-
Obama’s Imbroglios
May 23, 2013 | 45 comments
-
My Rahm Reunion
May 16, 2013 | 16 comments
-
The Left Hates Us
May 9, 2013 | 143 comments
-
Such a Dynamic Duo
May 2, 2013 | 49 comments
-
The Continuing Crisis
May 1, 2013 | 0 comments
The Current Crisis
London Honors Reagan
The July 4 unveiling of a Ronald Reagan statue in Grosvenor Square brought out a crowd of luminaries — including our very own editor in chief.
LONDON — The other morning I wandered down to Grosvenor Square to see the July 4th unveiling of a statue of President Ronald Reagan, despite reports that only a handful of people would be there. That invaluable piece of intelligence was handed down by the Hon. Louis B. Susman, our ambassador, who was busy as a director of the St. Louis Cardinals baseball team during the 1980s when President Reagan was staring down the Soviets with his befuddling mixture of amiability and steely resolve that astoundingly “ended the Cold War without firing a shot.” That is how Lady Thatcher memorably put it. She was not astounded, nor was President Richard Nixon or other hawkish Cold Warriors.
Our Liberal friends had a different way of seeing it. They thought Reagan was a dunce, and many still do. They feared he would bring us to nuclear holocaust, and Senator Ted Kennedy surreptitiously entered into league with the Soviets to oppose the president in 1984. They did not know what to make of his meetings with Mikhail Gorbachev, and I remember one, the journalist Michael Kinsley, saying no one Left or Right predicted the peaceful end of the Cold War. Later, as the historically minded dug out Reagan’s assurances that the Cold War could be won, the Liberals had moved on to a different subject. No one is better than the Liberals at avoiding epochal events that they have played little part in.
I liked the Hon. Susman’s crowd estimate. It shows how attuned to the times he and all his Liberal friends are. They are now predicting an Obama victory in 2012, and when it fails to take place they will change the subject. How about the conservatives are scary or leading America to its doom? Actually, the crowd Monday morning numbered in the thousands and many had to be turned away. There were hundreds more who turned out in the evening at an elaborate black tie tribute to the 40th president at Guildhall that was more than a tribute to Reagan. It also seemed to me to be an acknowledgement of the vast achievements of America and Great Britain’s “special relationship,” and of what great things those two resolute powers have achieved since the dawn of the 20th century. July 4, 2011 was a great day of American and British friendship.
There in Grosvenor Square, with statues of Dwight David Eisenhower and Franklin Roosevelt looking on, a handsome ten-foot statue was unveiled of the Old Cowboy, looking out on the festive crowd with a vaguely amused look on his face but his chest thrust out, his shoulders broad. He once corrected me when I told him I had heard that in recuperating from an assassin’s bullet he did bench presses and put an inch of muscle on his upper body. “Two and a half inches,” he serenely but firmly said.
There were speeches by Congressman Kevin McCarthy, former Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice, and the invaluable erstwhile Reagan aide, Frederick Ryan, the Chairman of the Board of Trustees of The Ronald Reagan Foundation. A note by the ailing Lady Thatcher was read. The Hon. Susman gave a speech that was admirable in its recognition of Reagan and also of FDR and Ike too. His predecessor Robert Tuttle spoke engagingly and, of course, First Secretary of State and Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs of Great Britain the Rt. Hon. William Hague, who said “it is a fitting tribute to the honor of the truest friend that Britain has ever had,” Ronald Reagan.
We all walked off glad to be breathing the sweet air of a Free World.
About the Author
R. Emmett Tyrrell, Jr. is the founder and editor in chief of The American Spectator. He is the author of The Death of Liberalism, published by Thomas Nelson Inc. His previous books include the New York Times bestseller Boy Clinton: the Political Biography; The Impeachment of William Jefferson Clinton; The Liberal Crack-Up; The Conservative Crack-Up; Public Nuisances; The Future that Doesn’t Work: Social Democracy’s Failure in Britain; Madame Hillary: The Dark Road to the White House; The Clinton Crack-Up; and After the Hangover: The Conservatives’ Road to Recovery.
Letter to the Editor View all comments (92) | Leave a comment
More Articles by R. Emmett Tyrrell, Jr.
