I'm interested to know what Americans think from both sides and even objectively. I know he has become a hero of the Republicans, and I guess economically the 80s was a pretty crazy time.

Reagan was good for the economy, helped end the Cold War, and for those who agree with him on social issues, was very good as well. He should have engaged in more outreach and taken the time for symbolism for minorities, sort of naive in that area.

Yes he was good. But he made a few mistakes, the main being amnesty. Additionally, he lobbied hard in 1994 (after he was out of the white house) for the Assault Weapons ban of 1994. I don't think it would have passed but for him.

Perceptions of a President's administration are quite subjective. There is no standard by which to judge them except our own own. The variables that accompany any President's administration are myriad. Some cannot be mitigated. However, many Americans don't acknowledge such variables or their mitigating effects. Nevertheless, a President's ability to communicate effectively and inspire is an important factor. President Reagan did so.

Agreed.

Reagan accomplished a lot of good for America. He was the most brilliant communicator since Franklin D. Roosevelt--a tremendous asset in the age of instant communication. He was the first president since Eisenhower to fill out two full terms, which brought stability to the Executive Branch. His sunny demeanor and outstanding communication lifted Americans from a long period of gloom. His courage in going public with his colon cancer, and his brave (even humorous) response to the near-fatal assassination attempt, inspired Americans. Although he came to office as the most rhetorically anti-Soviet president, he was pragmatic enough to see that Gorbachev was a different kind of Soviet leader. He and Gorby forged an important agreement to remove medium-range missiles from Europe, which set the stage for the more significant nuclear arms reductions negotiated by George H.W. Bush and Clinton.

But, Reagan used his matchless communication skills to make Americans believe that government (which he headed) was their enemy. Not surprisingly, the people he brought into government had contempt for it, and plundered the public. His lifting of restrictions on S&L's required a $200 billion bailout that we're still paying off. He cut the safety net from millions of America's most needy people, putting seriously mentally and physically ill people out on the street. Wprst of all: he presided over the greatest upward transfer of wealth in our history--the rich have gotten richer ever since, and the middle class pays for it.

Overall: more harm than good.

The best ever- IMO

TB, one of my concerns as I express to my students is our collective penchant for accruing positive and negative actions and outcomes to Presidents. For example, despite the mantra from pundits, Presidents don't raise or lower taxes; only the US Congress can do that. That Congress may agree with or oppose a President's proposal is exactly how our Constitution prescribes that relationship.

For example, in 1981 President Reagan signed a huge tax reduction into law and in late 1982 a huge tax increase into law. However, there would not have been the two laws for him to sign unless the Congress (Democrat controlled House and Republican controlled Senate) had passed both bills. Who gets credit?

One of the best in my opinion as well. I was a kid when he was president and he just looked like he came out of central casting. He looked and acted the part to a tee.

I think that he did more good than harm by outspending the soviets and lifting the iron curtain so that a couple hundred million people could be free. Pretty big accomplishment.

I don't agree with George Carlin but he's a great comedian. On one of his specials I saw as a kid he said that Reagan got elected with the help of the moral majority and the teamsters. "Organized religion and organized crime working together to make a better America". Always got a kick out of that

I agree, a horrible president, and yes, right out of central casting,

he was a champion union buster, hated unions, and despised the poor.

On unions I have had a little experience with unions. Enough to know I would not want to be in one.

On a lighter note I loved hostess cup cakes. Why did they go out of business?

They just started up again thank God. The only reason they were able to start up again was because they are no longer a union company.

Obama wants to make sure the poor stay poor.

I also have a little experience with unions. About twenty-five years, to be exact. And I know enough about modern drug screening and background checks to know that no union would have you. So everybody's happy.

I loved Reagan. I think it's important to remember not every major event that happens in the United States is the work of the President. He's the symbol and protector of the free world not the ruler of it. In order to have an effective government you need a functional Congress and a President who's both a leader and a compromiser.

As for Reagan, I'd put him in the top 10 out of the best all time. Not top 5 but certainly top 10 or 15.

He made everyone proud to be Americans again after the Nixon-Carter years. Oversaw a period of great prosperity, worked well with Congress and Tipp O'Neill. Was likeable, communicated, was a true leader, put Gaddafi in his place, helped bring down the Soviet Union, and survived an assassination attempt. He was a breath of fresh air.

Of course my couple marks against him would be, as Turnbull mentioned, the upswing of wealth to the top 1 or 2% of people certainly did not benefit the majority of Americans. Reagan was a social conservative but he was also a man of his generation. I wish he also did more to combat HIV and the AIDS virus.

As for the Unions, a lot of them were corrupt anyway at the time and had pushed costs too high so work was going down south or overseas. Unions have their place of course, but greed is greed, no matter what economic ideology it comes from. The Unions in this country went too far and it brought consequences. One of which is pensions and benefits that now can't be afforded.

Overall I think Reagan was a very good President

He also handled the AIDS crisis very poorly. It really wasn't till after Hudson's death, and when Ryan White's story came out about a tainted blood transfusion that he went into action.

1980-1988. Were you even born yet?

AIDS was practically an epidemic in New York City, especially in the gay neighborhoods. But not NEARLY enough was known about the disease back then to put the blame on Reagan.

Fast forward twenty years, where people are living with HIV for decades (and liberals will HATE this FACT), and George W. Bush does more for the HIV/AIDS health crisis than any President that preceded him.

