Once again — perhaps this time hoping that they are right — Time magazine has ostentatiously declared: “The End of the Reagan Era.” In the November 17 “commemorative edition,” the magazine features a piece by historian Richard Norton Smith explaining how “the Age of the Gipper ends with Obama’s election.”
But we’ve seen this movie before. Back in 2006, Time’s Joe Klein enthusiastically suggested the Democrats’ midterm election victory marked “the end of the conservative pendulum swing that began with Ronald Reagan’s revolution.”
Before that, in 1993, a Time cover story proclaimed that Bill Clinton was “Overturning the Reagan Era,” complete with an upside-down picture of Reagan. Reporter Nancy Gibbs insisted that passage of Clinton’s package of tax increases “brings to an end a bankrupt period in American politics. The narrow votes on Thursday and Friday represent the first real rejection of Reaganomics, a doctrine that survived for more than a decade in which taxes were lowered, spending raised, and Congress was blamed while everyone watched the deficit soar.”
It’s not hard to see how Smith got the assignment to help bury Reaganism. While he elevates Reagan to a status alongside Andrew Jackson and Franklin Roosevelt — presidents whose “status transcends stone portraiture or academic canonization...[who] stamped his name and, more importantly, his ideas, personality and values on a defining chapter of the American story” — Smith saves all of his criticism for Reagan’s conservative approach, even as he uses Reagan’s example to scold today’s Republicans as mean and backwards. An excerpt:
Reagan preferred laughing at his adversaries to demonizing them. He disarmed critics of his relaxed administrative style by acknowledging that the right hand of his Administration didn't always know what its far-right hand was up to. As the laughter crested, so did the tax-cutting, the regulatory rollback and the military buildup that foreshadowed, paradoxically, the most sweeping arms reductions of the nuclear era. The ensuing political realignment was measured less in voter-registration rolls than in a pervasive skepticism about the state. Because there were many things government did badly, it came to be assumed, there was virtually nothing it did well....No President is immune to the law of unintended consequences. By decoupling conservatism in the 1980s from fiscal responsibility, he unwittingly sanctioned future deficits and helped usher in a consumerist society gaudily living beyond its means. The result: credit-card conservatism. Deprived of their green eyeshades, the Cold War and the Soviet Union, Reagan's ideological children have little to unify their fractious family except love of country and loyalty to the past.
Certainly the campaign they ran this fall was anything but Reaganesque. One wonders what Reagan the onetime movie star would make of a campaign that made an epithet out of celebrity. More than tactics, ideas mattered to Reagan. He was the proverbial conviction politician, and his midlife conversion from New Deal liberal to Goldwater conservative owed more to Friedrich von Hayek than Joe the Plumber--the latter a perfect symbol of a party running on intellectual fumes. While Reagan thought in decades, if not centuries, his political heirs define success as owning the news cycle. Thus Halloween came early this year, as GOP operatives lurched from Ayers to acorn to questioning their opponents' patriotism and flinging allegations of socialism. The last claim in particular rang hollow coming from one who voted to recapitalize Wall Street and partly nationalize the banking system with $700 billion in taxpayer funds.
A base campaign indeed. McCain is a better man than his robocalls. Yet he became enmeshed in the red-state-vs.-blue-state, hot-button, wedge-issue, 50%-plus-one formula that has dominated and degraded our politics in these locust years of racial, regional and cultural polarization. Reagan at his best was a happy warrior, who put a smile on the sometimes dour face of conservatism and recast his political faith as both optimistic and futuristic. He was no hater, and cultural scapegoating wasn't his style. Indeed, in 1978 Reagan courageously opposed a California referendum that would have made it easier to fire gay schoolteachers simply on account of their sexual orientation.
Conservatives wishing to honor their modern founding father might begin by practicing what Reagan preached in his valedictory address to the 1992 GOP Convention in Houston. "Whatever else history may say about me when I'm gone," he told us, "I hope it will record that I appealed to your best hopes, not your worst fears, to your confidence rather than your doubts." Some things are ageless.
—Rich Noyes is Research Director at the Media Research Center.




















Editor at Large
Comments Policy
Whatever else it is, we
November 11, 2008 - 11:55 ET by Chris NormanWhatever else it is, we know that it's the End of the Time Magazine Era.
So isn't it or is it?
