What do you think?
Rate this book
President Reagan: The Role of a Lifetime
Hailed by the New Yorker as "a superlative study of a president and his presidency," Lou Cannon's President Reagan remains the definitive account of our most significant presidency in the last fifty years. Ronald Wilson Reagan, the first actor to be elected president, turned in the performance of a lifetime. But that performance concealed the complexities of the man, baffling most who came in contact with him. Who was the man behind the makeup? Only Lou Cannon, who covered Reagan through his political career, can tell us. The keenest Reagan-watcher of them all, he has been the only author to reveal the nature of a man both shrewd and oblivious. Based on hundreds of interviews with the president, the First Lady, and hundreds of the administration's major figures, President Reagan takes us behind the scenes of the Oval Office. Cannon leads us through all of Reagan's roles, from the affable cowboy to the self-styled family man; from the politician who denounced big government to the president who created the largest peace-time deficit; from the statesman who reviled the Soviet government to the Great Communicator who helped end the cold war.
920 pages, Paperback
First published January 1, 1991
73 people are currently reading
2550 people want to read
About the author
Lou Cannon
25 books7 followersLouis Cannon is an American journalist, non-fiction author, and biographer. He was state bureau chief for the San Jose Mercury News in the late 1960s and later senior White House correspondent of the Washington Post during the Ronald Reagan administration. He is a prolific biographer of US President Ronald Reagan and has written five books about him.
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 30 of 62 reviews
May 13, 2014
Lou Cannon's PRESIDENT REAGAN is probably my favorite of its kind: the insider-y, journalist's post-mortem on a recent presidency (a la THE SURVIVOR by John Harris and DAYS OF FIRE by Peter Baker). Originally published in 1991, it's very much worth reading today. Reagan is still very much present in the public imagination, and he is often distorted as Republicans seek in his legacy the precedent for whatever position they want to hold next. For example, Republican congressman Dana Rohrabacher recently said that Ronald Reagan would support decriminalization of marijuana; Reagan signed the Anti-Drug Abuse Act of 1986, which established mandatory minimum sentences for many drug crimes, including marijuana.
This is my second trip through PRESIDENT REAGAN, and what was fascinating to me this time was the emphasis on the sharp limitations of Reagan's accomplishments. Reagan was a devout Goldwaterite who thought Social Security was a Ponzi scheme. But while Reagan cut anti-poverty programs in a way that did real harm, key aides like James Baker were convinced that Reagan couldn't cut middle class entitlements. (With good reason: as George F. Will wrote shortly after the 1980 election, "Americans are conservative. What they want to conserve is the New Deal.") By his second term, key aides like David Stockman were openly bemoaning the president's lack of 'revolutionary temperament.' Similarly, Reagan adviser William Niskanen wrote later that 'little deregulation' had taken place during the Reagan administration. Conservatives in the Reagan era had a much sharper understanding of what Reagan had actually achieved than those who talk about the Reagan revolution today.
And what makes this type of approach so fruitful in examining the Reagan presidency is how chaotic it was: Reagan was, even more than George W. Bush, a passive president who only seemed decisive in front of a video camera. All too often, he would try to split the difference at a major policy meeting and leave everybody wondering what his position was. Often, he didn't understand policy well enough to know what the different sides of an argument were. And Reagan would rarely inquire about a policy if it wasn't raised for him. As a result, subordinates would freelance under the belief that it was what Reagan really wanted. In Nicaragua, the CIA would mine the harbor while the State Department sought a regional peace agreement. During the Iran-Iraq War, Caspar Weinberger sent arms to the Iraqis while Bud McFarlane pursued a rapprochement with the Iranians (leading to the Iran-contra scandal). Reagan never understood the strategy well enough to understand the contradictions.
In domestic affairs, the story of the savings and loan debacle provided a sharp parallel to the financial crisis of 2008: Reagan appointees relaxed regulations on S&Ls while increasing the federal deposit insurance to $100,000 per account, with the predictable result that greedy investors engaged in risky deals with the explicit guarantee of the federal government. Regulators did nothing while the problem spun out of control and the government eventually picked up a bill that topped $100 billion dollars. This leads us to another under-appreciated fact about the Reagan administration: as many as 40 Reagan appointees were indicted, including the leaders of the Interior Department, the EPA, the Department of Housing and Urban Development, two National Security Advisors, and longtime loyalists like Michael Deaver and Lyn Nofziger. The Reagan administration is by far the most corrupt presidency since Richard Nixon and one of the most corrupt in the postwar era.
PRESIDENT REAGAN is filled with coups and counter-coups, as fragile alliances of advisers conspire to control who the president meets with, what information he's exposed to, and so forth. (Implicit in all this is a lack of respect for Reagan's intelligence, which almost all of the top White House staffers shared.) Reagan, far more than other presidents, was only as good as his top aides; and Reagan was indifferent enough to the people around him that he often did not remember their names or notice when they'd left office. At times Cannon has to navigate a very byzantine narrative. At the same time, Cannon is sharp on the personality of Reagan himself: his aversion to conflict, his preternatural self-confidence, his particular kind of intelligence, and so forth. Reagan the man is always in focus as the story progresses.
The book suffers just a bit from age: now that gay rights is on the ascendance and the Religious Right is on the decline, Reagan's AIDS policy (and his relationship with the RR) is worth more time than Cannon gives it. (This is the limitation of this kind of narrative, I think; harder to tell a story about Reagan not doing something.) In light of the 2008 financial crisis, I would have liked to see more on Reagan's relationship to Wall Street (that, plus his tax cuts, seem in hindsight to be major drivers of income inequality). And perhaps because it wasn't as controversial at the time, Cannon spends almost no time on Reagan the drug warrior.
(Also, Cannon takes for granted Reagan's claims that escalating the arms race brought the Soviets to the bargaining table; but access to Soviet archives presumably could illuminate much that Cannon wouldn't have known while writing this volume.)
Still, this is a wonderful work of political journalism, a strong, comprehensive look at a president, his presidency, and his limitations. I've read through it twice and thoroughly enjoyed it both times.