More Articles From The Current Crisis
http://spectator.org/archives/2011/07/07/london-honors-reagan
Follow us:
ADVERTISEMENT
Current Issue
- Nuts to Nutter
- Inside the Gates of Eden
- Ailes: A Voice for the Silent Majority
SPONSORED LINKS
FLASHBACK TO: 1995
-
Pope Culture
A man of faith in a godless age is hitting Americans where it hurts.
-
Why the GOP Does Not, Like, Totally Suck
Mr. and Mrs. American Spectator Reader, let P.J. O’Rourke talk sense to your kids.
-
Dames at Sea
-
In the Absence of Guns
In Britain, defending your property can get you life.
-
The Metaphysical Martini
-
Counting the Costs of Clintonism
The debacle of this president’s administration is both a cause and a symptom of the decline of American values. Unless Congress impeaches him, that decline will go on unchecked. An eminent jurist surveys the damage and assesses the chances for the recovery of our culture.
-
Chuck McHagel
It won’t take long for conservatives to scratch this presidential wannabe off their 2008 scorecard.
-
The Legacy of Old John and Mother Fresh-Roasted
-
It’s the Best Time of the Year
The American Christmas, like the songs that celebrate it, makes room for everybody under the rainbow. Is that why so many people seem to be hostile to it?
-
The Bush Crack-Up
Was the President done in by the economy, or by the politics of the economy?
Clip of the Day
H/T to National Review Online
ADVERTISEMENT
oldfart| 7.7.11 @ 6:21AM
And where was our ambassador to the Court of St. James to honor a former President? The Brits at least have a proper perspective on history.
Jon B| 7.7.11 @ 9:50PM
Reagan was kind of a mixture of many different things. A warm, sincere, and compassionate person who possessed many delusional ideas about how the world worked. His trickle down economics theories have utterly failed destroying the low and middle classes while the rich get richer. Taking away the buying power of the lower classes lowers demand, and hence slows job creation for products evidenced by the 1 million manufacturing jobs lost under Reagan by 1988. The "job creation" of this period came from service jobs, and a large chunk of it was female wage earners, 2nd income families. This was necessary since Reagan actively raised taxes 13 times mostly on the lower classes, and mostly with a Republican Senate. Bush tried it again, and the same polices lead to another recession.
old white guy| 7.8.11 @ 6:07AM
my goodness, you are trying to revise history without a single fact.
Edward Hara| 7.9.11 @ 2:45PM
You are being told the truth. Get the book THE MAN WHO SOLD THE WORLD and read it. That is, if you are capable of reading.
Here, I'll even give you the URL so you can order it.
http://www.amazon.com/Man-Who-.....034&sr=1-1
TrueBlue| 7.8.11 @ 1:32PM
Except that those manufacturing jobs were lost because of government (EPA) regulations increasing the cost of production, not Reagan's policies. That's the problem with regulatory agencies that don't require congressional votes to create laws. Fault of the libs and their envirohippies, not Reagan, sorry.
Also, taxes were highest under Clinton, not Reagan and the two Bush Presidents.
BruceBerger| 7.8.11 @ 10:05PM
I guess those quarters of 5% plus GDP growth were bad for the country too.
I find it amusing that you misread Reagan's genius at its very core. Reagan understood how the real world works, rather than how people would like to think the world should work, assuming it to be perfect.
RCV| 7.8.11 @ 6:16PM
The ambassador was at the statue unveiling. He missed a dinner later that evening due to another official event.
Clint| 7.7.11 @ 6:43AM
Ronald Reagan:
"The nine most terrifying words in the English language are: 'I'm from the government and I'm here to help.'"
Jon B| 7.7.11 @ 9:52PM
True, republicans have run on "Government doesn't work" since Reagan. Then they get in office and prove it.
TrueBlue| 7.8.11 @ 1:35PM
Which is why I vote for someone based on their voting record, not the R/D next to their name. If they don't yet have a record, I'll trust what they say until they do have one to back up, or disprove, their word.
POST American| 7.7.11 @ 7:19AM
----Stooping to this, yet again, Tavistock
EYE-con DIS-traction op, we can only say,
as we survey our porn/sports/casino and
franchise slum 'culture' ---and that ever
growing, and unthinkably hideous legacy
of 50 MILLION perpetually unborn, and,
its perfect compliment, the LONG
engineered, deiberate, systematic betrayal
of it all in the name of TREASON
to the ideal of setting up the MOST awesomely
genocidal regime mankind has ever seen------
--------WHAT WOULD REAGAN DO??????------
WHAT?
