President Reagan: The Role of a Lifetime

Like Clinton and GW Bush, Reagan will be argued over for decades to come. Did he win the Cold War? Did he bust the budgets sending us into mountains of debt? Did he bring about the great economic times of the 1980s? Did he just put a smile over the real problems of regular Americans? And what about Iran-Contra? Your answers depend on your political ideology. Both conservatives and liberals will stretch, bend, and lie to make Reagan's achievements or dissapointments match up with their ideological bent. These wing-nuts will ignore tons of facts that argue against their position. This will also be the case for Clinton and GW Bush. So it is. Cannon, however, has written the single greatest book on the Reagan Presidency. Unlike the liberals who took pot-shots shortly after Reagan left office, or the conservatives who are trying to rewrite the past with overly glowing accounts, Cannon wrote a book whose format should be followed for every president after they leave office: thoroughness and fairness. Cannon, who covered the Reagan White House for the Washington Post, was so much more than just a journalist when he wrote "Role of a Lifetime." He was part political scientist, part psychobiographer, a small part memoirist, and, indeed, he still didn't forget the writing skills of a well-trained journalist. If you're a hardcore conservative or liberal, you will not love this book. It doesn't kiss Reagan's ass, nor does it only tear him apart. The man did some good and some bad in the White House. Cannon does as good a job as possible in being fair about it.

Vilified by the left and deified by the right, it sometimes seems like Reagan can't get a chance at being remembered for being a human being. Decade-long Reagan follower Lou Cannon's nearly 1000 page study of Reagan and his presidency, so far, has proven the first and also the best definitive book on the Reagan Administration.Cannon and Reagan weren't friends, but he did cover him in the news since the Gipper's days as California governor. But even though Cannon ocasionally offers a helpful anecdote, or expresses sympathies with Reagan, the book is based entirely on his years of reporting and interviews with members of the administration. The interactions between Haig, Schultz, Weinberg, Mike Deaver, Stockman, Ed Meese, etc. form the backbone of the narrative. Seeing as how Reagan's paradoxical ability to envision the larger historical picture and his desire to have as little to do with administrative activities as possible, the real players often seem to be the many secretaries and bureaocrats around Reagan.Not necessarily so, Cannon explains, but a fairly accurate simplification. In addition to Reagan's handeling, mishandeling, and unhandeling of the new economic reform package, the AIDS issue, Iran-Contra, Cannon explores what he and others have learned about Reagan in their years of working with him. Cannon weaves summaries and examples of Reagan's past throughout the entire book, bringing up personality traits or past experiences when they become relevant to the central story of the Reagan White House. The former President--a seemingly enigmatic figure, as Cannon admits--comes off as you'd expect; a dedicated, honest, visionary, perpetually friendly, distant, and intelligent but not in the traditional way presidents usually are.Anti-Reaganites will point out that Cannon doesn't spend enough time on Reagan's supposed heartlessness towards the homeless and environment. The pro-Reagan crowd will be dismayed that Cannon could even suggest Reagan wasn't the perfect messianic presence he's been mythologized to be. Maybe it's a sign that this is, after all, an informed, even-handed book that should please most people looking for an overall picture of the Reagan Presidency.

After being severely disappointed by the work Morris spent a decade working on--I re-read this book. It is very well written, and unbiased account of the Reagan Presidency and Reagan the man. Lou Cannon didn't need to insert himself into the story to make this book work. History will point to this as the definitive Reagan Presidency biography and Morris may be relegated the ash-heap of poor authorship. As a journalist who covered Reagan as governor of California and as President, Cannon has some interesting insights on a complex Presidency.