This is my second trip through PRESIDENT REAGAN, and what was fascinating to me this time was the emphasis on the sharp limitations of Reagan's accomplishments. Reagan was a devout Goldwaterite who thought Social Security was a Ponzi scheme. But while Reagan cut anti-poverty programs in a way that did real harm, key aides like James Baker were convinced that Reagan couldn't cut middle class entitlements. (With good reason: as George F. Will wrote shortly after the 1980 election, "Americans are conservative. What they want to conserve is the New Deal.") By his second term, key aides like David Stockman were openly bemoaning the president's lack of 'revolutionary temperament.' Similarly, Reagan adviser William Niskanen wrote later that 'little deregulation' had taken place during the Reagan administration. Conservatives in the Reagan era had a much sharper understanding of what Reagan had actually achieved than those who talk about the Reagan revolution today.
And what makes this type of approach so fruitful in examining the Reagan presidency is how chaotic it was: Reagan was, even more than George W. Bush, a passive president who only seemed decisive in front of a video camera. All too often, he would try to split the difference at a major policy meeting and leave everybody wondering what his position was. Often, he didn't understand policy well enough to know what the different sides of an argument were. And Reagan would rarely inquire about a policy if it wasn't raised for him. As a result, subordinates would freelance under the belief that it was what Reagan really wanted. In Nicaragua, the CIA would mine the harbor while the State Department sought a regional peace agreement. During the Iran-Iraq War, Caspar Weinberger sent arms to the Iraqis while Bud McFarlane pursued a rapprochement with the Iranians (leading to the Iran-contra scandal). Reagan never understood the strategy well enough to understand the contradictions.
In domestic affairs, the story of the savings and loan debacle provided a sharp parallel to the financial crisis of 2008: Reagan appointees relaxed regulations on S&Ls while increasing the federal deposit insurance to $100,000 per account, with the predictable result that greedy investors engaged in risky deals with the explicit guarantee of the federal government. Regulators did nothing while the problem spun out of control and the government eventually picked up a bill that topped $100 billion dollars. This leads us to another under-appreciated fact about the Reagan administration: as many as 40 Reagan appointees were indicted, including the leaders of the Interior Department, the EPA, the Department of Housing and Urban Development, two National Security Advisors, and longtime loyalists like Michael Deaver and Lyn Nofziger. The Reagan administration is by far the most corrupt presidency since Richard Nixon and one of the most corrupt in the postwar era.
PRESIDENT REAGAN is filled with coups and counter-coups, as fragile alliances of advisers conspire to control who the president meets with, what information he's exposed to, and so forth. (Implicit in all this is a lack of respect for Reagan's intelligence, which almost all of the top White House staffers shared.) Reagan, far more than other presidents, was only as good as his top aides; and Reagan was indifferent enough to the people around him that he often did not remember their names or notice when they'd left office. At times Cannon has to navigate a very byzantine narrative. At the same time, Cannon is sharp on the personality of Reagan himself: his aversion to conflict, his preternatural self-confidence, his particular kind of intelligence, and so forth. Reagan the man is always in focus as the story progresses.
The book suffers just a bit from age: now that gay rights is on the ascendance and the Religious Right is on the decline, Reagan's AIDS policy (and his relationship with the RR) is worth more time than Cannon gives it. (This is the limitation of this kind of narrative, I think; harder to tell a story about Reagan not doing something.) In light of the 2008 financial crisis, I would have liked to see more on Reagan's relationship to Wall Street (that, plus his tax cuts, seem in hindsight to be major drivers of income inequality). And perhaps because it wasn't as controversial at the time, Cannon spends almost no time on Reagan the drug warrior.
(Also, Cannon takes for granted Reagan's claims that escalating the arms race brought the Soviets to the bargaining table; but access to Soviet archives presumably could illuminate much that Cannon wouldn't have known while writing this volume.)
Still, this is a wonderful work of political journalism, a strong, comprehensive look at a president, his presidency, and his limitations. I've read through it twice and thoroughly enjoyed it both times.
October 11, 2018
https://bestpresidentialbios.com/2018...
Lou Cannon’s “President Reagan: The Role of a Lifetime” was published in 1991 and is effectively the sequel to the later-published “Governor Reagan: His Rise to Power.” Cannon is a journalist who covered Reagan’s political career closely for nearly four decades- first as a reporter for the San Jose Mercury News and later as White House correspondent for The Washington Post. He is the author of five books on Ronald Reagan.
As the title suggests, the vast majority of this weighty 764 page book is focused on Reagan’s two-term presidency. But periodic detours in early chapters provide the reader an informative peek into Reagan’s past by demonstrating how Reagan’s childhood, role as an actor and penchant for storytelling influenced his political career.
Critics of Ronald Reagan may find Cannon too friendly to his subject at times. But devotees of the 40th president are likely to bristle as their hero is portrayed as a frequently disengaged, disinterested or otherwise aloof figurehead taking cues from aides who felt their primary job was to save Reagan from himself. While Cannon’s later-published “Governor Reagan” shows remarkable objectivity toward its subject, in this volume the glass does often seem half-empty.
Still, Cannon’s biography of Reagan’s years in the White House is invaluable – both to fans of American political history and to readers interested in gaining insight into this skilled communicator. This book possesses almost a Robert Caro-esque “feel” given the nature of the wisdom it provides, how its insight was derived and the degree to which it penetrates selected topics.
Cannon often seems an unremarkable writer, but an extremely perceptive investigative journalist and a particularly keen observer of people. This is useful because “President Reagan: The Role of a Lifetime” is often more focused on the people around Reagan than on Reagan himself. Perhaps nowhere is this more instructive (or interesting) than the chapter which reviews the president-elect’s selection of cabinet and other senior administration officials.
But elsewhere, as well, Cannon maintains a watchful eye on the cadre of aides surrounding the president- reviewing their advice, analyzing their motives and assessing their influence on administration policy (and each other). And with certain subjects, such as the Iran-contra scandal, Cannon seems to have turned over every available stone in his effort to uncover the facts.
For all its merit, however, there is much about this book that will annoy or bother some readers. Because this is far more a political than personal biography, Cannon provides very little insight into Reagan’s personal life: his children and his religious beliefs, in particular.
And while some topics are covered with extreme intensity, others are comparatively untouched. Two topics alone (arms control and the Iran-contra affair) account for more than one-third of this book…providing great history but, for many, a sub-par biography. Meanwhile, the “Reagan recovery” and Reagan’s relationship with his vice president (and presidential successor) receive almost no attention.
Finally, Cannon provides a thought-provoking review of Reagan’s character and legacy in the book’s final chapter. Unfortunately, this assessment is provided in an intermittent and disjointed format that seems the result of a last-minute rush to address topics such as AIDS, ethics scandals and the S&L crisis that were not included earlier in the book.
