfired and the economy went in the crapper, well, he'd be hated right now and people would remember him as a friendly, dottering old man who just made shit worse.
Not quite right, mook. Reagan came in promising to turn things around. He said that we'd have malaise for a while before it would turn. The economy actually got worse for about a year before it took off like a rocket. While it was worse, people were really down on Reagan and doubted he could do anything (like your posts suggest). Nobody I know says Reagan turned things around due to sheer personal magnetism. That only got peoples' attention. There was a lot of stuff involved, known as Reaganomics. Laffer Curve and all that. You do know that Reagan had two degrees from Eureka College, right? Economics <---- and Sociology. Both helped him throughout his personal and political life, and especially when it came to the nuts and bolts of running a union, state government, and then the presidency. A really big difference between Reagan and Obama, BTW, is Obama promised (recklessly) big "stimulus" package means unemployment remains below 8% (FAIL) while Reagan promised economic downturn followed by america's brightest days ahead (true).
I don't see any incongruity between the two statements. When my parents grew up, my grandparents worked their asses off so the kids would have a future better than theirs. When I was growing up in the Carter years, my parents told me that the country's best days were behind us and I better enjoy the present while I could (before it got worse). Huge difference in the attitudes. "We're defeated, deflated, have little hope for the future" indeed.
Denny and Mook, you are providing excellent example of why I am excited to watch this tonight, so I can form my own opinion.
