Å·±¦ÓéÀÖ

I think you give Reagan way too much credit Bryan - I think sometimes it is all about the details.

I do agree that Reagan was unable to be swayed even when presented with the most persuasive arguments - he is why manufacturing ceased to exist in this country (the way it was)

And he did all of this while acting and speaking like the benevolent grandfather of America.

While visiting Reagan's Presidential library a few years ago - I was struck by his ability to come across in the media as a family member just telling a few jokes and having a chat in the living room. No fuss - no muss - never upset with anything - just coasting along.

I do think his old crony Baker made an accurate statement - Reagan was very focused about himself. Absolutely fabulous quote.

"...he had what I call a central core of convictions."

This, as I think you're indicating Bryan, was Reagan's strength and weakness; but also contributed to the Mister Magoo/Forest Gump perceptions of the guy.

Domestically, economic recovery was his most immediate challenge, with interest rates topping 12% when he took office. Fortunately, for Reagan and the country, Fed Chairman Paul Volcker had things well in hand.

Reagan's embrace of trickle down economics had little to nothing to do with the economic recovery, as I understand it. He quite closely resembled Magoo, or Gump, on economics. What else would one expect from a B movie actor who got into politics because he saw red wherever he looked.

On the international scene, he saw an outdated threat posed by the failing Soviet Union. But the Soviet gave him a perfect straw man for freedom rants - all that evil empire and tear down this wall theatrics. But again, the collapse of the Soviet had little to nothing to do with anything Reagan did. But it sure looked good, especially to those who didn't poke at the picture's fabric too vigorously, with Reagan blah, blah, blahing about the evil empire and tear down this wall and the wall came tumbling down. Cecil B Demille couldn't have staged it better.

Volcker was a real asset during those times. Yes, Reagan knew a good line when he heard it and it is still being used today as an example of his presidential clout.

Am finally joining in...all the holiday activity slowed me down to glacial speed...
I love history and especially the personalities who contributed to and influenced history. Love US history, and am impressed with the depth of the political history discussion in the previous 300+ comments. Enjoying and learning a lot.
Interesting to me that (Prologue XVII) Newsweek would declare that LBJ's reign would end after 1000 days. It seems that we always expect too much from and are too impatient with our politicians. We probably would not feel so disappointed with our leaders if we lowered our expectations. How really can one individual turn/change the course of a 300 million passenger ship that is traveling in completely unpredictable and often hostile waters as we so often encounter in the world?

I was wondering what happened to you Lewis. I was a bit concerned. Yes it probably was tough for LBJ to turn things around on a dime and he did accomplish a great deal - Vietnam was not his finest hour though.

Was there really such a cataclysmic shift from liberal to conservative in LBJ's first 1000 days as it states on pages XIX-XX? It's hard to imagine that such a deep seated swing could occur across the land in such a short time.

Yes it is. You can always add any questions that you might have on the Q&A thread for Jonathan.

Interesting (page XX) to imagine government either saving us or ruining us. Was that a sentiment of that age...or have people always tended to think in those terms, I wonder? Perhaps we have been spoiled by stability for so long that we can't imagine such extreme results from the actions of a few. But then, I suppose if we look around us at a few other nations, we can see what calamity or renewal can be wrought by one leader or one government... Thoughts?

At the time (page XXIII) I suppose we didn't fully realize how earth changing the 1960s-1970s were...but by the time we finally climbed out to the 1980s, there was certainly no resemblance to what the 1950s had been like...

An interesting comparison (page XXV) between control and success between LBJ and RR... LBJ seemed to need to be in control. RR seemed to be more like the actor he was...needing to be liked and to be center stage...

It must be ideal (page XXVIII) for a president to come into office following what appears to be a disastrous administration. RR came in after plenty of unhappiness with Carter/Iran. LBJ, on the other hand, had a hard act to follow after JFK/youth/idealism. I wonder how things might have turned out differently for RR if he had been handed Vietnam on a platter upon entering the White House...

I was in grade school at the time (page 25) so was clueless about the LBJ/RFK dynamics and competition for attention and control. But it is a interesting look into the setting up of a new administration in unusual circumstances.

Lewis wrote: "Interesting (page XX) to imagine government either saving us or ruining us. Was that a sentiment of that age...or have people always tended to think in those terms, I wonder? Perhaps we have been s..."

Since the beginning of the country and the constitution folks here have been arguing between a strong central government versus states' rights and I doubt it will stop any time soon. Just look at the Federalist Papers and the Anti Federalist Papers and that will give you a good idea.

by Alexander Hamilton

by Patrick Henry

Lewis wrote: "An interesting comparison (page XXV) between control and success between LBJ and RR... LBJ seemed to need to be in control. RR seemed to be more like the actor he was...needing to be liked and to b..."

No doubt about it. I think also that LBJ was afraid of losing control like his father had done.

Lewis wrote: "At the time (page XXIII) I suppose we didn't fully realize how earth changing the 1960s-1970s were...but by the time we finally climbed out to the 1980s, there was certainly no resemblance to what ..."

Unfortunately the baby was thrown out with the bathwater. There were a lot of "real" family values and core ethical beliefs that people wished had stayed with us.

Lewis wrote: "It must be ideal (page XXVIII) for a president to come into office following what appears to be a disastrous administration. RR came in after plenty of unhappiness with Carter/Iran. LBJ, on the oth..."

Who knows. I doubt he personally would have been able to do much with it. And Ronald Reagan would have handed the job off to a team of advisers to sort out.

Lewis wrote: "I was in grade school at the time (page 25) so was clueless about the LBJ/RFK dynamics and competition for attention and control. But it is a interesting look into the setting up of a new administr..."

Unusual seems to be an understatement.