November 11, 2008 - 12:15 ET by andophiroxiaI've seen that Obama has run a semi-Reaganesque campaign with absolutely no intention of keeping up the promises.
However, so if Reaganism is really dead, why did he employ so many elements in it?
Again, the news doesn't know its head from its bottom.
“You have enemies? Good. That means you’ve stood up for something, sometime in your life.” ~ Winston Churchill
they are having their pie
November 11, 2008 - 15:34 ET by katainkentthey are having their pie and eating it too! ;)
member of the Conservative Independant Witness Protection Program since Nov. 5, 2008
Ideas
November 11, 2008 - 12:36 ET by KC MulvilleThere are people. There are ideas. Do not confuse the two.
The Reagan personality era may be over, pushed aside by the personality of Obama. But have the ideas been pushed aside?
The news media is proclaiming that, domestically, Reagan has been proved wrong. They claim that, left alone without government oversight, the private sector will have more mortgage crises because of greed. They ignore the question whether the Barney Frank-led Democrat intrusion into Fannie Mae to extend pressure them to extend bad loans was a good government work or bad.
And if so, what ideas have replaced Reagan's? The idea that government, led by Nancy Pelosi, Harry Reid, and Barney Frank ... is a good thing? They know more than the market?
Desperate
November 11, 2008 - 13:05 ET by jchutch2Again, the desperation of the Democrats shines through like a quarter in a penny jar. When will the left learn that a legacy is not created through a desire or acres of feel-good news stories but? Reagan did not go into office seeking to create a legacy or era. He went in to serve his country and to get his country to feel special about itself again. The people's appreciation of his love is what created the era and legacy. Not to mention the unparalleled economic boom which they also attempt to pretend wasn't real, was overblown, or wasn't due to him.
Further proof is the legacy Clinton does have. What he's most remembered for. Most people will tell you when they think of Clinton's legacy, they'll think of 1 of 2 things. A blue dress or a cigar.
Please check my own essay on the subject of Reagan's Era:
http://www.mintcity.net/?p=328
Smith Is An Idiot
November 11, 2008 - 13:09 ET by rammingspeedJimmy Carter's four years in office kicked off the "Reagan Revolution" (it had actually started in the '60s and Carter made sure it took place) and the next time a president with Carter's anti-prosperity/socialistic policies starts operating, the Reagan Revolution will get back in gear.
Someone sticks a hot poker in your eye, you pull it out and stick it back at them.
The Reagan Era ended in
November 11, 2008 - 15:07 ET by mattmThe Reagan Era ended in 1990, when Bush 41 reneged on his "no new taxes" promise, enacted the quota bill and put Souter (I think it was) on the Supreme Court.
I thought it was revived in 1994 when the GOP got congress, but they have been caving anf going moderate ever since.
Thanks RINOs.
This is not just the end of the Reagan Era, it's the end of America as it was intended to be, and as it should be.
Welcome to the Former USA.
"If you're not outraged, you're not paying attention."
Let not your heart be troubled...
November 11, 2008 - 16:34 ET by Tom1969caThe Reagan Era is not dead ... it today lies dormant, hibernating, if you will, in a sleepy little town in Alaska called Wasilla, waiting for the right moment to be reborn - waiting for a President to demonstrate to Americans the price to be paid for electing liberals.
That President has come.
2012 cannot come soon enough.
=====
Daily Sarah Palin fact:
Sarah Palin believes in the principle of Peace through Superior Firepower.
NYT Token Conservative Agrees Reagan Era Is Over
November 11, 2008 - 15:36 ET by chazskiSunday on Face The Nation, David Brooks also declared that the Reagan Era was over. It seems to be the wishfull thinking concensus of the New York liberal media establishment. Obviously, what is needed is another Carter to bring on disaster which another Reagan will then have to clean up. I think we at least have the first half of that scenario in place as we speak.
Time Magazine is laying off
November 11, 2008 - 18:33 ET by TN MomTime Magazine is laying off people due to declining readership. Time's era of Liberal, Biased articles is about to end.
The Reagan era will never die.
November 12, 2008 - 02:54 ET by JWFIf only because liberal journalist types need it to crap on every few years to fill space.
How anyone could believe any of this tripe is beyond me. Once again, I could not stomach more than a few paragraphs of these loony rants.
Sincerely,
a Veteran of a 1000 psychic wars.