Overall, Lou Cannon’s “President Reagan: The Role of a Lifetime” is a thoroughly penetrating and often meticulous history of the Reagan presidency. Readers seeking a captivating narrative, or who are particularly enamored by Reagan’s legacy, may be frustrated by the author’s style. But even if Cannon’s portrait of Reagan feels somewhat incomplete, it is hard to imagine a better source of insight into the inner-workings of the Reagan White House.
Overall rating: 3¾ stars
Lou Cannon’s “President Reagan: The Role of a Lifetime” was published in 1991 and is effectively the sequel to the later-published “Governor Reagan: His Rise to Power.” Cannon is a journalist who covered Reagan’s political career closely for nearly four decades- first as a reporter for the San Jose Mercury News and later as White House correspondent for The Washington Post. He is the author of five books on Ronald Reagan.
As the title suggests, the vast majority of this weighty 764 page book is focused on Reagan’s two-term presidency. But periodic detours in early chapters provide the reader an informative peek into Reagan’s past by demonstrating how Reagan’s childhood, role as an actor and penchant for storytelling influenced his political career.
Critics of Ronald Reagan may find Cannon too friendly to his subject at times. But devotees of the 40th president are likely to bristle as their hero is portrayed as a frequently disengaged, disinterested or otherwise aloof figurehead taking cues from aides who felt their primary job was to save Reagan from himself. While Cannon’s later-published “Governor Reagan” shows remarkable objectivity toward its subject, in this volume the glass does often seem half-empty.
Still, Cannon’s biography of Reagan’s years in the White House is invaluable – both to fans of American political history and to readers interested in gaining insight into this skilled communicator. This book possesses almost a Robert Caro-esque “feel” given the nature of the wisdom it provides, how its insight was derived and the degree to which it penetrates selected topics.
Cannon often seems an unremarkable writer, but an extremely perceptive investigative journalist and a particularly keen observer of people. This is useful because “President Reagan: The Role of a Lifetime” is often more focused on the people around Reagan than on Reagan himself. Perhaps nowhere is this more instructive (or interesting) than the chapter which reviews the president-elect’s selection of cabinet and other senior administration officials.
But elsewhere, as well, Cannon maintains a watchful eye on the cadre of aides surrounding the president- reviewing their advice, analyzing their motives and assessing their influence on administration policy (and each other). And with certain subjects, such as the Iran-contra scandal, Cannon seems to have turned over every available stone in his effort to uncover the facts.
For all its merit, however, there is much about this book that will annoy or bother some readers. Because this is far more a political than personal biography, Cannon provides very little insight into Reagan’s personal life: his children and his religious beliefs, in particular.
And while some topics are covered with extreme intensity, others are comparatively untouched. Two topics alone (arms control and the Iran-contra affair) account for more than one-third of this book…providing great history but, for many, a sub-par biography. Meanwhile, the “Reagan recovery” and Reagan’s relationship with his vice president (and presidential successor) receive almost no attention.
Finally, Cannon provides a thought-provoking review of Reagan’s character and legacy in the book’s final chapter. Unfortunately, this assessment is provided in an intermittent and disjointed format that seems the result of a last-minute rush to address topics such as AIDS, ethics scandals and the S&L crisis that were not included earlier in the book.
Overall, Lou Cannon’s “President Reagan: The Role of a Lifetime” is a thoroughly penetrating and often meticulous history of the Reagan presidency. Readers seeking a captivating narrative, or who are particularly enamored by Reagan’s legacy, may be frustrated by the author’s style. But even if Cannon’s portrait of Reagan feels somewhat incomplete, it is hard to imagine a better source of insight into the inner-workings of the Reagan White House.
Overall rating: 3¾ stars
March 5, 2017
Lou Cannon is and has been one of the foremost experts on Ronald Reagan's life and presidency. While this book is primarily about Reagan's time in the White House (or at his California ranch), Cannon begins with a long look at Reagan's upbringing, background, personality, and relationships with others. Cannon was in a unique position to view Reagan as he happened to cover him in Sacramento while he was Governor of California from 1967-1974, but was then assigned to the Washington Post throughout Reagan's presidency. Cannon knew and interviewed not only Reagan but just about everyone who knew him during these two time periods.
Cannon's lengthy review of the forces that shaped Reagan as a child are eye-opening. Reagan's father, Jack, was an alcoholic - something that scarred Reagan for life. Reagan saw his dad passed out on the front steps and had to drag him into the house; the family moved around Illinois constantly which resulted in Reagan not being able to establish any roots; he sought sanctuary in being solitary, wandering around the Rock River. Reagan was clearly embarrassed by his father's affliction later in his own life, speaking about him only when pressed and even then providing as little detail as possible.
Perhaps to escape this dreary life, Reagan mentally withdrew into himself and stayed there. Even Nancy Reagan, the person closest to him, admitted that sometimes she could not get past the impenetrable wall that Reagan had surrounded himself with. Unfortunately, as Cannon repeatedly demonstrates, this trait did not serve Reagan well in establishing relationships with other people. Invariably kind and genial to everyone, he was close to nobody - often failing to remember names of aides that he frequently saw. Both he and Nancy ended up with a revolving door of staff as people kept leaving, often because they felt unappreciated by the Reagans, especially Ronald. Reagan made no effort to thank and acknowledge people for doing things on his behalf. All of his employees were expendable to him. One leaves, bring in another. By the time he was President, Reagan had long ago disappeared into his own world and was content to remain there.
Cannon is eminently fair - never does this book appear to be a bashing of Reagan. In fact, Cannon tries to show - and succeeds in doing so - that Reagan's legacy is decidedly mixed. He showcases the highlights of Reagan's tenure (such as the relentless optimism that he displayed to the American public). He details the crucial summits that Reagan had with Soviet leader Mikhail Gorbachev, and rightly gives Reagan credit for helping to move the U.S. and U.S.S.R. toward the end of the Cold War, although that seemed inevitable by late in Reagan's presidency. He credits Reagan with understanding that, in 1980, the American people wanted someone who would make them feel hopeful about the future and take pride in who their president was.
