Tear Down This Myth: How the Reagan Legacy Has Distorted Our Politics and Haunts Our Future

Balanced and Fair, So There...,

By	Hank Drake (Cleveland, OH United States) - See all my reviews

Ronald Reagan was out of the public eye for the ten years preceding his death. During his time in office, and in his first five years out of office, there was an anti-Reagan backlash. (Even George H. W. Bush had a small hand in that, when he spoke of a "kinder and gentler" America, Nancy Reagan was said to have asked, "Kinder and gentler than who?") Numerous critical books were written about Reagan both during and immediately after his presidency.

After Reagan movingly went public with his Alzheimer's diagnosis in 1994, negative criticism in print and on the broadcast media ceased - partly out of respect, but mostly because publishers thought negative books on Reagan would not sell. The former president was consigned to the mist of hagiography. By the time he died in 2004, there were serious calls for memorialization such as adding his visage to the dime and even to Mount Rushmore.

It takes time to look back at history with real perspective.

Two books have been recently published which attempt to present an alternative perspective on the Reagan presidency. One, William Kleinecht's The Man Who Sold the World: Ronald Reagan and the Betrayal of Main Street America, is revisionist polemic and does more to enrage than enlighten. Will Bunch's Tear Down this Myth, however, is a fair and balanced (to borrow a phrase popular with right-wingers) look at the Reagan presidency. Far from polemic, and often complimentary to President Reagan, Bunch attempts to reveal the presidency of Ronald Reagan as it was experienced by those during the era. Many of the negative reviews appearing on Amazon are obviously written by those who didn't read the book. As I've said before, Amazon needs to look more carefully at reviews before publishing them. This is not a chat board.

The difference between Reagan and George W. Bush, Bunch implies, is that while Reagan had a general philosophy (lower taxes, deregulate the market, stand tall against the Soviets), Bush was dogmatically rigid. True, Reagan signed a massive (and warranted) tax cut in 1981. But he signed six tax increases in the years that followed. Despite what idolaters parrot, the '81 tax cut did not spur economic recovery, but preceded an even deeper recession than the one Reagan inherited. Faced with a Democratic controlled House (and for six years, Senate), Reagan had to compromise on many of his programs. After proposing draconian entitlement cuts in 1981 (anyone remember "ketchup is a vegetable?"), Reagan realized they would never sell and backed off. Ever the pragmatist, Reagan worked with House Speaker Tip O'Neill (who were poles apart politically but enjoyed each others' company) to reform Social Security. He also signed immigration reform and programs to improve health care for the catastrophically ill. Talking tough against the Soviets, Reagan nevertheless was able to hammer out agreements with Mikhail Gorbachev which did more to reduce Cold War tensions than the détente favored by his predecessors. (He also became so worried about increasing tensions in 1983 that he considered inviting Yuri Andropov to an emergency summit.)

But Reagan made mistakes which have been glossed over: including the stationing of Marines in Lebanon and providing aid to Saddam Hussein. The Iran-Contra scandal, which nearly sank his presidency, has been almost forgotten. And the spiraling deficits of the 1980s (repeated 20 years later) proved that the Laffer Curve, which was the cornerstone of Reaganomics, had no basis in actual fact.

How then, did Reagan will two landslides? It's simple. Even though numerous polls showed the American people were leery of his policies, they just liked the guy.

Tear Down this Myth is well researched and Bunch writes in fine, easily readable style. Conservatives have touted Ronald Reagan as America's savior, while Liberals have painted him as the devil incarnate. Reality, as Will Bunch demonstrates, is somewhere in between.

A Sunset on Mars.



The Earth and Moon photographed from Mars orbit.

Mason the eunuch

Friday morning, Danny and I dropped Mason off at the vet's office for neutering and the removal of his hind dewclaws. The operation and recovery took about six hours. The neutering procedure is less severe than I envisioned: the vet makes a small incision between the base of the penis and the scrotum, and pops the testes out through the incision. The scrotal sac remains but will shrivel up over time.

At 2:30, I returned to the vet's office to pick up Mason, and he came bounding out to me as if nothing had happened. His hind legs were wrapped in gauze, but he didn't so much as limp. The vet and I took Mason into the examination room, and we placed the notorious lamp-shade on his head, so he wouldn't risk opening up his incision. He has to wear it until the 16th. Mason is not a happy camper and initially kept bumping into objects, but he's adjusting to it.

Over the weekend, Danny and I took it easy, staying close to home. We only made a few brief shopping trips, and I spent a good amount of time reading in the family room while Mason and I listened to Classical music (Mason likes Schubert). The high point of the weekend was having Zsolt over for dinner, movies, and music.

The Graduate

Mason graduated from puppy training last night.

Danny and I just dropped him off at the vet for neutering. I already miss him.

Thursday night, I drove Zsolt to his concert in Ashtabula. Therein lies a tale. Time was becoming problematic for me, as Danny was scheduled to work and Mason would be left alone for over five hours, a record for him. Wednesday night, Danny was called in to substitute for another worker, and Danny agreed with the proviso that he could get Thursday off. With Mason no longer an issue, Zsolt and I had some more leeway in our schedule.

 

The weather was not great, but we were able to get to the KSU campus with plenty of time to spare. We were going to need every moment we could get.

