The Reagan Legacy
Published on June 5, 2004 By Larry Kuperman In Politics
Ronald Reagan died today, at age 93, after a long bout with Alzheimer's disease. His legacy is a complicated one, but I would just like to share my thoughts as a person who lived through his two terms in office as the President of the United States.

Let me preface any further remarks by saying, candidly, I voted against him not once but twice. Despite that, I must say that the United States was a better place after his two terms in office. His accomplishments cannot be underestimated and we should remember him for what he did.

When Ronald Reagan took office, America was at one of the low points of our history. We stood helpless while Americans were held hostage in Tehran. Thirty minutes after Ronald Reagan took office, those hostages were on a plane home.

In the wake of Vietnam and Watergate, a malaise had gripped the American spirit. Ronald Reagan offered a vision, a sense of a strong America moving forward. Our economy was in a shambles, gripped by inflation. He used the White House as forum to get us moving again. His first two years in office we suffered the worst economic downturn since the Great Depression; but two years after that, most Americans were prospering.

His opponents, myself included, said he was two old to be President. Yet, this was a man who survived being shot and a month after a bullet lodged one inch from his heart, was standing in front of Congress, obviously back in control. He was also a man of great courage.

We often said that he was not smart enough to be President, didn't have a sufficient grasp of the issues. Yet he accomplished his goals, succeeded way beyond expectations. If you want to know Ronald Reagan, read his 1987 speech at the Berlin Wall, the famous "Tear down this wall" speech. Please take a moment to visit http://www.reaganfoundation.org/reagan/speeches/wall.asp
In 1990, that wall fell.

Listen to his quips. This was a man who had a ready wit, who used laughter to help bring us together. Regarded as the antithesis of "cool," he quoted Springsteen in a speech. And in so doing, helped our nation to heal our divisions.

Regarded as the founder of the New Conservatism, he had a warm relationship with Mikhail Gorbachev of the Soviet Union. In his second term in office, he reduced the number of nuclear weapons.

Ronald Reagan was elected as a conservative, yet the deficit almost tripled in his two terms as President. He never managed to reduce the size of the American government. The Iran-Contra scandal marred his Presidency. So, he was not perfect. But Communism fell, the American economy recovered, we now felt that the problems of the world were solvable. Hope replaced cynicism, not just in America, but in the world. There is no question in my mind that we were all better off after eight years of Ronald Reagan's leadership, than before. Whether you were a Russian experiencing new freedom, a Berliner united with your family or an American back at work, you were better off. And that is the Ronald Reagan Legacy.

Comments (Page 2)
2 Pages1 2 
on Jun 07, 2004
here's a testimony to Mr. Reagan. Some may agree with him.
http://www.rense.com/general53/good.htm
on Jun 08, 2004
Well I'll be damned, someone is actually comparing the Cold War to the War on Drugs? I'll be sure to let the 100 million dead left behind by 20th century communism know that they're worth about as much as the average junkie. And lest you accuse me of heartlessness - I was addicted to methamphetamine, luckily beat it, but I will never pretend it's anyone's fault than mine. But the fact that my grandfather was taken to Siberia on Stalin's cattle trains was NOT his fault, and it is DIRECTLY because of Ronald Reagan that this regime is no more.

He, along with Winston Churchill, was the greatest statesman of the 20th century. I will hear no arguments. Rest in peace, Mr. Reagan.
on Jun 08, 2004
I think it is just amazing that a man who broght us to the brink of armageddon is now credited with ending the cold war. Forget Gorbachev, forget Havel, forget the Poles at Gadansk--it was all Reagan's doing. Communism didn't fall because of Reagan, it fell because of the growing numbers of internal dissidents who courageously fought it. Forget the appalling disaster and the creation of an immense American underclass, forget the Iran-Contra deception...forget it all and just bathe in the glory of a second rate actor whom the people loved because he was even dumber than they were. We are witnessing the great conservative myth-making machine in action here; don't forget that!

on Jun 08, 2004
At this point in the discussion, I usually refrain from commenting, since I feel that no one is really LISTENING. But some of the comments here require response.