But Cannon does not spare any criticism of Reagan or his abysmal managerial style either. The lack of ethical behavior, while not by Reagan himself, stemmed from Reagan's not ever making ethics a priority, or even something to be talked about. The internecine staff squabbles were something that Reagan often did not know existed, and even when he was aware of it (such as the dislike between Secretary of State George Shultz and Secretary of Defense Caspar Weinberger) he refused to address it. Cannon makes a solid case for Reagan being the most controlled and stage-managed president of the 20th century, and correctly explains that Reagan viewed his entire presidency as that of one giant movie where he is the leading man and is just following a script that others have written for him. As long as he knows what to say, when to say it, where to go, and when, everything works. But the moment something upsets that direction, Reagan struggles mightily to get back on track, sometimes just falling back on familiar anecdotes that Cannon says Reagan kept stored in his "mental cassette" for use when a certain word or situation caused him to remember the anecdote. Sometimes the anecdotes would be relevant to the situation, but sometimes not.
Cannon neither states that Reagan was stupid or intelligent, but that rather he focused his energies on a few particular things that were important to him (the Strategic Defense Initiative, for example) and totally ignored everything else. He does score Reagan for being intellectually lazy, all too often preferring to watch movies instead of reading briefing books, and for not leading on certain subjects when he clearly could have (the AIDS epidemic, where Reagan was extremely slow to recognize and only reluctantly talked about in general terms when he did address it). Cannon also provides examples of how Reagan's remoteness and lack of intellectual curiosity caused some major issues for him in his presidency. One example is when Chief of Staff James Baker and Secretary of the Treasury Don Regan proposed to switch jobs, Reagan just said that sounded fine and announced the change, never bothering to think about the potential consequences of the switch and whether either man or both were qualified for those positions.
Cannon spends 150 pages discussing the Iran-contra scandal in great detail. While well-written and researched, like the rest of the book, by the end of those 150 pages, it was refreshing to move onto something else. Unfortunately, that something else was a long chapter about arms control negotiations with the U.S.S.R. Absolutely vital components to Reagan's presidency, but not very entertaining or enjoyable to read through. Two things that Cannon did not really touch on: 1) the explosion of the space shuttle Challenger in 1986 and Reagan's reaction it. He has a photo at the beginning of the book of Reagan sitting in the Oval Office with a pained expression on his face as he is about the address the nation, yet curiously he does not talk about this in the book. 2) Vice President George Bush's relationship with Reagan is mentioned only occasionally, and then not very deeply. However, on the whole, if you are looking for a comprehensive view of both Reagan the man and Reagan the President, this is a worthwhile book to read.
Grade: B+
Cannon's lengthy review of the forces that shaped Reagan as a child are eye-opening. Reagan's father, Jack, was an alcoholic - something that scarred Reagan for life. Reagan saw his dad passed out on the front steps and had to drag him into the house; the family moved around Illinois constantly which resulted in Reagan not being able to establish any roots; he sought sanctuary in being solitary, wandering around the Rock River. Reagan was clearly embarrassed by his father's affliction later in his own life, speaking about him only when pressed and even then providing as little detail as possible.
Perhaps to escape this dreary life, Reagan mentally withdrew into himself and stayed there. Even Nancy Reagan, the person closest to him, admitted that sometimes she could not get past the impenetrable wall that Reagan had surrounded himself with. Unfortunately, as Cannon repeatedly demonstrates, this trait did not serve Reagan well in establishing relationships with other people. Invariably kind and genial to everyone, he was close to nobody - often failing to remember names of aides that he frequently saw. Both he and Nancy ended up with a revolving door of staff as people kept leaving, often because they felt unappreciated by the Reagans, especially Ronald. Reagan made no effort to thank and acknowledge people for doing things on his behalf. All of his employees were expendable to him. One leaves, bring in another. By the time he was President, Reagan had long ago disappeared into his own world and was content to remain there.
Cannon is eminently fair - never does this book appear to be a bashing of Reagan. In fact, Cannon tries to show - and succeeds in doing so - that Reagan's legacy is decidedly mixed. He showcases the highlights of Reagan's tenure (such as the relentless optimism that he displayed to the American public). He details the crucial summits that Reagan had with Soviet leader Mikhail Gorbachev, and rightly gives Reagan credit for helping to move the U.S. and U.S.S.R. toward the end of the Cold War, although that seemed inevitable by late in Reagan's presidency. He credits Reagan with understanding that, in 1980, the American people wanted someone who would make them feel hopeful about the future and take pride in who their president was.
But Cannon does not spare any criticism of Reagan or his abysmal managerial style either. The lack of ethical behavior, while not by Reagan himself, stemmed from Reagan's not ever making ethics a priority, or even something to be talked about. The internecine staff squabbles were something that Reagan often did not know existed, and even when he was aware of it (such as the dislike between Secretary of State George Shultz and Secretary of Defense Caspar Weinberger) he refused to address it. Cannon makes a solid case for Reagan being the most controlled and stage-managed president of the 20th century, and correctly explains that Reagan viewed his entire presidency as that of one giant movie where he is the leading man and is just following a script that others have written for him. As long as he knows what to say, when to say it, where to go, and when, everything works. But the moment something upsets that direction, Reagan struggles mightily to get back on track, sometimes just falling back on familiar anecdotes that Cannon says Reagan kept stored in his "mental cassette" for use when a certain word or situation caused him to remember the anecdote. Sometimes the anecdotes would be relevant to the situation, but sometimes not.
Cannon neither states that Reagan was stupid or intelligent, but that rather he focused his energies on a few particular things that were important to him (the Strategic Defense Initiative, for example) and totally ignored everything else. He does score Reagan for being intellectually lazy, all too often preferring to watch movies instead of reading briefing books, and for not leading on certain subjects when he clearly could have (the AIDS epidemic, where Reagan was extremely slow to recognize and only reluctantly talked about in general terms when he did address it). Cannon also provides examples of how Reagan's remoteness and lack of intellectual curiosity caused some major issues for him in his presidency. One example is when Chief of Staff James Baker and Secretary of the Treasury Don Regan proposed to switch jobs, Reagan just said that sounded fine and announced the change, never bothering to think about the potential consequences of the switch and whether either man or both were qualified for those positions.
Cannon spends 150 pages discussing the Iran-contra scandal in great detail. While well-written and researched, like the rest of the book, by the end of those 150 pages, it was refreshing to move onto something else. Unfortunately, that something else was a long chapter about arms control negotiations with the U.S.S.R. Absolutely vital components to Reagan's presidency, but not very entertaining or enjoyable to read through. Two things that Cannon did not really touch on: 1) the explosion of the space shuttle Challenger in 1986 and Reagan's reaction it. He has a photo at the beginning of the book of Reagan sitting in the Oval Office with a pained expression on his face as he is about the address the nation, yet curiously he does not talk about this in the book. 2) Vice President George Bush's relationship with Reagan is mentioned only occasionally, and then not very deeply. However, on the whole, if you are looking for a comprehensive view of both Reagan the man and Reagan the President, this is a worthwhile book to read.