 

One aspect about Zsolt I never fully appreciated until Thursday is his rock-solid professionalism. Zsolt is a real trooper. The piano, a Steinway M, is designed for a living room and was plainly too small for the auditorium. It was also dreadfully out of tune, badly voiced, and the regulation was shot. A more temperamental artist would have noisily stomped off the stage and cancelled. Not Zsolt. He patiently ran through some of his pieces to gauge the hall’s acoustics and get a feel for the piano.

 

At 6:30, there was a Q & A with a representative of KSU’s music program. Zsolt’s answers to the questions were well considered, and betrayed no hint of nervousness about speaking or performing before a crowd. The KSU guy continually mispronounced Zsolt’s name, but Zsolt did not offer a hint of irritation. Nor did Zsolt make an attempt to correct him. 

 

The Q & A concluded at 7:00, which gave Zsolt another ½ hour to prepare on the small practice piano backstage. More people filed in, eventually filling the hall about half way. A large number of attendees were of student age. It’s heartening when a classical concert is not solely populated by the blue hair crowd.  

 

Some of the repertoire was new to Zsolt, but a few pieces I’ve been hearing him in since 2004, including Schubert’s Klavierstucke D. 946, No. 2, and Liszt’s Dante Sonata. Even with the limitations of the instrument, I was struck by how Zsolt’s interpretations have ripened over the last five years. He brought new elements of these well worn pieces to light. I recently heard Maurizio Pollini playing the Schubert, and his performance sounded flat and lifeless compared to Zsolt. After hearing Zsolt play the Dante Sonata several times, I can confidently write that Zsolt “owns” the piece. All too many pianists turn the Liszt’s work into a cheap display of pianistic effects, and just as many wallow in sluggish tempos in a false attempt at profundity.  Zsolt has all the technique needed for the piece, and definitely turns up the heat, but never goes in for cheap exhibitionism. I crave to hear him in Liszt’s B Minor Sonata.

 

The audience was unusually attentive, even during Zsolt’s encore, Arvo Part’s Fur Alina. Afterward, one young person asked me for the name of the piece so he could get a recording.  

 

Zsolt treated me to Waffle House on the way home. It’s a relief to me that Zsolt takes as much pleasure in comfort food as I do.

 

On Sunday, I treated Danny to Abuelo's in appreciation for his help Thursday.

 

For those in the area, Zsolt will be giving a recital on Thursday, February 26 at 7pm. at the

Rancho Mirage Public Library.
 

Signs of Recession

I have not been personally affected by the current economic downturn - - yet. One of my friends was laid-off from GE, but that had been known about for years. He was able to find another job, with a commute of 90 miles each way.

Even without watching the news, I’ve seen the signs that things are not good, some subtle, some obvious.

On the subtle side, I called my dentist’s office on Monday to make an appointment for my check up and cleaning. They were able to book me for…today. I also called the optometrist and scheduled my eye checkup for Monday the 23rd In 20 years of making these kinds of appointments, I’ve never been able to book closer than a month in advance. But, in a recession, people begin putting off expenses they deem not immediately pressing, and in the absence of illness or other symptoms, that includes medical, dental, and eye care. If these items were not covered by my Progressive health plan, I’d probably be putting them off too.

On the obvious side, more and more stores are closing - - go to any mall and you’ll see for yourself. Restaurants are closing by the dozen, especially non-chain restaurants. As bad as the news from the auto and banking industries is, the frightening story you’re not hearing about in the media is the shutdown of small companies that make pieces/parts that supply the larger companies. Not just laying off, but shutting down. Once the economy recovers, larger companies will need the items these small companies produced, but it will be more difficult to restart them, which means more imports from God knows where.

In Defense of Deficit Spending

I’ve always been leery of debt, whether it be personal debt or deficit spending by the government. But looking at history, most of what this country has achieved has been with some form of deferred payment, i.e., deficit spending.

The government has run a deficit of varying sizes under every president since Herbert Hoover, save three: Harry Truman, Lyndon Johnson, and Bill Clinton.

Most recently, following spiraling deficits incurred under Ronald Reagan, Bill Clinton got the budget under control, and the deficit became a surplus in 1998. But that was mainly because the economy was so strong that the Federal government received tax revenues far beyond expectations. Surpluses and balanced budgets are for times of prosperity, not for rainy days, and we are enduring a profoundly rainy day.

The fact of the matter is that public debt has been a necessary evil for generations, and much good has come from the projects that brought on the debt. At a time when 90% of rural residents had no electricity, the Tennessee Valley Authority brought affordable power to millions of residents. How many of them would have preferred to live in the dark until we could pay for the TVA with cash up front? Would commuters of the last three generations been willing to do without the Interstate Highway System? Or the Golden Gate Bridge? These were not “make work” projects but improvements that needed to be done. Lest one think deficit financing is a new principle, Abraham Lincoln himself greatly increased the debt pushing for the Trans-Continental Railroad, the track-mileage of which was doubled between 1860 and 1870, and Lincoln was an enthusiastic opponent of “internal improvements.”

Today, much of the infrastructure, from roads and bridges, to water mains and sewers, to schools and public buildings, are crumbling from neglect while the nation turned its attention elsewhere. They need to be repaired or replaced.

Later generations reaped the rewards of projects and progress begun by their ancestors, and future generations will benefit from the improvements we make today. Why shouldn’t they help pay for it?