# Think Tank > History >  Ronald Reagan, a good president?

## DavidK

Only about a year ago I started paying attention to politics and finally realized how bad things really are in this country -- so I'm going to quickly ask a question that I'm sure many of you who are much more intelligent then I am when it comes to presidential history would be able to answer. Ronald Reagan, from my knowledge, is well known by many conservatives today as being one of the greatest republican presidents that ever lived. My question to you all is, in your opinion, was Ronald Reagan a good president, and if he was or wasn't, please explain your reasoning. I appreciate any feedback you can give me.

----------


## pcosmar

> Only about a year ago I started paying attention to politics and finally realized how bad things really are in this country -- so I'm going to quickly ask a question that I'm sure many of you who are much more intelligent then I am when it comes to presidential history would be able to answer. Ronald Reagan, from my knowledge, is well known by many conservatives today as being one of the greatest republican presidents that ever lived. My question to you all is, in your opinion, was Ronald Reagan a good president, and if he was or wasn't, please explain your reasoning. I appreciate any feedback you can give me.


He had a good message at the beginning. Whether it was sincere or just good acting I do not know.. He got stuck with Bush, against his wishes from what I have heard.
The Reagan years were the Bush years in reality.
And no,, it wasn't good.

Ron Paul was so disgusted with it that he resigned from the Republican Party.

----------


## QuickZ06

Reagan armed the Taliban.

And he was a bad president. 

Actions speak louder than words.

----------


## Crotale

Not for me.

----------


## specsaregood



----------


## Justinfrom1776

I've always felt that he was a good libertarian/conservative in 1964 but made a whole string of compromises with Social Conservatives and Neoconservatives before eventually becoming president in 1980.

----------


## TheTexan

Good actor.  Bad president.

----------


## fisharmor

> Good actor.  Bad president.


But you repeat yourself.

----------


## LibertyEagle

> Only about a year ago I started paying attention to politics and finally realized how bad things really are in this country -- so I'm going to quickly ask a question that I'm sure many of you who are much more intelligent then I am when it comes to presidential history would be able to answer. Ronald Reagan, from my knowledge, is well known by many conservatives today as being one of the greatest republican presidents that ever lived. My question to you all is, in your opinion, was Ronald Reagan a good president, and if he was or wasn't, please explain your reasoning. I appreciate any feedback you can give me.


I voted for the man twice and loved what he said.  He did do a number of good things, but the reality is that the size and scope of government grew a great deal while he was in office.  It took a long time for me to take a good look at it and when I did, I had to admit to myself that while his rhetoric was absolutely wonderful, and I still agree with it to this day, his actions were not in line with his rhetoric.

It really took a left turn after he was shot.  And like Pcosmar said, he had promised conservatives that he would not choose an "Insider" V.P. and then he chose Bush, who is an Insider-extraordinaire.  

I also want to say that one of the reasons I support Ron Paul is because I still want someone who would DO what Reagan only talked about.  Paul has shown from his well over 20 year voting record, that he would do just that.

----------


## specsaregood

> But you repeat yourself.


Wouldn't that be contradicting himself?

----------


## fisharmor

As much as everyone's panties are in a bunch about Obama unilaterally going into Libya.... Reagan did that, in Grenada.
As much as every good conservative loves guns.... Reagan was the one who made it illegal to own full autos manufactured after 1986 (thus making legal full autos incredibly rare and accordingly expensive).  Whole class of guns civilians don't have access to now.
The 1980's economic boom was the same kind of boom we always have - turn on the money spigot full bore, finance spending with deficits.

When they say Reagan was a "great" president, what they're referring to most of the time is the fact that the US empire suffered a serious setback with 'Nam, and Carter didn't do anything to push the empire forward.  Reagan was the one who started dumping money back into "defense", starting conflicts across the globe to push US hegemony, and otherwise encouraging worship of the state-god.

----------


## fisharmor

> Wouldn't that be contradicting himself?


No, he was good at acting like he was going to be conservative, and he was a bad president because it was only acting.

----------


## Voluntary Man

*Ronald Reagan, a good president?*

Better than GHWB, Clinton, GWB, and Obama -- but he was no Ron Paul.

----------


## brushfire

> *Ronald Reagan, a good president?*
> 
> Better than GHWB, Clinton, GWB, and Obama -- but he was no Ron Paul.


Exactly - I'd have to ask that the question be further qualified.  "A good president compared to whom?"