Grade: B+
December 30, 2014
Cannon spends the first 150 pages trying his hardest to paint Reagan as a lazy, unintelligent, uninterested doofus, and embarrasses himself over the remaining 600 pages as he tries to maintain that image of Reagan while reporting about his many and monumental triumphs in office. Of course Cannon does his best to avoid this by laboring far too long on Lebanon and Iran, while breezing through the Cold War and the greatest economic boom in our nation’s history.
This book says far more about Cannon than it does about Reagan (who isn’t actually in the book very much). Whenever sources conflict about anything, Cannon chooses to believe the one that makes Reagan look worse. Other times, Cannon simply dismisses a reliable source who praises Reagan, while giving no reason for doing so. One of many examples is when Cannon quotes Martin Anderson praising Reagan’s expertise of the free market and mastering of the work of economists like Friedman and Hayek. Cannon boldly states that Anderson was exaggerating and "attributed to Reagan a greater grasp of the issues than he had." Cannon provides absolutely no evidence to support such a strong statement. Who does Cannon think he is that we should take his unsupported and blatantly biased word over Reagan’s closest advisers and history itself? Furthermore, when Cannon does provide a source it is almost always "confidential." This practice from a reporter would not be so dubious if Cannon didn't so clearly have an ax to grind.
This book really does have a lot of great information, but unfortunately Cannon tries too desperately to push his remarkably biased agenda from start to finish. It’s a shame because he really could have written a good book with all that he had to work with. Nevertheless, it should be accepted for what it is, a book about one of the greatest conservative leaders in all of history, written by a liberal journalist for a liberal audience.
Verdict: Do NOT read this book. There are far too many good books out there (on this subject and others) to waste your time on this hatchet job.
This book says far more about Cannon than it does about Reagan (who isn’t actually in the book very much). Whenever sources conflict about anything, Cannon chooses to believe the one that makes Reagan look worse. Other times, Cannon simply dismisses a reliable source who praises Reagan, while giving no reason for doing so. One of many examples is when Cannon quotes Martin Anderson praising Reagan’s expertise of the free market and mastering of the work of economists like Friedman and Hayek. Cannon boldly states that Anderson was exaggerating and "attributed to Reagan a greater grasp of the issues than he had." Cannon provides absolutely no evidence to support such a strong statement. Who does Cannon think he is that we should take his unsupported and blatantly biased word over Reagan’s closest advisers and history itself? Furthermore, when Cannon does provide a source it is almost always "confidential." This practice from a reporter would not be so dubious if Cannon didn't so clearly have an ax to grind.
This book really does have a lot of great information, but unfortunately Cannon tries too desperately to push his remarkably biased agenda from start to finish. It’s a shame because he really could have written a good book with all that he had to work with. Nevertheless, it should be accepted for what it is, a book about one of the greatest conservative leaders in all of history, written by a liberal journalist for a liberal audience.
Verdict: Do NOT read this book. There are far too many good books out there (on this subject and others) to waste your time on this hatchet job.
June 27, 2020
For a man whose legacy may be bigger than his achievements, a book that may be less important than it appears: Lou Cannon’s mammoth President Reagan.
I had been thrown by readers I respect suggesting that Cannon was too hard on Reagan, and that they would not finish or even start this book, but I did not find that to be true at all in Cannon’s follow-up prequel, Governor Reagan. However, the expected negativity did show itself early and frequently in this one, as Cannon tells us in every chapter how Reagan was detached, disinterested, bungling, and mistaking fiction for reality. Cannon’s approach is even revealed in the cover subtitle: That Reagan was merely an actor playing another role, that happened to be his biggest one—but that’s not saying much, as Cannon also indicates in the text.
That doesn’t mean I regret reading it or that I didn’t enjoy it at least a little. President Reagan is packed with information, and spends just enough time on Reagan’s pre-presidency and post-presidency (in the 2000 reprint) to be considered a cradle-to-grave biography (since Reagan’s public presence faded before Alzheimer’s took its toll). But that is mostly the extent of my praise.
This biography of a president is the one I've read with the smallest gap between the end of the president’s time in office and its original publication, and it shows. I’ve come to decide that for a biography to have any chance of being fair—respecting its subject while honestly presenting the person’s flaws and mistakes—there needs to have been at least twenty years that have elapsed between presidency and publication, for history to have made an impartial assessment. Long-term impacts and changing public perceptions are important parts of the story. Cannon’s proximity as a reporter following Reagan in both Sacramento and Washington made the author himself a part of the story. He was too close to the screen to see the whole picture; the book written too soon to be of real usefulness today for the young reader experiencing President Reagan for the first time.
I never like to hear an author’s opinions or read about his other books while I am taking in the one in my hands, and as I said, Cannon’s presence on the scene made him a part of the story, so that could not be avoided. But it could have been less than it was. I want to know what time thinks of Reagan, not what Lou Cannon thinks of him.
In several chapters, Reagan’s supporting cast takes over the pages, placing the president in the background, removed from his own life story. Cannon’s presentation is jumbled, going back and forth in the timeline, which presidential biographies often do during the time in office, out of necessity. But because these 760 pages are almost exclusively about Reagan’s presidency, it gets very hard to follow, and Cannon rarely reminds the reader what year he is talking about, even when the year changes during a paragraph. He is also prone to unnecessary repetition, a flaw not uncommon to this genre.
I was most disappointed that two chapters were dedicated to the Iran-Contra affair (with an announcement by the author, no less), and that Reagan’s many meetings with Mikhail Gorbachev that led to the end of the Cold War were literally an afterthought, mostly condensed to a single, penultimate chapter. But that arrangement was appropriate to the book as a whole, written to offer Reagan as an irresponsible bumbler, whose modern association with the fall of the Soviet Union just sort of happened to him.
I will reiterate what I said about Governor Reagan: For someone who lived through Reagan’s presidency, who is looking for a single-volume biography of the man, I would suggest reading that one by Cannon, and forgoing this one.
Or select a different author.