Dan| 7.7.11 @ 9:15PM
I now know who you remind me of! Mr. Doubletalk! You have to be him! "Most people on here and by most I mean some...Has it?"
Appleby| 7.7.11 @ 7:24AM
Ronald Reagan was the last Imperial President the USA has enjoyed. He was a man who had studied the job description and understood it before he took on the job. And of course he, like Mr. Bush, benefitted from being underestimated by his enemies.
And of course he benefitted from following Jimmy Carter.
DaveS| 7.7.11 @ 2:57PM
He made quite sure that Carter would be followed - at the earliest possible convenience.
Jon B| 7.7.11 @ 9:54PM
Reagan also benefited from stealing Carter's debate tapes, and from Carter's energy policy, and from Carter's choice of Paul Volcker. Not to mention the arms for hostages deal. The federal Reserve Bank of New York says that Reagan's wealth redistribution economic policies slowed growth by 3.8% during the 80's.
old white guy| 7.8.11 @ 6:09AM
are you delusional?
The Big Kahuna| 7.7.11 @ 7:55AM
He also benefitted from his close relationship with Remmitt.
Siegfried X| 7.7.11 @ 7:56AM
Talk is cheap. Action speaks louder than words.
So the Republican media are now willing to talk positively about President Reagan again? That's an improvement, but merely a cosmetic improvement over the Bush / McCain era of the 2000's, during which "mainstream" Republicans shunned talk about Reagan and conservatism, but instead focusing on attempting to pass left-wing legislation: RomneyCare, Bush's No Child Left Behind and Medicare Drug bills, and the Bush / McCain attempts to pass illegal alien amnesty.
I won't believe there is a substantive change in the Republican Party until I see it nominating conservative candidates and passing conservative legislation. And I'm not holding my breath. For that reason it's important to treasure memories of Reagan's conservative government (and the best moments of Gingrich's speakership) because it appears like we won't ever see that conservatism again.
McCandles| 7.7.11 @ 9:23AM
We may see true conservatism again, but we need some republicans that arent p------s. The only ones with any cajones are the women right now. With the demographic shifts, the ignorance of the electorate, and the brainwashing of young people by the education system, it will be our last chance to save our great nation. Bachmann 2012!
BD57| 7.7.11 @ 10:15AM
While I understand your point, I'm sorry you're feeling disillusioned.
Reagan's fight began at a time when Republicans were far more of a "me too" party than they are today. He absorbed years of ridicule and scorn along the way, yet he was never sour or bitter and he didn't quit. He believed in the shining city on a hill and would not let go of it.
I'm not crazy about "compassionate conservatism" either .... "compassionate" is redundant & its results were far too often "me too," maybe not at conception, but certainly after they worked their way through Congress.
IMO, Medicare Part D is a mixed bag. Yes, it expanded the welfare state and, no, I would rather that it hadn't been done. At that same time (a) Bush probably gained more votes than he lost promising to adopt it - - - if he hadn't, we might well have had Al Gore; (b) who - among many other bad things - would have pushed for a far less market-oriented, far more expensive program.
This one has at least been beating cost projections in a good way .... maybe it'll open some eyes as to how best to deal with the rest of the medicare mess.
What we need more than anything are conservative leaders who aren't embarrassed / ashamed of being conservatives. Reagan never was.
Siegfried X| 7.7.11 @ 11:29AM
If Republican presidents "must" pass socialist programs, then we have lost. That would mean there are two Democratic parties, with no opposition.
Anyone who lived in the 70's and now will realize that this country has moved far, far left compared to what it was. There are whole regions of the country that were conservative back then but are liberal now. (Perhaps some in the South still grow up in conserative areas, but things have changed elsewhere.)
Al Adab| 7.7.11 @ 1:04PM
Right you are gentlemen. All the while we are being told that Mitt Romney, the quintessential establishment Republican, is our frontrunner candidate. What would be the point of electing one of those?
John Gant| 7.7.11 @ 4:03PM
Any one like me, who lived in the golden years of this country, circa 1948 to 1964, truly knows how far left this country has gone. Can you imagine nowadays of a twelve year old kid walking down Main Street with a 20 gauge shotgun slung over his shoulder on his way to the corn fields and a day with his friends dove hunting? The late sixties and all of the 70s was when all this nonsense began.
