Quote:
Originally posted by ladysycamore
Reagan was NOT (IMO) the best President, and quite personally, I cringe at all this hero worship being praised upon him. However, he DID seem like a good person overall.
|
Nicely summed up.
There are conservabots out there currently redoubling their efforts to perpetuate the myth that Reagan was the Greatest President Ever -- the most popular, the most successful, fulfilled every campaign promise, served all Americans well, defeated the Evil Empire, blah blah blah, and thus he was an American Hero and a Role Model and a Superb Leader and should have his face and name glued onto everything in America that isn't nailed down.
The link I provided on Page 2 of this thread helps debunk much of that. He wasn't an abject failure, but he wasn't a conquering hero of ultraconservatism, either. The army of Dittobots loves to pimp Reagan's accomplishments, but often neglect to mention things like Iran-Contra, massive federal deficits, the (necessary) rollback of many of his prized tax cuts, the S & L scandal, the small army of Reagan's appointees and Cabinet members who were indicted and/or convicted of various crimes, his luck in having Mikhail Gorbachev with whom to negotiate, his frequent compromises with the Democrats (surely a cardinal sin in Dittoland), his diminished capabilities in the later years of his Presidency, and other flaws. Many of the accomplishments they cite are overstated and exaggerated, as well.
It's like photographing a man who's wearing a pimpin' suit-jacket only from the waist up, in hopes that no one will notice that he's forgotten his pants and has dog crap on his shoe.
Reagan might've been a good person in private, a devoted husband, a nice guy, etc., but that's irrelevant to the larger debate; calling him a poor leader does not equate to calling him a bad person.
But if you bring up Reagan's obvious flaws now, it's practically a declaration of war in the eyes of those who worship him and hail him as the father of modern conservatism. To them, we should all morph into Peggy Noonan and breathlessly stare wide-eyed at Saint Ronnie, saluting the Man Who Saved America, and to suggest otherwise is somehow inherently offensive.
Screw _that_.
Every editorial deserves a rebuttal. When others are putting Reagan on a pedestal and pumping out one-sided spin, it's not a "smear on the office of the Presidency" to show up and give the other side. Five months away from a vitally important election cycle, it's doubly important to take the blinders off about America's recent history, particularly when Bush will have little hesitation in painting himself as following in Reagan's footsteps. America needs to know where those footsteps might lead.
At the very least, Americans need to wipe away the fantasy that the world, our leaders and others can be viewed in black-or-white, good-or-evil terms. There's some truth on both sides of the Reagan argument, just as there will be for every President one may consider.