I had been thrown by readers I respect suggesting that Cannon was too hard on Reagan, and that they would not finish or even start this book, but I did not find that to be true at all in Cannon’s follow-up prequel, Governor Reagan. However, the expected negativity did show itself early and frequently in this one, as Cannon tells us in every chapter how Reagan was detached, disinterested, bungling, and mistaking fiction for reality. Cannon’s approach is even revealed in the cover subtitle: That Reagan was merely an actor playing another role, that happened to be his biggest one—but that’s not saying much, as Cannon also indicates in the text.
That doesn’t mean I regret reading it or that I didn’t enjoy it at least a little. President Reagan is packed with information, and spends just enough time on Reagan’s pre-presidency and post-presidency (in the 2000 reprint) to be considered a cradle-to-grave biography (since Reagan’s public presence faded before Alzheimer’s took its toll). But that is mostly the extent of my praise.
This biography of a president is the one I've read with the smallest gap between the end of the president’s time in office and its original publication, and it shows. I’ve come to decide that for a biography to have any chance of being fair—respecting its subject while honestly presenting the person’s flaws and mistakes—there needs to have been at least twenty years that have elapsed between presidency and publication, for history to have made an impartial assessment. Long-term impacts and changing public perceptions are important parts of the story. Cannon’s proximity as a reporter following Reagan in both Sacramento and Washington made the author himself a part of the story. He was too close to the screen to see the whole picture; the book written too soon to be of real usefulness today for the young reader experiencing President Reagan for the first time.
I never like to hear an author’s opinions or read about his other books while I am taking in the one in my hands, and as I said, Cannon’s presence on the scene made him a part of the story, so that could not be avoided. But it could have been less than it was. I want to know what time thinks of Reagan, not what Lou Cannon thinks of him.
In several chapters, Reagan’s supporting cast takes over the pages, placing the president in the background, removed from his own life story. Cannon’s presentation is jumbled, going back and forth in the timeline, which presidential biographies often do during the time in office, out of necessity. But because these 760 pages are almost exclusively about Reagan’s presidency, it gets very hard to follow, and Cannon rarely reminds the reader what year he is talking about, even when the year changes during a paragraph. He is also prone to unnecessary repetition, a flaw not uncommon to this genre.
I was most disappointed that two chapters were dedicated to the Iran-Contra affair (with an announcement by the author, no less), and that Reagan’s many meetings with Mikhail Gorbachev that led to the end of the Cold War were literally an afterthought, mostly condensed to a single, penultimate chapter. But that arrangement was appropriate to the book as a whole, written to offer Reagan as an irresponsible bumbler, whose modern association with the fall of the Soviet Union just sort of happened to him.
I will reiterate what I said about Governor Reagan: For someone who lived through Reagan’s presidency, who is looking for a single-volume biography of the man, I would suggest reading that one by Cannon, and forgoing this one.
Or select a different author.
April 10, 2023
Just as atheists tend to be the most knowledgeable people about the Bible, so too have I pursued a study of 1970s and 1980s conservatism with one purpose in mind: know thy enemy. But what Lou Cannon has done here is extraordinary. He has spent decades as a journalist trying to understand the appeal of Reagan and, with this volume, he has been both fair-minded and critical. This bigass book -- situated somewhere between journalism, psychological dossier, and biography -- is both fascinating and exhaustive, with Cannon talking with Reagan himself, as well as most of his Cabinet. The portrait of Reagan here is that of a man whose relentless optimism was both his blessing and his curse (the ultimate curse, of course, being the Iran Contra affair). Hard of hearing, stubborn as hell, prone to afternoon naps, and taken with gross oversimplifications of complex policy, Reagan was, nevertheless, the cheery and folksy sunbeam uncle who Americans wanted to hear at this particular time in American history. He played the contentious pair of George Shultz and Casper Weinberger against each other, often never siding with either until a natural state of harmony had been reached. His faith in people allowed him to build a relationship with Gorbachev that diminished the Cold War, but it also allowed the CIA to become more interventionist right under his nose (most notably in Nicaragua). Reagan was so remote that even his own children have expressed how little they knew him in many ways. That quality defeated Edmund Morris, but not Lou Cannon! This book is about as close as we are likely to get to understanding the actor turned President, the savvy speaker good with a witty line (some pilfered from old movies) while disastrous in understanding the Fed, foreign policy, or any of the vital issues that previous Presidents at least made an effort to understand. Reagan had a kind of ADD in office and preferred anecdotes to facts, which is what allowed so many Republicans to prosper before they turned into the fascist clown show that they are today. You could argue (and many have) that Reagan was Chauncey Gardiner in the White House, although that would be significantly underestimating him. He came back from a failed first debate with Fritz Mondale with renewed vigor and wit (the line about his opponent being "young and inexperienced") that arguably secured his re-election in 1984. At the same time, one gets the sense that Reagan believed that if you kept telling lies, the lies would somehow transmute into truth, no matter what the tableau. He could never admit fault, a dangerous quality in any politician. But it was difficult for even his enemies to entirely hate him, even though his peers were well-aware of his deficiencies. Kudos to Lou Cannon for putting in so many years into trying to unpack this populist enigma. I don't think I'll read a book on Reagan that is as accomplished as Cannon's.
January 1, 2018
I read this book because it was on Obama's summer reading list back in 2011 when he was having a hard time dealing with a republican controlled congress and he wanted to know how Reagan worked with the democrats in the 80's.
Lou Cannon covered Reagan from his time as governor of California and for the Washington Post during the White House years. Needless to say he knows the man very well. Reagan lovers seems to dislike that book because Cannon focuses a lot on Reagan's flaws as a politician. We often read how he was disinterested in the political process or the arcane of law making. Reagan was using his charm and his Hollywood stories to make a point when he couldn't contribute to a policy discussion, much to the embarrassment of his staff. Nevertheless, Cannon's portrait of the 40th president remain highly credible given all the access and the sources that he had to write this biography (he wrote 3 biographies of Reagan). The best parts of the book are about Reagan's character, his youth and time in Hollywood, his relationship with ''the supporting cast'' of the White House cabinet and his dealing of the Cold War.
But I found the chapters on Iran-Contra (140 pages) way too long. The author makes a convincing the case that Reagan was well aware of the trade-arms-for-hostages scheme but I felt the read really tedious and none important toward the end. The scandal is almost a mini book inside the 764 page long biography.
