When Did Reagan Stop Sucking?

I’m not sure how it happened but Ronald Reagan has become respectable if not lauded as one of the great presidents. It’s bad enough that Nixon was praised for opening China when he died, rather than reprimanded for Watergate and secret bombings in Laos. So, now, too, we have “the great communicator” who brought America together and toppled the evil empire, rather than the doddering president who fired air traffic controllers rather than meet their labor demands, who allowed the Iran Contra Affair to happen on his guard, and who supported bloody anti-Communist movements in Central America.  Perhaps it was a time of peace and prosperity. There’s a new book out that tries to explain this that was reviewed in Salon called The Age of Reagan written by liberal historian Sean Wilentz:

Between Ronald Reagan's last year of presidential office in 1989 and his death in 2004, a strange transformation took place within the Washington Post. I only noticed when, in a fit of masochism, I began to plow through the paper's coverage of Reagan's state funeral. As expected, there were the usual encomiums from Krauthammer and Will and Novak -- no different in kind than what they'd been churning out for a quarter-century -- but where was the other side? After decades of antagonism to Republican presidents in general and Reagan in particular, Post reporters, analysts, columnists and editorialists were sprinting -- practically elbowing each other out of the way -- to apotheosize a man they had never even liked, let alone endorsed.

I finally had to call my brother in Chicago and ask: "When did Reagan stop sucking?"

  

I also heard a reference from a liberal critic on Slate’s Culture podcast saying that Reagan was one of our great presidents although with reservation.  It seems unthinkable to me.  Perhaps there was a time of peace and prosperity but for whom our family of six was just getting by on our father’s modest salary. I have no great memories of the Regan era being better than the Clinton era or any other time of being alive, but knowing about all the corruption and misguided foreign policy it's hard to canonize Regan in my opinion.

Comments

[Eric]

It's going to happen to Bush 2.0 some day, just you watch. If it can happen to Reagan, it can happen to W.

[Kraig]

Doubtful. Michael Moore will jcontinue making W documentaries for the next 20 years.

[Michele]

you know, Reagan did a lot for school lunches in america. i mean, ketchup IS now considered a vegetable! amazing legacy.

[phatrick]

Just goes to show, everyone gets to be a saint when they die.

This reminds me of my favorite synonym for "moron": "Reagan Democrat."

Apologies to all I've offended.

[Eric]

I know this sounds crazy, especially to the right wingers, but, Michael Moore will have no effect on how W is remembered, in the same way Ann Coulter will have no effect on how Al Gore is perceived by history.

Bush will be considered a failure not because of Moore, but because of his record.

Most importantly, Bush's face will still probably end up on a quarter.