Edward Hara| 7.9.11 @ 2:50PM
Lesseee......Conservative =
Bombing the hell out of an innocent country that had NOTHING to do with 9/11 while letting the perpetrators (Saudi Arabia) go free.
Lying to get us into war after war after war so that the boys in the military/industrial complex can profit.
Revising history to make an evil schmuck like Reagan look like God Himself.
Destroying social policies that help the poor so that the wealthy can get wealthier.
Oh, and doing it all under the illustion that this is Christian activity and Jesus would be so proud of you.
And you aren't embarrassed??? You should be.
Nick| 7.9.11 @ 4:52PM
Mr. Hara,
Go spew you commie propaganda somewhere else, okay?
In other words, "Go sell crazy someplace else, we're all stocked up here." I.e., PurpleJackass, Kook of the Net, POST American, et al.
Edward Hara| 7.22.11 @ 11:12AM
Commie propaganda? I love the level of intelligent conversation that I routinely receive from Conservatives when I point out the evils that our country has engaged in. Instead of having the cajones to defend the indefensible (how DO you defend the killing of innocent civilians in war like Bush did?) you just retreat to a corner and call names.
Good job. Gives me so much more respect for the intelligence level of Conservatives.
Skippy| 7.9.11 @ 4:54PM
Hardly.
Proud would be the word you seek.
I feel it with every post from a treasonous slug like yourself.
Jon B| 7.7.11 @ 10:00PM
Interesting comments. Reagan increased Government jobs by 100,000 or so. His policies also increased Government spending so that the National Debt quintupled by 1992. He had record deficit spending until Bush Junior broke his record. However, "W" possesses the record for increases in the National Debt and surpassed even Reagan's wealth redistribution away from working Americans, to the top. This kind of wealth redistribution provides the illusion of working briefly, but it has never worked throughout the history of mankind because simply, you are running up your debts. Reagan, Bush, and Bush junior spent (including the massive interest on their debts) 12 times more than the rest of America's Presidents combined.
BruceBerger| 7.8.11 @ 10:13PM
A few years back I did an analysis of the budgets during the Reagan and Clinton years. If you look at the average deficits of the two administrations as a percentage of GDP, clearly Reagan's were higher. However, half of the difference was due to defense spending. Reagan invested to put the USSR out of business. Clinton then dramatically reduced defense spending because the USSR was out of business. Remember the peace dividend? Reagan's spending on defense was one of the best investments the US has ever made. Just imagine how much higher defense spending would be today if the USSR still existed in its pre-1989 form.
Mark in LA| 7.9.11 @ 11:15AM
The problem is that with the Reagan worshippers the goalposts always change to fit the image of St. Ronnie the Great. Reagan was a likable moron who did what his trainers told him to do. While he was under the spell of the neocons, who William F. Buckley convinced him he needed for foreign policy gravitas, he was constantly beligerent to them which almost resulted in a Russian nuclear missle launch when a Norwegian weather rocket was launched and Moscow forgot to notify the Strategic Rocket Forces forward radar stations of the launch. Only when Margaret Thatcher convinced him that Gorbachev could be negotiated with did he change his tune and the neocons turned on him.
According to this "history", he supposedly single handedly did in the USSR according to his hagiographers without ever mentioning the men lost in the Korean War and the Vietnam War and the trillions invested in defense spending before he even arrived on the scene.
He gets credit according to them though the Brelin Wall fell and the USSR disintegrated after he left office but the other people get no credit. That's Reagan history retelling if ever there was.
Will Reagan's military legacy also be that he put us on an unstainable path of ever increasing military spending with our government always looking for boogeymen to use it on - leading to a loss of our freedoms and eventual bankruptcy of our country? Nope, didn't think so.
Skippy| 7.9.11 @ 5:04PM
We love him for all the reasons you mentioned.
And that will drive you mad for all eternity.
Sweet!
Edward Hara| 7.22.11 @ 11:14AM
So you admit that you are a warmonger! Nice. Are you also going to now try to tell me that you are a follower of the Prince of Peace?
The two don't go together, you know!
DanMingo| 7.8.11 @ 1:24AM
Reagan could not get elected in our time...he's not right wing enough for today's republican party.
Mimi| 7.7.11 @ 8:24AM
Right now, It will have to be a CONSERVATIVE government or our DEMISE !