Good book overall
Lou Cannon covered Reagan from his time as governor of California and for the Washington Post during the White House years. Needless to say he knows the man very well. Reagan lovers seems to dislike that book because Cannon focuses a lot on Reagan's flaws as a politician. We often read how he was disinterested in the political process or the arcane of law making. Reagan was using his charm and his Hollywood stories to make a point when he couldn't contribute to a policy discussion, much to the embarrassment of his staff. Nevertheless, Cannon's portrait of the 40th president remain highly credible given all the access and the sources that he had to write this biography (he wrote 3 biographies of Reagan). The best parts of the book are about Reagan's character, his youth and time in Hollywood, his relationship with ''the supporting cast'' of the White House cabinet and his dealing of the Cold War.
But I found the chapters on Iran-Contra (140 pages) way too long. The author makes a convincing the case that Reagan was well aware of the trade-arms-for-hostages scheme but I felt the read really tedious and none important toward the end. The scandal is almost a mini book inside the 764 page long biography.
Good book overall
November 21, 2007
This is a well done biography about one of the 20th Centuries most significant presidencies. Cannon does not sugercoat his dialogue about Reagan. As a consequence, this provides an objective view of this President, who the far radical left tried to demonize since he was so successful in reversing the New Deal and Great Society Policies they championed for 60 years. If any one is interested in getting the real story about Reagan (both his flaws and merits), this is a useful book.
June 27, 2018
Journalist Lou Cannon devoted much of his career to covering Ronald Reagan, from his days as an aspiring gubernatorial candidate through his post-presidency. Little surprise, perhaps, that his third, and most comprehensive book on Reagan remains the gold standard of Reagan biographies. Even today, biographers too often delve either into vague sociological ramblings or conservative panegyrics that reveal far more about their authors than the subject. Cannon dispenses with either approach, allowing both a personal understanding of Reagan (whom Cannon portrays as charming and withdrawn, highly intelligent yet often rash and non-reflective) and the ups and downs of his administration. Cannon's book is admirably balanced, with a occasional tilt towards the negative: his disdain for Reagan's economic and domestic policies shows through, and he paints Reagan's lackadaisical treatment of his White House staff, his poor handling of the Lebanon crisis and Iran-Contra in devastating terms. On the other hand, he does extend Reagan plaudits for his political acumen, his intuitive ability to reach decisive actions (whether for good or ill) and especially his deep-seated fear of nuclear war, which led him (after many fits and starts) to embrace Gorbachev and work towards ending the Cold War. Despite occasional analytical shortcomings, it paints a far fuller, more convincing portrait of our 40th President than any work before or since.
August 16, 2015
If you truly despise Ronald Reagan, or if you believe that he is one of the greatest presidents in our country's history, you will probably be dissatisfied with this book. In either case, it will not provide support for your preconceived notions. But if you want a good, balanced, fair biography of Ronald Reagan, one that goes into his life and especially his presidency in great depth, gives credit where credit is due and does not restrain itself from offering blame where that is due, this is a great biography, possibly the best I've ever read of any president or other famous figure. What's especially impressive is that it managed that feat barely three years after Reagan left office, without more time for history to have made its judgement. Purely from a readability standpoint, it isn't bad but could have been improved by shorter chapters; I probably won't attempt it again any time soon. But from the perspective of being a fair and detailed account of the life of its subject, it is fabulous.
December 28, 2016
Comprehensive historical account of Reagan's eight years in the presidency by a reporter who knew him well and had been following his career since 1966. Fairly told with plenty of stories to make any Reagan fan happy as well as a clear-eyed look at his failures. Cannon had one on one access to Ron and Nancy while he was writing the book, as well as nearly all the other major players. Some of the supporting cast definitely comes across as much more competent and professional than others, which jibes with my own recollections of those times. It's long but well worth reading for anyone interested in the history of the last 50 years and the presidency.
December 22, 2020
Ronald Reagan was one of the most significant Presidents of the 20th century. Reagan’s electoral victories of 1980 and 1984 fulfilled the Republican dream of having a true conservative in the White House. Reagan has remained enormously popular with Republicans ever since. Journalist Lou Cannon covered Reagan from the very beginning of his political career, after Reagan won the governorship of California in 1966. Cannon was well-prepared to write the definitive biography of Ronald Reagan, and it’s hard to imagine anyone topping President Reagan: The Role of a Lifetime, first published in 1991 and updated in 2000. (Cannon covered Reagan’s California years in 2003’s Governor Reagan: His Rise to Power.)
Ronald Reagan the man remained an enigma to many of the people around him. Was he simple? Complex? Complexly simple? Cannon digs into Reagan’s personality in detail, and various chapters of President Reagan deal with Reagan’s humor, his intelligence, and other aspects of his personality.
The stereotype about Reagan is that he wasn’t the brightest bulb on the block. Cannon spends a good deal of time dissecting Reagan’s intelligence. He writes: “What I knew was that he understood all manner of things that suggested powers of analysis without possessing any visible analytic ability.” (p.111) What finally made things click for Cannon was psychologist Howard Gardner’s work on multiple intelligences. Briefly, Gardner suggested that rather than using an IQ test as a measure of intelligence, there are many different types of intelligence. Gardner’s work hasn’t always been well-received by the psychological community, but I think there’s something to it. Gardner told Cannon that Reagan ranked high in interpersonal intelligence, but low in logical-mathematical intelligence. Gardner emphasized Reagan’s reliance on stories and anecdotes as a prism through which he viewed the world. Gardner’s analysis makes sense—Reagan was superb at charming people and being well-liked. Seemingly everyone who ever met Ronald Reagan has good things to say about him personally. Reagan was good with people, but he was not the smartest person in the room, the way that Bill Clinton and Barack Obama are. I’d put George W. Bush in the same category as Reagan—not a genius by any means, but skillful at personal relationships. I think both Bush and Reagan were much smarter than the media made them out to be.
In my readings about Reagan, he strikes me as an odd mix of intuitive intelligence and a shocking lack of curiosity. During a 1983 summit, Chief of Staff James Baker asked Reagan why he hadn’t opened his briefing book. Reagan’s answer? “Well, Jim, The Sound of Music was on last night.” (p.37) Well, we always knew he was a fan of the movies.