----------


## ClydeCoulter

He raised taxes by removal of deductions that hurt the middle class & poor severely, such as removing deductions on small loans (automobile, credit cards, etc).

----------


## Pericles

> I voted for the man twice and loved what he said.  He did do a number of good things, but the reality is that the size and scope of government grew a great deal while he was in office.  It took a long time for me to take a good look at it and when I did, I had to admit to myself that while his rhetoric was absolutely wonderful, and I still agree with it to this day, his actions were not in line with his rhetoric.
> 
> It really took a left turn after he was shot.  And like Pcosmar said, he had promised conservatives that he would not choose an "Insider" V.P. and then he chose Bush, who is an Insider-extraordinaire.  
> 
> I also want to say that one of the reasons I support Ron Paul is because I still want someone who would DO what Reagan only talked about.  Paul has shown from his well over 20 year voting record, that he would do just that.


He compromised with a Democratic party controlled congress and was not confrontational. Big error in trying to go along to get at least something done. Paid too much attention to the press, which was on his ass at every turn.

----------


## donnay

I personally think Ronald Reagan went in truly sincere about making the changes America needed.  Then the attempted assassination was his warning to back off.  Everything went downhill after that.

If you look at the connections the Bush family had to the Hinkley family you can begin to see that Bush wanted to be president in the worst way.

----------


## Anti Federalist

> He had a good message at the beginning. Whether it was sincere or just good acting I do not know.. He got stuck with Bush, against his wishes from what I have heard.
> 
> *The Reagan years were the Bush years in reality.*
> 
> And no,, it wasn't good.
> 
> Ron Paul was so disgusted with it that he resigned from the Republican Party.


Call me naive, but I believe him to be sincere at the outset.

Then he got shot, shot allegedly by a deranged man who wanted to "impress Jody Foster".

A man who was the son of a very close friend of ex CIA chief and then current VP George Herbert Walker Bush.

Who was also pals with Al Haig, you'll recall infamously stated, hours after the shooting, that:




> Constitutionally, gentlemen, you have the President, the Vice President and the Secretary of State in that order, and should the President decide he wants to transfer the helm to the Vice President, he will do so. He has not done that. As of now, *I am in control here*, in the White House, pending return of the Vice President and in close touch with him. If something came up, I would check with him, of course.


A Freudian slip that revealed a little more than they wanted, I think.

In summary, I don't buy the "official story" of that shooting for a second, and I can see in my mind's eye a very clear picture of two or three men, standing around Reagan's hospital bed and ominously intoning, "You'd better play ball now, 'cos next time, *we won't miss*".

It was only a couple of years after this that Bush started, along with his cronies, running the operation that would become know as "Iran/Contra" out of the White House.

An operation where the US government shipped in cocaine and other drugs, sold them on the streets of the United States, sold weapons to middle eastern "terrorists" (including Osama bin Laden, Hezbollah and Iran) and funneled the money into proxy wars in Central America that Congress had specifically banned the funding of.

This was all run out of Arkansas, where Bill Clinton was the governor, and over 50 people that got too close to the operation being run out of Mena, AK, were murdered, and their deaths officially covered up by the state at Clinton's direction.

It was this "insider information" more than anything else, that forced Bush the Elder to "throw" the 1992 to Clinton.

The coup started in 1963, they sold out the currency and the manufacturing base to the Chinese in 1971, they moved into power officially in 1980 and we've been living under it pretty much ever since.

----------


## narrowphoenix

NO!

----------


## Sola_Fide

When Reagan was campaigning for Goldwater, he sounded great.

When he got into office...not so good.

----------


## Lishy

Didn't he start the OFFICIAL war on drugs?

----------


## Anti Federalist

> Didn't he start the OFFICIAL war on drugs?


No, that was Nixon

He certainly kicked it up a notch, by allowing the violation of _Posse Comitatus_ and use military assets to prosecute the WoD.

----------


## pcosmar

> Call me naive, but I believe him to be sincere at the outset.


Naive is not a descriptor I would use. It is entirely possible that he was sincere. Ron apparently liked him.

I never met Reagan personally. I have met Ron.

This does go back to exactly what we are all up against. And the lengths that TPTB will go.

But it is only a reality check to those that are paying attention.




I got chills up my spine the first time I heard this years ago,, It doesn't get any better with time.

----------


## mport1

Good president is an oxymoron.  They have all done terrible things.