All it took to come to this was ONE, weak , Liberal idealogue and a 2008-2010 minions in Congress to unlawfully put in their "DREAM-LIST" of tyrannical ideas. None of this belongs in the GREAT country of America!
NoLib| 7.7.11 @ 11:20AM
We wouldn't be saddled with the Leftist ideologue in the White House without the big spending, "compassionate" RINO who preceded him. Gotta give credit where credit is due, unfortunately.
The Bush family nearly destroyed our party.
DanMingo| 7.8.11 @ 1:30AM
All of our deficits, have been under Republican Presidents. They, starting with Reagan who TRIPLED the debt.
Conversely, under Democratic Presidents, the debt has gone down.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/N.....tial_terms
Your Conservative government cannot solve the problems; they caused them!
BruceBerger| 7.8.11 @ 10:13PM
See my response to Jon B. above.
TURK| 7.7.11 @ 8:28AM
Being active in the repub party in a medium sized county in Ohio I was an enthusiastic follower of Goldwater and later Reagan. When I mentioned the name of either in public, I was admonished to be quiet. I was on active duty in the Pentagon when Reagan spanked Carter. I was not local to see these sniffy country clubbers conduct election night 1980. Having just returned a couple of yrs ago some of that crowd are still hanging on. In fact, because of Reagan, the county is now so Republican, those I knew as kind of nasty democrats had epiphanies and now reign as repubs.
In this election, we must go over and through the above mentioned rinos and avoid another McCain like disaster. The trashing of conservative candidates ongoing at the moment, must be resisted and overcome.The myth that there are no heavy weight candidates in the race is given the lie by both Repub debates. The leftist, Obama loving msm has telegraphed their fear of the Repub candidates. Their recent "reporting" of the successful Cain organization 'crackup and the Bush/Perry 'feud, are but a couple of tip offs that the left is scared s---less of Cain-Perry.Ditto Pawlenty;Palin et al. The silence was deafening when the repub candidates creamed the snotty media clowns in both debates. The "unbeatable" myth in re the dolt in the white house has been dealt with! ELMER FUDD can beat him. And the Repub field in and about to be in, may not have any Reagans, but several are close enough for me.
NoLib| 7.7.11 @ 11:21AM
Me too, and it ain't Mitt!
POST American| 7.7.11 @ 8:52AM
Ever KEY to remember
Reagan, or any other genuine leader of right
you care to name, was NOT afraid of calling it as it was ---NOT afraid of the word TREASON.
Try it for yourself sometime---------------SOON!
Michael L. Hauschild| 7.7.11 @ 10:27AM
http://nation.foxnews.com/debt.....debt-talks
JimH| 7.7.11 @ 10:32AM
Can we set up a miniature SDI around it to repel those Commie pigeons? ;->
AgentRose| 7.7.11 @ 10:57AM
Dear Editor in Chief:
Statues to Reagan aren't going to cut it. Our country is in dire straights and the Republicans continue (mostly) business as usual--with the exception of the newly elected tea party people.
Have you seen "Waiting for Superman"
Have you seen "Agenda: Grinding America Down"
Have you read Ann Coulter's book, "Demonic"?
Have you read Gretchen Morgenson's book, "Reckless Endangerment"?
There is enough material in these movies and books to have this country and a decent campaign staff able to win in a landslide in 2012--if the dictator allows an election--or unless there is a crisis!! Can't you push some people? Can't you push some articles? Can't you push some campaigns?
Just think of the black vote alone. Coulter's book documents how the Democrats have held the blacks back for decades. Watch "Waiting for Superman." How any black could vote for a Democrat after watching that is beyond me. Then there is the mortgage mess. Morgenson's book documents how companies (and Fannie Mae--a la Dodd and Pelosi's son to name a few) charged higher interest rates to minorities.
There is MORE THAN enough material here. Let's go!!!
What Republican campaign is talking about this?
Edward Hara| 7.9.11 @ 2:53PM
You still don't "get it," do you? Both parties, Left and Right, are OWNED -- lock, stock, and barrel -- by the corporations who are the real power behind the scenes. This is fact, the evidence is there for anyone to see, and anyone in D.C. who is foolish enough to try to dismantle these corporate scoundrels will get the J.F.K. treatment from them.
Skippy| 7.9.11 @ 5:06PM
The Mob shot JFK, not corporate assasins, and you know it.