Technology, funding, medical studies. It all takes time. We didn't even know what we were dealing with yet back in the '80s.

Interesting book on that subject is And the Band Played On by Randy Shilts. You would think a gay journalist from San Francisco would love to only bash the right but, I have to say he doesn't hold his punches at all when it comes to criticizing the left and the gay community. Interesting read very informative if you can get passed some of the graphic details of the gay culture.

He didn't despise the poor. That's one of the myths of the left-wing. Because he decreased marginal tax rates there was an increase in revenues and an increase in private employment. In the African American community employment increased to a larger extent than for white Americans, the same goes for entrepreneurship.

The problem was, while Reagan was "the great communicator," he was tone-deaf to racial symbolism and explaining how his free market economics would help the poor. The Left went out of their way to define him as how you described him, as someone who despised the poor. It's like saying he hated unions. He didn't, but he didn't like the political power of some unions that were in the pockets of the Democratic Party. I was a job steward years ago and saw first hand how unions often overreach, even if it means shooting themselves in the foot by causing the business to go bankrupt. That's what happened in Detroit.

I also hate to disagree with Turnbull on this one, but the idea of people keeping more of their own money, the money that they worked for, is not an "upward transfer of wealth." He also didn't wipe out welfare or anything of the kind. It was cut by about 1% and the CETA Program, which was considered a failure, was discontinued. Reagan also followed Paul Volcker's advice on battling inflation, which led to a brief recession, but once it ended it led to a period of sustained job growth and prosperity. http://www.utsandiego.com/uniontrib/20040611/news_lz1e11perkins.html

The S&L crisis wasn't caused by Reagan but by multiple factors, such as the fact that most of them were in bad shape in 1981, the bureau that was supposed to monitor them covered up, and Congress passed the buck instead of dealing with the issue head-on early. See http://www.econlib.org/library/Enc/SavingsandLoanCrisis.html

No, I wasn't born during the time. I would appreciate insight from those who were around when the epidemic was starting out.

I honestly heard a lot about Reagan when it came to the epidemic. And, just looking it up now (should have before I posted) there are a couple articles that said he put high priority on AIDS research.

And, I never heard that about Bush as well.

From Matt Damon, who is, keep in mind, a Hollywood Lefty:

http://www.theatlantic.com/national/arch...ds-work/255992/

I wished I would have known about this. Thanks for the info PB.

My pleasure, buddy .

Reagan's speech after the Challenger disaster was sublime.

No, and yes:

Reagan ran up the largest budget deficits to date by increasing defense spending because he and his advisers believed the USSR had gotten a big jump on us in strategic weaponry. Many people believe that his insistence that we build "Star Wars" forced the USSR to follow us, forcing them into economic collapse. The facts that emerged after the USSR broke up are that Soviet economy was in a very precarious state for years due to Brezhnev's senility and the weakness of his two successors. Their spending on conventional and strategic weapons was flat during six of Reagan's eight years in office--and they never spent much on their own "Star Wars" because they believed it wouldn't work. They were ready to topple.

But, yes, Reagan did contribute to the breakup of the Soviet Union by opening a useful and supportive dialog with Gorbachev--in effect, encouraging him in his open and reforming policies within his own country. In so doing, Reagan helped Gorby to pacify the hard-liners by showing them that the US wasn't on the verge of launching a nuclear war, and was open to responding to Gorby's peaceful initiatives. Reagan's willingness to discuss eliminating all strategic missiles showed them that the US could be reasonable. His support was essential for helping Gorby to preside over the dissolution of the USSR. Only a president with Reagan's impeccable anti-Communist credentials could have brought it off, and gotten the American people to support him.

Quite right TB. The Ruble is not traded much because it has virtually no value. It's economic character in Russia (and the former Soviet Union) is and was almost impossible to measure. In modern times (including today), the US military budget has exceeded a number of large nations' combined military budgets.

You're also right TB about those factors that led to the USSR's downfall. I'm glad you exposed the myth that US military spending led to the USSR's downfall. The USSR's failed attempt to take over Afghanistan made a gigantic contribution to that Nation's downfall although that effort is almost never stated as a factor. It used up considerable Soviet resources and exposed the unproductive Breshnev and Kosygin domestic and foreign policies. Also, don't forget Yuri Andropov who in the early 80s started the USSR on the path that Gorbachev followed.

Reagan is/was well liked in the UK. I think it is because he was so tight with Margaret Thatcher....but she was an old twat so there you go......

When Reagan was president, I was too busy crapping my diapers. What I've heard was that he was a good president, he was very eloquent in speech (since he was an actor, I certainly hope so), but not perfect. Ok, aside from crapping my diapers, I did remember that the hostages from the Iran situation were being released minutes after Reagan took office. That topic alone was definitely debated a lot on amongst parents' friends and themselves.

Did Reagan ever actually know what he was doing? Genuinely I ask because I was born in 75 and can just about remember his nice smiley face etc He was sometimes portrayed as a bumbling idiot and thatchers squeeze in the English media

I was also too young then to be able to give an informed opinion about Reagan's impact BUT....I recall hearing several times that the deal to release the hostages specified that they be released ON the day Reagan was inaugurated , and not while Carter was still in charge.

Actors know how to make entrances, after all.

He was a great President who commanded respect. No President will make everyone happy