For Reagan, a communist was a communist, fifty years and half a world of separation be damned. And the president was confident that he could spot a ringer. “Reagan’s personalized version of anticommunism also implied,” Mann writes, “that once a Soviet leader could establish that he was straightforward rather than deceitful and was trying to alter the Soviet system, then Reagan might be willing—more willing, in fact, than Richard Nixon—to give credence to that leader and to try to do business with him.” Thus was made the policy on which billions of lives rested.
Reagan trusted Gorbachev, despite the advice of nearly everyone around him. Trust, but verify. The origin of that durable phrase, Mann relates, is one Suzanne Massie, the most disquieting piece of the Reagan puzzle. Massie was a Russophile who fell in love with the motherland during a Russian language class. She went on to write a ridiculed book on the romanticism of Russian history, and also collaborated with her husband, Robert K. Massie, on the best-selling Nicholas and Alexandra. Mann dedicates a quarter of his book to the bizarre relationship between Massie and Reagan, highlighting how Massie passed along her superficial understanding of Russian culture to a credulous Reagan, who then recycled her tales during major summits. Massie, though, was right: Gorbachev was genuine about trying to open up the system. In listening to her, Reagan had once again done a fairly stupid thing that turned out to be correct. (His top aides, both threatened and bemused by Massie, eventually succeeded in cutting her off from the president.)
Mann devotes another quarter of his book to Reagan’s tear-down-this-wall utterance. He shows that Reagan made this demand against the wishes of his foreign-policy advisers, and largely for the purpose of appearing relevant back home, even as his presidency crumbled. But then again, discerning any motive at all behind Reagan’s actions is difficult, concedes Mann, noting that even Nancy never felt that she fully knew him.
Mann also dedicates a quarter of his book to Reagan’s relationship with Nixon, and another to his summits with Gorbachev. The four-part structure breaks up the narrative arc, as the reader sprints through the Reagan administration four times over. But the form does serve the purpose of building a solid argument, which will be tough to knock down.
Now, if Reagan was Gump in this drama, then Mikhail Gorbachev was Jenny: the smart, well-meaning lefty whose best efforts inevitably ended in disaster. (Forget the Forrest-Jenny romance; the analogy falls apart there.) Gorbachev’s strategy to open the Soviet system in order to strengthen it failed. And it would have failed, Mann argues, whether Reagan had hiked defense spending or not. The Soviet economy was in the tank, suffering from structural weaknesses that sapped the strength of the central government. Gorbachev’s only real ace in the hole was his cooperative relationship with Reagan.
Soviet conservatives, who battled Gorbachev’s reform efforts, lost their greatest talking point when the American president stopped acting like an enemy. Yet Reagan was able to strengthen Gorbachev just enough so that he could carry out his reforms, but not enough to keep him in power. And in the end, Reagan’s seemingly naïve view of the communist character turned out right. He always believed that if he could simply show Gorbachev the wealth the American system created, he’d be moved to change his mind. Gorbachev stuck to his ideological guns. But his opponents in the elite sphere of the Soviet government did not. They saw what riches lay before them for the taking. When Gorbachev, with Reagan’s help, opened the door, they walked in and took them. And then slammed the door shut again.

Reagan is castigated for not being a college professor, accompanying his policies with wonkish justifications. He was more sophisticated politically than he is given credit for being - based on experience, as a former Democrat who appreciated FDR's leadership style, and as a union leader at a time of great Left-Right struggles for control of that movement. Look at it this way. Louis Armstrong never went to the conservatory, nor could he have written an exegesis of his music. He just did it. The bottom line is that Reagan's more 'sophisticated' critics all through the 1980s turned out to be very wrong about the likely outcome of his Cold War policies, by comparison with Reagan - but being intellectually vain journalists and academics, they would die befor they admitted it. Yet in looking back - who would have done anything different from what Reagan did?
#1 Posted by Mark Richard, CJR on Wed 4 Mar 2009 at 12:59 PM
Reagan is castigated for not being a college professor, accompanying his policies with wonkish justifications. He was more sophisticated politically than he is given credit for being - based on experience, as a former Democrat who appreciated FDR's leadership style, and as a union leader at a time of great Left-Right struggles for control of that movement. Look at it this way. Louis Armstrong never went to the conservatory, nor could he have written an exegesis of his music. He just did it. The bottom line is that Reagan's more 'sophisticated' critics all through the 1980s turned out to be very wrong about the likely outcome of his Cold War policies, by comparison with Reagan - but being intellectually vain journalists and academics, they would die befor they admitted it. Yet in looking back - who would have done anything different from what Reagan did?
#2 Posted by Mark Richard, CJR on Wed 4 Mar 2009 at 01:00 PM
Reagan is castigated for not being a college professor, accompanying his policies with wonkish justifications. He was more sophisticated politically than he is given credit for being - based on experience, as a former Democrat who appreciated FDR's leadership style, and as a union leader at a time of great Left-Right struggles for control of that movement. Look at it this way. Louis Armstrong never went to the conservatory, nor could he have written an exegesis of his music. He just did it. The bottom line is that Reagan's more 'sophisticated' critics all through the 1980s turned out to be very wrong about the likely outcome of his Cold War policies, by comparison with Reagan - but being intellectually vain journalists and academics, they would die befor they admitted it. Yet in looking back - who would have done anything different from what Reagan did?
#3 Posted by Mark Richard, CJR on Wed 4 Mar 2009 at 02:36 PM
Reagan spent Soviets into failure. Blarney.
Soviets did not increase military spending by one ruble during Reagan 8 years.