Al Adab| 7.7.11 @ 11:08AM
Isn't it a sad commentary on our own country when our friends in other nations recognize and appreciate greatness while we continue to lambast those among us who made history? Whatever else might be said and no matter how unforgiving The Left will be about Reagan proving that the Conservative movement has the answers, there is a reason the base of the statue contains a piece of the Berlin wall. All those among us today and our future citizens will be blissfully unaware of the Cold War and the Price America paid to rid the world of the false philosophy and ultimate tyranny of Marxism. Even though you are unaware, you're welcome.
Bill A | 7.7.11 @ 12:00PM
It is now almost twenty four years since Preident Reagan's speech "tear down this wall". Historically speaking, it is a relatively short period of time. For those of us who grew up during the "Cold War" and who actually practiced getting under our desks in the event of a nuclear attack, the demolition of the Wall and the end of the "Cold War" was especially significant. As the time distance increases, the historical significance of Reagan's actions will be more widely appreciated.
Marc Jeric| 7.7.11 @ 12:26PM
How the liberal elite in New York must be suffering! " A likable dunce indeed! And, of course, Reagan had nothing to do with the demise of the Soviet collossus - it was the work of Gorabachev, of course! His "glastnost" and Perestroika" did it! In Russian that means "transparency" and "reform"; and that is exactly what Mullah Obama promised us at his inauguration.
Al Adab| 7.7.11 @ 1:06PM
Interesting point. What do you suppose the translation of "Obama" might be?
Kishego| 7.7.11 @ 2:03PM
I think Obama is arabic for " bend over".
Edward Hara| 7.22.11 @ 11:15AM
MWWWWWAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!!!!
GOOD ONE!!!!
Frank Tavos| 7.7.11 @ 1:43PM
I think it translates as "LOSER"!
theduke| 7.7.11 @ 3:52PM
I just looked it up. It is African and means, "crooked, somewhat bent." I am not kidding.
skip| 7.7.11 @ 11:36PM
I'll bite. Source?
Brandt Hardin | 7.7.11 @ 2:43PM
Reagan has a legacy so distorted by the Conservative idolization of him that we may never have a clear picture of the real man behind the television. Did he rid the world of commie scum? Check out my portrait of The Gipper in commemoration of his 100th birthday at http://dregstudiosart.blogspot.....ipper.html
James| 7.7.11 @ 2:56PM
Distortion of Reagan's record? That's what the left tried to do to the great man--and failed. haha
Jon B| 7.7.11 @ 10:06PM
Gobachev was asked several times if Reagan helped end the cold war. He replied both times, "That is not a serious question." Reagan's hard line stance nearly destroyed Gorbachev's efforts to change Russia's system. It wasn't until he dropped the hard line and began talking that Gorbachev was able to convince Russian hard liners in the Senate to go ahead with it. Unfortunately, Russia is much the same as it was before, except with a more profitable economic system.
That Reagan ended the cold war is yet another myth the right wing hangs onto despite all evidence to the contrary
Nick| 7.8.11 @ 4:24AM
Is this the same moronic "Jon B" who came here last year spewing the lie that President Reagan gave the Soviets $450 million?
You must be the same dope, based on this asinine statement:
"[...] that Gorbachev was able to convince Russian hard liners in the Senate [...]."
The Soviets had a Senate? Oh...that's right. They had free elections and freedom of religion, too, didn't they?
Or, were you referring to "The Swimmer" Kennedy and Patty 'Leaky' Leahy when you wrote "Russian hard liners in the Senate"?
Gorby was a stinking commie who will go down in history as a loser. While Ronaldus Magnus will be remembered as hero, along with Pope John Paul the Great and Margaret Thatcher.
JmsA| 7.9.11 @ 11:08AM
Don't waste your time and knowledge on any of these leftist turds, Nick; they'll never get it. That's why we're in the mess we're in.
DaveS| 7.8.11 @ 3:03PM
Your claims are lame and historically untrue. Delusional. Sure, much was spent on unused ordnance. We won, Soviets lost, Russian people (and all others in their sphere of influence) also won.
Siegfried X| 7.7.11 @ 6:28PM
Anyone who lived through Reagan's whole presidency KNOWS that he was a conservative and great president. No amount of spin can change that. Spin is so boring and pointless -- cherry-pick a few events out of a long career, distort them, and then pretend like that proves something.