Throughout this mammoth presidential biography, I was continually reminded how unbelievably fair and unbiased it was. I suppose such things should be a given, but too often the politics of the writer interfere with what should be a detached historical assessment. Cannon, more than any non-fiction writer on the scene (also see his "Official Negligence" for a similar lack of ideological grandstanding), respects the reader, knowing that credible (and exhaustive) sources, extensive, multi-facteted research, and a balance of criticism and praise brings the past alive far more than sanctimonious revisionism. As for the Reagan portrayed in Cannon's work, he is as most of America knew him to be: charming, devoid of vanity, genuinely friendly, stubbornly committed, and yes, unmistakably deficient in the realm of day-to-day politics. Moreover, Reagan himself understood his limitations, approaching the presidency as he would a film role, or as the CEO of a corporation. Because Reagan was not equipped intellectually to handle complex policy discussions and position proposals, he advocated (more so than any president this century) a "cabinet government," whereby all major decisions were delegated to who were presumed to be trusted advisors. To his near downfall, Reagan trusted too much and his reluctance (and inability) to tackle matters of high importance in his administration directly led to scandals, abuse of the public trust, and violations of stated goals. Reagan's achievements are given their due, but also the proper perspective, for Cannon is not seeking to deify his subject. Reagan was instrumental in the thaw of U.S.-Soviet relations, but he also missed many opportunities and often held too strongly to ideological positions that often contradicted the facts or what might have been a more pragmatic approach. And, lest we forget, the alleged opponent of big government failed to submit a balanced budget in his eight years in office and could not bring himself to cut valued programs of the New Deal legacy (due in part to a sentimental attachment to FDR). In many ways, Reagan was a complicated man, although his philosophies were anything but, which of course added to his lasting appeal with conservatives. Never a mystery and always up front with his intentions, Reagan was an attractive figure for a party in need of strong, dedicated leadership. However, Reagan was flawed in that he was unable to deal with direct confrontation, rapid change, and facts which came in opposition to his "inner script." In all, Cannon presents a fascinating figure; one worth remembering, but always with a realistic tinge. He gave us our pride, but it came (and continues to come) at a heavy cost.

If you wanted one man to write a book on the Reagan presidency, it would have to be Lou Cannon. Cannon, who covered the Gipper as a journalist for nearly three decades, doesn't disappoint his audience. His book is not an exploration into Ronald Reagan the man. Rather, it is a thorough and lucid trip through the Reagan administration. You'll relive the highlights of the 1980s, including the budget battles of 1981, the invasion of Grenada, and the INF Treaty with the Soviet Union. You'll also be confronted with some of the shortcomings of the Reagan presidency, inlcuding the Iran-Contra affair and the annual budget deficits. Cannon is somewhat detached from Reagan, which can be a positive attribute in a biographer, but the author is too reluctant to embrace his subject. His reporting of the Reagan presidency is first-class but his analysis of the 1980s is too negative. Biographers like to present their subjects as complex characters who do both good and bad things. And indeed, Reagan is no exception. But the balance of information in Cannon's book, whether he realizes it or not, supports the assertion that Reagan was one of our greatest presidencies. Most important was Reagan's instrumental role in peacefully eradicating communism from the earth. He indeed had a vital partnership with Mikhail Gorbachev in this task. Conservatives and liberals do themselves a disservice when they give one man all the credit at the expense of the other. The truth is that both men were crucial to one of the brightest and significant events of the century. Cannon makes this point well. Cannon is a little more reluctant to give Reagan credit for the economic recovery of the 1980s. Budget-wise, this may be a fair judgement. Indeed, Reaganomics turned out to be a false promise. Tax rates in 1989 were the same as in 1981 and government spending was much, much higher. But Reagan deserves credit for holding the line against a Democratic Congress at odds with his vision. Reaganomics was more successful in fighting inflation, where the president gave crucial support to the Federal Reserve in its efforts to restore monetary sanity, and also in defending free trade against protectionists and laying the groundwork for both NAFTA and GATT. Cannon puts too much emphasis on the Iran-Contra affair, which history has denigrated to less than a footnote, but his analysis of U.S. involvement in Lebanon is important and sobering. The overall perspective, however, is a bright one. No man did more to replenish America's confidence and unity, after two decades of despair and disunity, than Ronald Wilson Reagan. A true patriot, Reagan was proud to be an American. His service as president made it possible for millions of citizens to share his faith. After reading Cannon's opus, you'll understand why.