P.H. Stephenson said "a man who broght us to the brink of armageddon." For anyone that has read any of posts, you know that I am big on the concept of fairness. That compels me to reply. Why do I never see this allegation made about John F. Kennedy, who threatened the U.S.S.R. with nuclear war and who gave the go-ahead to an invasion of Cuba? C'mon, now. Kennedy was one of my heroes and Reagan was not, but facts are facts. The father of Liberalism (Kennedy) was the sponsor behind the Bay of Pigs and got us into Vietnam (remember when they called it McNamara's War?) while the father of Conservatism established a constructive dialog with the Soviet Union and reduced the number of nuclear weapons.

On the other hand, the National Debt rose sharply. Not to be pedantic, but the debt rises when expenses exceed income. We can talk about the reasons behind that (in fact here is a very good article on those reasons: http://wfhummel.cnchost.com/debtdeficit.html) but if the President gets credit for an economic recovery, he should also bear the responsibility for financing that recovery. We cut taxes, maintained a level of domestic entitlements (Social Security) and increased military spending. Those policies were beneficial (at least short-term) but where do you think the money came from? When more goes out than comes in you got debt.

Like them or not, those are the facts.
on Jun 10, 2004
RONALD REAGAN WAS A GOOD GUY BUT I DON'T THINK HE WAS THE BEST PRESIDENT.

RONALD REAGAN
1911-2004

DIED ON JUN 5 @ 4:09 pm EST



WE WILL MISS YOU! x 1,000,000,000
on Jun 11, 2004
i agree with ph stephenson of some levels...

first off, i dont think reagan should be praised for everything, and although ppl tend to forgive him about the iran-contra scandal, rising of deficit, etc. we shouldnt overhumanize him

of course reagan's antics did pay off in a raise of aggressiveness against the soviet union, and although deficits were high, he did put the economy back on its feet
on Jun 12, 2004
I think it's apalling that the media (as we all know is Liberal) was tearing apart Ronald Reagan before he was even in the grave! CNN had several guests during the viewing in the library in California and the Rotunda in D.C. who acted as though he was a miserable failure. Today, the 12th, a guest on CNN compared Reagan with Clinton claiming, more or less, "They both presided over periods of economic prosperity." From what I can gather, I believe it takes several years for a president's economic policy to take effect. So what did George W. Bush inherit? Clinton's failed economic policy! But, when you look at the facts now, the economy has been growing for ten months. From what? George W. Bush's economic policy. Someone earlier pointed out:

"Both Ronald Reagan and George W. Bush have this in common: Despite both being elected as conservatives, neither practiced fiscal conservatism. Both used tax cuts to stimulate the economy, but neither matched those cuts with equal cuts in Federal spending, thus raising the deficit. During the Reagan era, the deficit basically tripled. We can debate whether it was Congress fault for not approving cuts to social programs, but regardless, the deficit increased. One could make the case that each President put this country back to work during difficult times, but at the expense of mortgaging our future. This is also part of the legacy."

He states, "We can debate whether it was Congress fault for not approving cuts to social programs, but regardless, the deficit increased." The Legislative and Executive branches are seperate. He states that perhaps it was congress' fault for not cutting spending. They do, after all, approve the Federal Budget.
Reagan also tried to stop government regulations. This is part of the reason the Government is in debt. In America there is a massive bureaucracy which is out of control. Gerald Ford once said, "A government big enough to give you everything you want is big enough to take from you everything you have." One American system that is seriously threatened is Free Enterprise. In 1982 journalists reported that there were 310 Federal Regulations that governed the making of a pizza. In 1996, it was estimated that American busineses were spending $670 BILLION dollars to meet government regulatory requirements every year.
Every president since Taft has asked Congress for the authority to reorganize the executive branch (which includes the bureaucracy). The most significant attempt to reorganize the executive branch came in 1982 under President Reagan. Known as the Grace Comission, it reported on Federal Spending and came up with over 2000 recommendations for the government to implement to reduce the size and sace money. Reagan was able to implement 800 f these recomendations and, as a result, the amount of federal regulations. The humber of new regulations put into the Federal register was reduced by 43% (as compared to the Carter administration). However, Fmr. Presidents Bush (#41) and Clinton reversed the trend and, as a result, government regulation is on the rise.
I believe Reagan's legacy is smaller government, but a bigger debt which, if Reagan's policies were implemented and expanded, could possibly reduced the debt more. Tax cuts also energize the economy as current President Bush and the late President Reagan understood.
2 Pages1 2