Jon B| 7.7.11 @ 10:08PM
Reagan had popularity ratings below average at the end of his term. Most people thought that the country needed a new direction. It wasn't until Grover Norquist's "Reagan Legacy Project" started in the late 90's that people began to get an inflated opinion of Reagan that does not reflect the actual record or attitude of Americans while he was President.
skip| 7.8.11 @ 11:00AM
You wouldn't, by any chance, care to share your source for all this historical 'wisdom', would you, shit for brains?
DaveS| 7.7.11 @ 3:00PM
Just make room on Rushmore for the Gipper. That would be the proper stateside honor.
Alan Brooks| 7.7.11 @ 3:01PM
You worship Reagan as if he were Jesus Himself.
You ARE idolators and now God is punishing you idolatrous Pharisees.
Repent.
MarkR| 7.7.11 @ 10:10PM
Nah I wont. I would rather worship someone who has the track record than a Messiah who never held a legitimate job. Plus I love how Reagan laughed his as- off at you guys and could have cared less about your opinions. That's closer to Messiahship than an old sniping teleprompter dependent gaggle of aphoristic Marx and Engles recitals. (Loved my last sentence- as I really like being a conservative- ya like that drones?)
Edward Hara| 7.22.11 @ 11:16AM
Tyrannts always laugh at the people they are oppressing.
DaveS| 7.8.11 @ 2:52PM
Take your meds.
David| 7.7.11 @ 3:08PM
I'm just glad I live in Texas where we are still conservative. I dearly miss Ronald Reagan. I know I slept good knowing he was President. No one dared to challenge the United States at anything!
theduke| 7.7.11 @ 3:43PM
Thanks, B0b. I've been reading your columns since before the reign of Reagan and I will read them until my eyes give out. Then, like my grandfather, I will have my wife read them to me.
c. j. acworth| 7.7.11 @ 6:24PM
Since Obama sent the bust of Churchill back to the Brits, can we have the statue of Reagan? I'd like to prop it up behind the desk in the Oval office; I'm pretty sure it would be a better president than the current occupant. Probably better than whoever sits at it next, for that matter.
Jon B| 7.7.11 @ 9:49PM
Reagan was kind of a mixture of many different things. A warm, sincere, and compassionate person who possessed many delusional ideas about how the world worked. His trickle down economics theories have utterly failed destroying the low and middle classes while the rich get richer. Taking away the buying power of the lower classes lowers demand, and hence slows job creation for products evidenced by the 1 million manufacturing jobs lost under Reagan by 1988. The "job creation" of this period came from service jobs, and a large chunk of it was female wage earners, 2nd income families. This was necessary since Reagan actively raised taxes 13 times mostly on the lower classes, and mostly with a Republican Senate. Bush tried it again, and the same polices lead to another recession.
Skippy| 7.9.11 @ 5:20PM
Just keep posting the same tripe and maybe someone will believe it.
Prince Bambo thinks it'll work, so why not you?
MarkR| 7.7.11 @ 10:04PM
I remember George Will and the pseudo right wing pundits in the 1970's proclaiming Reagan as a doddering old fool. As a dunce and a trigger happy potential nuclear holocaust waiting toi happen. Mr. Reagan was anything but loved and admired by Washington DC insiders. As I watch the adulation I am reminded that for the left and pseudo right the only good conservative is a retired or dead one. Speaking over the media was Reagan's genius. I hope and pray that someone (Bachmann,Perry, Palin... or other) will be successful at performing the needed task of speaking to the common sense of what's left of that type in the country.
Jon B| 7.7.11 @ 10:13PM
George Will played Jimmy Carter for Reagan using stolen debate tapes stolen from Carter, which is why he never commented on the debate tapes stolen by a Bush staffer and sent to Gore in 2000.
Ron| 7.7.11 @ 11:39PM
Very nice to see some pleasent news for a change these days. I served under President Reagan in the early 1980s. I was proud to serve my country as also being an American who loves our country.
The British, along with other civil countries have the wisdom to see this in a leader to at all cost's settle differences without violence yet be diplomatic at the same time.
We'll never see a president again like the "Ole Gipper" but still have predesessors to keep him fresh in our memories like Mark Levin, One of President Reagan's advisors of that era as well as being one of the best constitutional attorneys we have today. GOD bless our country and I thank GOD as well for having the opportunity to have lived and experienced that era.
old white guy| 7.8.11 @ 6:12AM
is there something wrong with jon b????
