Progress Reports: Patrick Buchanan
Remembering Ronald Reagan
If President Reagan were alive today, he would be in the 100th year of his life. And as our country again appears dispirited and divided, as we were in the days before he became president, people are remembering Reagan and asking: What was it that made him a successful, even a great president?
Was he lucky? Indeed. But as the Roman poet wrote, fortune favors the bold.
Ronald Reagan had a serene self-confidence — in himself, in the principles of his political philosophy, in the innate capacity of the people and country he led. And he came to office with a clear analysis of the crises that bedeviled his country, and ideas for dealing with them.
If America was in a Slough of Despond, he would inspire and lead her out. If the Soviet Empire was moving aggressively in Asia, Africa and Latin America, he would give freedom fighters support and the means to resist. If America had a “hollow army,” he, remembering the hollow army of 1940, would begin a buildup unrivaled since World War II, not to fight a war but to meet the Kremlin face-to-face as a president dealing from strength.
If the economy was in the deepest recession since the Depression — 21 percent interest rates, 13 percent inflation, zero growth -government was not the solution. It was the problem. The solution lay in unleashing the ingenuity, energy and talents of the American people by returning to them some of the wealth that government was misallocating.
Then there was the man. Shot and almost killed, two months after taking office, his grit and humor as his life was in the balance endeared him to Americans who cherish both. Though genial and friendly, a man who loved to tell jokes, he showed the world an inner Irish toughness when air traffic controllers refused his offer of 48 hours to end their illegal strike.
And, though the oldest president in history, he had about him a boyish quality, always listening to new ideas — like building a shield against nuclear missiles.
He began his presidency telling the blunt truth about an “evil empire” that crushed the human spirit, but ended it walking through Red Square arm-in-arm with Mikhail Gorbachev with Russians cheering and patting him on the back. And it is hard to think of another president who could have angrily walked out of a nuclear arms summit with the Soviets, refusing to compromise his country’s security, then joke with staffers on the way home from Reykjavik to his beloved wife Nancy, whom he had phoned to say, “Honey, I’m gonna be late for dinner.”
“Hopeful, big-hearted, idealistic — daring, decent and brave,” Ronald Reagan described America in his second inaugural. The words exactly fit the man.
Patrick Buchanan served as White House Director of Communications from 1985 to 1987, during Ronald Reagan’s first two summits with Premier Gorbachev.
Readers’ Comments
WIlliam Lyne | Posted on March 21, 2010 at 10:34 am
We need him now more than ever.
Vince Hugh | Posted on March 22, 2010 at 6:38 am
GE let NBC run loose promoting liberal polices that Reagan was against. GE promoting Reagan is almost comical if it wasn’t so foolish.
ghouliani | Posted on March 22, 2010 at 10:34 pm
Ronald Wilson Reagan had brought on a barrage of praise, both selective and exaggerated, from people across the political spectrum.
The conservatives, gop, rnc, and neo-cons too, have shared their thoughts on the trumpeted legacy of America’s Great Communicator.
Most of the honest praise has focused on his rhetoric, much of which, I admit, was not very appealing, and certainly no more eloquent than what we’d expect to hear from the White House these days.
Reagan talked a good talk about shrinking the government, cutting taxes and spending. He gave sermons against Communism. He spoke well of liberty, individualism, and limited state power.
He condemned conscription. He brandished the Constitution. He espoused capitalism.
But what did he do?
As governor of California and president of the United States, he enacted policies that, in the main, greatly expanded the role and size of government.
As governor, he oversaw the largest tax increase in Californian history. Democratic Governor Jerry Brown cut back the tax rate when he came to office.
As president, Reagan expanded the federal government by about 90%.
Ah, but this was for defense, one might protest. And defense spending, according to the conventional wisdom, doesn’t count for some reason. In fact, defense spending is good for a “capitalist” economy, even though it was supposedly defense spending that brought down the Soviet economy. (I wonder if Reagan’s increases in California’s spending when he was governor can be attributed to a good-faith effort on his part to beat Oregon and Nevada in an arms race.)
All in all, Reagan allowed the welfare state to enlarge and the military budget to explode, causing monstrous budget deficits and government growth that dwarfs government growth under Clinton, even when Clinton had a Democratic Congress. Reagan’s tax cuts notwithstanding (some of which he reversed), the state grew fat and its growth will inevitably be financed through inflation or tax increases (unless the state defaults).
Reagan also bombed Libya, put the “war” in War on Drugs, allowed the continuation of Selective Service registration (despite his campaign promise to end it), helped the Khmer Rouge terrorize Thailand, imposed brutal trade sanctions on Nicaragua, funded the murderous brutal Contras, sold missiles to Iran, gave assistance to Saddam Hussein and Osama bin Laden, and lied to the American people.
That he did all these things in the name of “freedom,” “capitalism,” “small government,” and “liberty” renders his legacy, in my opinion, all the more insidious. If bad Reaganesque policies continue to have a pass because of their superficial rhetorical selling points, American liberty will have suffered, not strengthened, because of him.