----------


## Zippyjuan

People want different things from their presidents.  Some want them to solve all of the world's problems others want them to get out of the way. For some, one issue it the most important and for others a different issue may be the most important so they will consider a president to be good or bad based on those expectations. Reagan has a mixed record on almost everything so you can find things to like and dislike on all issues. He said he was for getting the government off the backs of the people but also oversaw the largest increase in governnment spending.  He was for peace and in private talks with Gorbachev offered to scrap our entire nuclear arsenal if the USSR would do the same- all the while building more nuclear weapons than all other countries combined in history. He cut taxes but also signed the largest tax increases in history. 

What I liked about Reagan (and actually Clinton as well) was that they were not party ideologues who held to principle on every issue but instead had broader goals they wanted to work towards and were willing to give up some things in order to move foreward. Reagan wanted to reduce taxes but after his tax cuts took effect he also saw the impact they were having on the rising government debt so he had to change.  Others see this as wishywashy on issues and not true representatives of their parties.

Anybody who examines Reagan's record will find things they like and don't like about what he did or didn't do. If you like him or his party you are more likely to focus on what you agree with. Like all presidents, his record is mixed.

----------


## RiseAgainst

> Naive is not a descriptor I would use. It is entirely possible that he was sincere. Ron apparently liked him.
> 
> I never met Reagan personally. I have met Ron.
> 
> This does go back to exactly what we are all up against. And the lengths that TPTB will go.
> 
> But it is only a reality check to those that are paying attention.
> 
> I got chills up my spine the first time I heard this years ago,, It doesn't get any better with time.


I am of the opinion that Regean was mentally ill.  That is not a slam on RWR, rather my understanding of how he could have changed from such a visionary man of liberty to such a gigantic government shill.  He was used.  The words of Regean were true, what he said in support of Goldwater was true Regean.  Unfortunately his mind was deteriorating, and TPTB saw a great opportunity to use his populism and acting ability to their advantage.

Regean was a HORRIBLE President, but I don't blam Regean at all.

----------


## Zippyjuan

Presidents always get more credit and blame than they deserve- same as a quarterback on a football team.  They are victims of circumstances when they are in office (some can create those circumstances though) and also have to rely on Congress to pass legislation.  In Reagan's case, Congress was controlled by the opposition party.

----------


## specsaregood

> No, that was Nixon
> He certainly kicked it up a notch, by allowing the violation of _Posse Comitatus_ and use military assets to prosecute the WoD.


I still find it too coincidental that the guy that nixon unseated in his first congressional office run was the congressman in d.c. that was most vocal about eliminating the federal reserve.  nixon was handpicked to get the ball really rolling...

----------


## Anti Federalist

> I still find it too coincidental that the guy that nixon unseated in his first congressional office run was the congressman in d.c. that was most vocal about eliminating the federal reserve.  nixon was handpicked to get the ball really rolling...


Yes, yes he was.

Nixon and his crummy little toady, Kissinger, really did start the fires on this whole mess.

Another "compromise" GOP president.

Christ...

*No One But Paul!*

----------


## GeorgiaAvenger

He surrounded himself with the wrong people

----------


## Zippyjuan

> He surrounded himself with the wrong people


He did have an incredibly high number of people working for him who were indicted on varous charges- he earned the nickname of the Teflon President since they did not seem to have impact on the popularity of the president himself.

----------


## Travlyr

> He surrounded himself with the wrong people


Or they surrounded him.

----------


## GeorgiaAvenger

> Or they surrounded him.


Yeah. He did a good job resisting them considering the circumstances. But when you have dozens of people who are "experts" in their field, and they are your advisers, you will do what they say.

This book talks about his battle with the "neocons" http://books.google.com/books/about/...d=N-bQtjYcy0AC

----------


## Hyperion

Using the extremely low bar set by the Presidents of the 20th Century, Reagan was pretty good. The detractors make good points but it's all about the company you keep.

----------


## tbone717

If it hasn't been mentioned, we do need to remember that Reagan had a Dem House and Senate to contend with, so even if he did want to advance libertarian-conservative policies a lot of them would have never been able to get through Congress.

----------


## Anti Federalist

It was under "pro gun" Reagan that a whole class of firearms were permanently banned from further production and citizen ownership.

This was done as a "compromise" to get the McClure/Volkmer firearms owner's protection act passed, with NRA's blessing.

A law that, almost 30 years later, is now widely ignored by local cops in gun hostile states such as NJ and IL on a regular basis.

----------


## truelies

Reagan was lots of talk and bloody little action. ONLY when compared to Carter was he any good. That though is quite an accomplishment given than since JFK (who was pretty good) each new prez has been worse than the one before. I shudder to ponder what about the next prez will make BHO the Usurper look good in comparison.