Tuco| 7.8.11 @ 9:07AM
Nope...it would appear to be a perfectly programmed libtard.
:-)
Bob From District 9| 7.8.11 @ 5:27PM
Reagan's greatest contribution to ending the cold war came when he started talking nicely to the Soviets. Until then nothing he did had any real effect.
If you believe Reagan bankrupted the Soviet Union, then be aware, LBJ had more to do with that than Reagan did.
Of course you wouldn't understand, nor do you care about the truth.
rubty| 7.8.11 @ 5:46PM
who cares -
Richard Baker| 7.8.11 @ 5:46PM
Amazing how the Brits honor him with the statue, and in Grosvenor Square, yet.
Bob:
What ARE you drinking? Thanks to Ronald Reagan, Margaret Thatcher, Pope John Paul II, the AFL-CIO, and Cardinal Glemp the Soviets disappeared because these folks, and many others, aggravated the Soviets into a game they couldn't win. I guess Reagan's speech before the Berlin Wall (Mr. Gorbachev, tear down THIS wall) was speaking nicely, eh?
Bob K.| 7.9.11 @ 9:03AM
Communism in Eastern Europe died mainly because the people living in those countries under it's rule no longer supported it or believed in it any longer.
Reagan understood that. Gorbachev and his cronies in the Supreme Soviet knew that. Russia's communist neighbors to it's west were slipping away and Russia was in no position to stop them. Reagan's policies and military build up caused Russia's leaders minds to, in the words of Samuel Johnson, "concentrate wonderfully" and they decided to let the entire edifice of communism come down. To that extent they deserve some credit. Call Reagan's policies "Diplomacy at a distance." if you like.
Communism in Eastern Europe went out with hardly a whimper.
Occam's Tool| 7.10.11 @ 3:24PM
And it (Communism) would not have fallen if Carter had been elected instead of Ronaldus Magnus. Carter could screw up a wet dream.
Fist of the Fleet| 7.9.11 @ 11:56AM
Under Reagan, I changed jobs 4 times and tripled my income. Under O'bama, I lost my job, was out for 16 months and now I am earning 25% less than 3 years ago. Go figure.
Edward Hara| 7.9.11 @ 3:12PM
David Stockman paints a very different picture of Ronald Reagan than you Reagan worshippers do.
Skippy| 7.9.11 @ 5:29PM
Bitterness at being marginalized when his knees went weak will do that to a guy.
Stockman sez one thing, 25 years of prosperity say another.
Who ya gonna believe?
A bitter has-been or your own lying eyes?
Edward Hara| 7.22.11 @ 11:17AM
Wow. You are really brainwashed, aren't you. You have swallowed the LimbaughAid (what flavor was it?) all the way down!
Try doing a little reading. I suggest the book THE MAN WHO SOLD THE WORLD to get a more honest picture of Reagan. He was buddy to the rich and did their bidding.
Richard Baker| 7.9.11 @ 7:17PM
Skippy:
Stockman was disgruntled because he wasn't listened to as he felt he should have been. The adults didn't listen to him, I suppose. Poor baby.
POST American| 7.10.11 @ 2:23AM
----Of course, one and all should be ccheckcing out Charlotte Isserbyte's (former Reagan
ed. official) posts on the destruction of American
education --under Reagan.
ALLLL this during the very heyday of the
Bush Sr. deployed Globalist RED China sellout and TREASON op.
---STOP worshiping people!
-----START worshiping TRUTH.
Occam's Tool| 7.10.11 @ 3:21PM
I developed my Irritable Bowel Syndrome during the Clinton Years, as that asshole threatened by quality of life every damn day, at home and abroad. Never recovered from that son-of-a-bitch, even under Bush, because he was too "Compassionate." Now we have a worthless treasonous son of a bitch in the White House again.
The last time I had normal intestinal lining was under RR. Just one of the many things I was grateful to him for.
Occam's Tool| 7.10.11 @ 3:22PM
I'm sorry, that would be Bush I that I was last intestinally normal, eh? Ah, well. He was just as futile as his son.
weddingdress | 7.12.11 @ 5:16AM
Stockman was disgruntled because he wasn't listened to as he felt he should have been. The adults didn't listen to him, I suppose. Poor baby