Many Americans say Reagan was a man of principle, regardless of what else we might think of him. And yet I’ve heard few examples of how he acted on his principles. More often, I hear excuses that he had a principled ideology but failed to follow through.
Still, his rhetoric probably did bring a fair number of people around to adopting some good values. And even some of his policies – such as pulling out of Lebanon after terrorists bombed the Marine base in Beirut, lifting oil price controls, continuing Carter’s deregulation – were quite admirable, especially by today’s standards.
By and large, however, Reagan’s words are used to advance the power of the state. Many in today’s War Party, previously critical of Reagan’s relative restraint, claim that Reagan would have approved of their pet war in Iraq, when we do not know one way or the other if that is true.
They say Reagan made them revere liberty, and that their reverence towards liberty leads them to revere war.
They say that his words about the Soviet Union are applicable today, and that what we face now is Cold War II.
They say that Clinton hasn’t sufficiently followed Reagan’s policy of bloated military spending and foreign bellicosity; However the Reaganite George W Bush most certinly did, and Bush even surpassed Reagan.
They have in the past compared him to Thomas Jefferson, when all the two presidents had in common was that their words were better than their presidencies. (Even this is a weak comparison, seeing as how President Jefferson actually shrank the government.)
Today’s champions of neo-Reaganism invoke the legacy of a man who practiced libertarian rhetoric and carried out a predominately statist agenda, and they do it to advance an agenda even more statist than Reagan’s.
As much as I think certain misanthropes distort and twist Reaganism to their devious purposes, it is no surprise that the Gipper would have such a vile following. No symbol is more useful in the advocacy of empire than a respected leader who glorified freedom even as he trampled it.
Reagan was a Democrat, and union president, before he became a republicant and a union buster (PATCO); this makes Reagan a flip-flopper. Reagan was also a turn-coat, traitor, and informant
for J. Edgar Hoover
I can’t speak of Reagan the man, whom I never knew. It seems clear, however, that freedom lovers who mourn his passing should likewise mourn his legacy, which, as it stands, is hardly a cause for celebration.
Shaun | Posted on March 23, 2010 at 1:33 pm
Thank you Pat for your insightful summary of Reagan’s legacy as president. He has been missed.
Steve | Posted on March 23, 2010 at 10:55 pm
OH How I miss this great man !! Our current president could not clean the dirt off of his shoes !! The good old days !!! Freedom and prosperity , when people were actually proud to be americans, unlike today !!!
garrett cluck | Posted on March 24, 2010 at 10:44 am
The great and inspiring President Reagan is surely spinning in his grave when sees how GE and its CEO have trampled everything he believed in. I will never buy another GE appliance or product.
Helmut Rabis | Posted on March 25, 2010 at 8:05 am
Ronald Reagan changed my life by changing my political attitude and conviction. He opened my eyes about the sometimes ridiculous day-dreaming of liberal and left-wing thinking. His straight forward pursuit of American values has turned our world upside down. He single-handed ended the tyranny of the Soviet Union, or as he liked to call it, the Evil Empire! He gave my home country Germany its territorial unity back, against all odds! Face it, how many people would have ever thought that the “Evil Empire” would ever peacefully(!)give up its brutal grip on East Germany?
Who would ever forget what he said at Brandenburg Gate of East Berlin: “…Mr. Gorbachev, tear down this wall….!”
Thank you Ronald Reagan, thank you!
Sean Brearcliffe | Posted on March 25, 2010 at 8:51 am
Beautifully said, Pat.
Jason | Posted on March 26, 2010 at 12:14 pm
I was reading that supposedly the work for General Electric turned Reagan into a conservative.
Yet it has been pointed out that spending under Reagan’s California governorship mushroomed to all time highs, and then he went to Washington and performed the same favor for the federal government.
When the Liberty Amendment to abolish the income tax was gaining steam in the late 1950s, General Electric sent Ronald Reagan around the country speaking with a plan that did nothing but spike the Liberty Amendment.
Reagan was quintessentially, both in career and in life, an actor, a man practiced at seeming to be what he was not, an outstanding example of the contradiction of the entire conservatism industry, heated talk and no action.
George Yurieff | Posted on March 27, 2010 at 10:42 am
For many overseas, it’s hard to believe that a professional actor could become President of the United States. But that’s America. And it’s even harder for some to appreciate that perhaps this man will be far more remembered for his accomplishments in that role, as not only President, but a great President. We miss you.
George Yurieff – gy@nevic.ru
Jeremy Dodds | Posted on March 30, 2010 at 2:22 am
Reagan set to come to life on stage/screen!!
Thank you Hollywood – We Americans NEED this one-man show NOW more than ever!!
http://www.saukvalley.com/articles/2010/03/29/18582431/index.xml
Don Mitchell | Posted on April 27, 2010 at 11:25 am
Ronald Reagan was the only person I have ever voted FOR in my 63 years.Every one else was a vote against someone else. He may of had faults but compared to all the rest, he is a shining beacon to me.
Don Mitchell