Russian historians published in 2008 a lengthy study on Fall of Soviet Union.
Reagan not mentioned.
want info on Reagan
google
clarence swinney + reagan firsts
cswinney2@triad.rr.com
#4 Posted by clarence swinney, CJR on Sat 14 Mar 2009 at 11:05 AM
Reagan History
Comparing Democrat’s hero-CLINTON—versus Republican’s hero--REAGAN
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
1.JOBS—grew by 43% more under Clinton.
2.GDP---grew by 57% more under Clinton.
3.DOW—grew by 700% more under Clinton..
4.NASDAQ-grew by 18 times as much under Clinton.
5.SPENDING--grew by 28% under Clinton---80% under Reagan.
6.DEBT—grew by 43% under Clinton—187% under Reagan.
7. DEFICITS—Clinton got a large surplus--grew by 112% under Reagan.
8.NATIONAL INCOME—grew by100% more under Clinton.
9.PERSONAL INCOME—Grew by 110% more under Clinton.
SOURCES—Bureau of Labor Statistics (www.BLS.Gov)--Economic Policy Institute (EPI.org)—Global & World Almanacs from 1980 to 2003 (annual issues)
www.the-hamster.com (chart taken from NY Times)
National Archives History on Presidents. www.nara.gov
LA Times 10-11-00 on Market--www.Find articles.com
A vote for a Republican is a vote for Less Success.
A vote to reduce the Standard of Living for all Americans.
#5 Posted by clarence swinney, CJR on Sat 14 Mar 2009 at 11:09 AM
REAGAN FIRSTS
--------------------------RONALD REAGAN RECORDS AS FIRST---------------------------
(1900-1989)
(Peggy Noonan pay attention)
1.First to turn America into a DEBTOR nation in Peacetime
2. First to increase DEBT faster than growth of national income in eight years
3. First to increase DEBT faster than growth of gdp over eight years
4. First to double the deficit in just eigh t years
5. First to “almost”: triple the national DEBT in just eight years
6. First to increase SPENDING by 80%--over 8 years.
7. First to SPEND more in eight years than was spent in prior 50 years.
8. First to have “real” INTEREST RATES of 8% after averaging 1% over 35 years.
9. First to keep PRIME INTEREST RATES at 20%.
10.First to over value the dollar to the yen at rate of 262 yen to 1 dollar.
11.First to have served as Governor and increase STATE SPENDING by 112%
12.First to have HOME LOAN INTEREST RATES as high as 16%
13. First to CUT TAXES by 60% for his rich pals
14. First to allow the SAVINGS AND LOAN INDUSTRY to be raided after signing a deregulatory bill and proclaiming “I think we have hit the jackpot”. Come and get it the vaults are unguarded.
15. First to deal with TERRORISTS
16. First to send an AUTOGRAPHED BIBLE to a man he called “The Satan of Terrorists”.
17. First to have an ADMIRAL plead the Fifth Amendment.
18. First to have a stealing, lying, gutless wife abusing MARINE LT. COLONEL plead the Fifth Amendment.
19. First to have a “sitting” CABINET MEMBER INDICTED
20. First to have an ASSISTANT SECRETARY OF STATE INDICTED.
21. First to have an ASSISTANT SECRETARY OF DEFENSE SENT TO PRISON.
22. First to have over 100 MEMBERS OF AN ADMINISTRATION CHARGED WITH CRIMES..
23. First to have more members of his administration charged with crimes than CUMULATIVE TOTAL OF ALL OTHER PRESIDENTS in the twentieth century
24. First to set a record for the LARGEST ONE DAY PERCENTAGE DECLINE in the DOW in history. 10-19-87
25. First to have over $10,000,000 INCREASE IN WEALTH from serving for 8 years as president.
26. First to testify ”under oath” 130 times that ”I DON’T REMEMBER” .
27. First to have an Admiral with a photographic memory testify 128 times “ I DON’T REMEMBER”.
28. First to undergo BRAIN SURGERY a few months after leaving office. No pain no gain.
29. First to, repeatedly, FALSIFY HIS WIFE’S AGE. As tho anyone cared.
30. First to promote his religious faith and never have an ACTIVE CHURCH MEMBERSHIP.
31. First to never use the term JESUS CHRIST in speeches.
32. First to seek GUIDANCE FROM THE STARS not from God
33. First to have had a SHOTGUN WEDDING.
34. First to have worked as a SHILL in Las Vegas.
35. First to call a Stealing, Lying, Psychotic, wife abusing Marine a “LIAR.
36. First to have been OPENLY ALIENATED from his children.
37. First To have served with ALZHIMERS
38. First to have UNEMPLOYMENT AT 10.8% since great depression.
39. First to attack a small unprotected nation with 88,000 inhabitants and 10,000 bb guns then PROCLAIM -“America stands tall again”— “we have whipped the Vietnam Syndrome”-we have defeated communism”. Gosh! What if we had whipped Cyprus?.
40. #1-in FARM FORECLOSURES
41. #1-In BANK FAILURES
42. #1-In SAVINGS AND LOAN FAILURES
43. #1-In Percent increase in PERSONAL BANKRUPTCIES
44. #1-In recorded MISSTATEMENTS
45. #1-In never having a single press conference in which he did not make at least one or more INCORRECT STATEMENTS.
46. #1-In needing a staff person standby during press conferences to tell the press “WHAT HE REALLY MEANT”.
47. #1-In having SERVICEMEN KILLED during peacetime.
48. #1-In larges
#6 Posted by clarence swinney, CJR on Sat 14 Mar 2009 at 11:12 AM