----------


## StilesBC

Terrible.  Yes, he talked well about some important things.  

Personally, I hold people who do the opposite of saying the right things in higher contempt than I do of people that follow through on doing the wrong things.  The main reason being, false prophets can be held up forever as paragons of virtue - providing cover for others to copy their actions.  Tyrants are judged and remembered appropriately - serving as a deterrent for the future.

----------


## No Free Beer

> I voted for the man twice and loved what he said.  He did do a number of good things, but the reality is that the size and scope of government grew a great deal while he was in office.  It took a long time for me to take a good look at it and when I did, I had to admit to myself that while his rhetoric was absolutely wonderful, and I still agree with it to this day, his actions were not in line with his rhetoric.
> 
> It really took a left turn after he was shot.  And like Pcosmar said, he had promised conservatives that he would not choose an "Insider" V.P. and then he chose Bush, who is an Insider-extraordinaire.  
> 
> I also want to say that one of the reasons I support Ron Paul is because I still want someone who would DO what Reagan only talked about.  Paul has shown from his well over 20 year voting record, that he would do just that.


I agree with this.

I just feel that some people on this forum act like being President is so easy and that Dr. Paul would be perfect. 

It is a lot more complicated than we think and know.

So be a bit more rational, people.

----------


## Feeding the Abscess

> Call me naive, but I believe him to be sincere at the outset.
> 
> Then he got shot, shot allegedly by a deranged man who wanted to "impress Jody Foster".
> 
> A man who was the son of a very close friend of ex CIA chief and current VP George Herbert Walker Bush.
> 
> Who was also pals with Al Haig, who infamously stated, hours after the shooting, that:
> 
> 
> ...


If Reagan hadn't been a terrible governor I'd lend some credence to the "hero turned villain" theory.

----------


## Okie RP fan

My understanding of Reagan is that he was an excellent communicator and he connected with most of America during the 80s. 

Also, he was kind of a natural leader, and in some ways united us in the fight against the Soviet Union. 

He was a gentle guy who gave up on his principles, if you asked me. Even with so many of his big government policies and expansions, I honestly think he was one of the _ most_ "conservative" presidents in recent times.

----------


## Voluntary Man

> My understanding of Reagan is that he was an excellent communicator and he connected with most of America during the 80s. 
> 
> Also, he was kind of a natural leader, and in some ways united us in the fight against the Soviet Union. 
> 
> He was a gentle guy who gave up on his principles, if you asked me. Even with so many of his big government policies and expansions, *I honestly think he was one of the  most "conservative" presidents in recent times.*


Well, sure, if you include everyone since Hoover, Reagan wins that contest pretty handily -- but that bar _is_ very low.

----------


## Okie RP fan

> Well, sure, if you include everyone since Hoover, Reagan wins that contest pretty handily -- *but that bar is very low.*


In bold, that is the key issue. 

Someone in this thread stated "compared to whom..." So, perhaps we should address the question in that sense.

----------


## MaxPower

> Only about a year ago I started paying attention to politics and finally realized how bad things really are in this country -- so I'm going to quickly ask a question that I'm sure many of you who are much more intelligent then I am when it comes to presidential history would be able to answer. Ronald Reagan, from my knowledge, is well known by many conservatives today as being one of the greatest republican presidents that ever lived. My question to you all is, in your opinion, was Ronald Reagan a good president, and if he was or wasn't, please explain your reasoning. I appreciate any feedback you can give me.


I think he was fairly average as US presidents go-- which is to say, not terribly good. During his administration, among other things, spending and deficits increased substantially, the national debt more than doubled, the CIA meddled in foreign affairs and helped to stir up blowback, and the drug war was ramped up to a new level of draconian severity. On the plus side, the federal government's march toward domination of the domestic economy did slow down under Reagan's watch, and he was less cavalierly-aggressive in his use of the military than many 20th-to-21st-century presidents were. I do think he was substantially better than Bush I, Clinton, Bush II or Obama, making him the best president of the last 30 years, but insofar as I'm concerned, the last actual _good_ president this country had was Harding or Coolidge.

----------


## Zippyjuan

> If Reagan hadn't been a terrible governor I'd lend some credence to the "hero turned villain" theory.


As both governor and president he signed the largest budgets as well as the largest at the time tax increases (California budget grew 120% while he was governor and he signed the largest tax increase in state history).

He did have excellent speach writers though.

----------