Ultimately, Reagan found it hard to separate fact from fiction. He was fond of telling a story about a World War II pilot sacrificing himself to stay with his wounded machine gunner as the crippled craft nose dived towards the ground. But was the story true? Nope. Reagan said the pilot was awarded the Congressional Medal of Honor. A reporter went through all 434 Medal of Honor winners from World War II and couldn’t find any that matched Reagan’s story. That’s because Reagan’s story came from Reader’s Digest. (p.38-39)
Reagan also stretched the truth when he made it sound as though he had filmed Nazi death camps as Europe was liberated at the end of World War II. Reagan in fact did no such thing. He never left the United States during World War II. Reagan served in the First Motion Picture Unit of the Army Air Corps and helped make propaganda films for the military. Important work perhaps, but not the same as filming Nazi death camps. Even more bizarrely, Reagan made these to claims to Israeli Prime Minister Yitzhak Shamir and renowned Nazi hunter Simon Wiesenthal. (p.428-431) Reagan also claimed that he had saved a copy of the death camp film for himself and then showed it to people when they doubted the truth of the Holocaust.
The larger point about Reagan’s stretching of the truth with these stories is that he had a sometimes tenuous grasp on reality, and he was seemingly able to convince himself of just about anything. Consider, for example, Reagan’s infamous statement about Iran-contra: “A few months ago I told the American people I did not trade arms for hostages. My heart and my best intentions still tell me that’s true, but the facts and the evidence tell me that it’s not.” (p.580) It doesn’t really matter what your heart tells you if the facts and the evidence don’t match it.
I’d be fascinated to know what conservatives think of Cannon’s book, since it seems to me a thorough debunking of the myth of Reagan’s greatness. Ultimately, Reagan comes across as an extremely poor manager of people, despite his formidable charm and charisma. Could Reagan give great speeches? Sure, absolutely! The ceremonial aspect of the Presidency was one that Reagan whole-heartedly embraced and thrived in. (He was an actor, after all.) But the actual nuts and bolts of governance? That was much harder for Reagan.
As Cannon writes, “The limits of Reagan’s management style became more fully evident in the second term, when his detachment encouraged Chief of Staff Donald Regan to function as a surrogate president and the National Security Council staff to serve as a secret government.” (p.150)
Much of the second half of President Reagan is about the Iran-Contra scandal, in which NSC staff, with Reagan’s approval, secretly traded arms to Iran, hopeful that American hostages would then be released. Long story short, it proved to be a disaster. Some hostages were released, but then other Americans were captured. Supposedly the NSC staff were dealing with “Iranian moderates,” who would then hopefully become our friends. That didn’t happen. The profits from the arms for hostages deals were then used to fund the Contra rebels fighting the socialist government in Nicaragua. Needless to say, when all of this became public knowledge, it created a huge scandal and tarnished Reagan’s image.
Iran-Contra also highlighted Reagan’s weaknesses as a manager of his staff. Cannon writes: “On balance, Reagan was a strong man, but an extraordinarily weak manager. He restored public confidence in the presidency without mastering the difficult art of wielding presidential power.” (p.296) I agree with Cannon—by being so passive, Reagan surrendered a lot of power to his advisers for no good reason. Reagan was rarely decisive in his actions, and he rarely put forth his own initiatives or policy ideas.
Throughout Reagan’s presidency, his cabinet was sharply divided between Secretary of Defense Caspar Weinberger and Secretary of State George Shultz, who were usually on opposite sides of issues. (George Shultz just celebrated his 100th birthday on December 13th, and he marked the occasion by publishing an Op-Ed in The Wall Street Journal titled “The 10 Most Important Things I’ve Learned About Trust Over My 100 Years.”) Reagan tried to play conciliator in the disagreements between Weinberger and Shultz and take a middle path, but that just made things worse. At some point, Reagan simply should have chosen either Weinberger or Shultz and had the other man resign. (If it were up to me, I would have kept Shultz.) Weinberger and Shultz both opposed the arms for hostages trades with Iran that Reagan approved, but they were cut out of the decision-making process early on because of their opposition, and because of their mutual antagonism, they were unable to unify and work together to stop a foolish plan before it was implemented.
I think what will ultimately be seen as Ronald Reagan’s greatest accomplishment is the peaceful conclusion of the Cold War, and the INF Treaty of 1987, which eliminated an entire class of nuclear weapons. Despite his image in the popular media as a warmonger, Reagan was a peacenik when it came to nuclear weapons, and he long advocated for the elimination of all nuclear weapons. Reagan’s meetings with Mikhail Gorbachev are always fascinating to read about. Gorbachev was willing to deal with the West, in part because sky-high defense spending was bleeding the Soviet economy dry. Reagan and Gorbachev came agonizingly close to agreeing to eliminate all nuclear weapons during their 1986 summit at Reykjavik. I’ve always thought of the Reykjavik Summit as an agonizing failure, in part because of Reagan’s stubborn insistence that he wouldn’t scrap the SDI missile defense system. But if the United States and the Soviet Union had agreed to eliminate their nuclear weapons, what would the other nuclear powers have done? Would the other nuclear powers have agreed to eliminate their nuclear weapons as well? Ultimately, Reykjavik paved the way for the INF Treaty, an important step in the lessening of tensions in the Cold War.
George Shultz was a vital part of the negotiations for the INF Treaty, and in his Wall Street Journal op-ed, he reveals that he earned the trust of Soviet leaders when he saluted the fallen Russian soldiers of World War II at a wreath-laying ceremony in Stalingrad in 1973. Another important figure in the INF Treaty was Colin Powell, who was then National Security Advisor. In my review of The Rebellion of Ronald Reagan, I found it fascinating that Reagan was focused on when he should give Gorbachev a pair of cuff links. Powell kept trying to return the subject to Soviet missiles, but Reagan was stubbornly focused on the cuff links. Was this a sign that Reagan was mentally slipping? Or an indication of his interpersonal intelligence, that he knew the personal relationship he had with Gorbachev was as important as the weighty matters they were discussing? Thanks to Cannon’s book, I now know that the cufflinks were ultimately unimportant. Gorbachev did not seem impressed by them, perhaps because, as Colin Powell told Cannon, “I had been trying to tell Reagan that the Russians don’t wear French cuffs.” (p.696) All that time spent worrying about the cuff links for nothing!
Ronald Reagan was an interesting man, and although I disagree with most of his policies, I have no doubt that if I had met him in person I would have been charmed by his charisma. I’d be able to bring up that I went to Knox College in Galesburg, Illinois, where Reagan lived for a year or so during his childhood. No doubt that would have set him off on a series of stories about growing up in Illinois. President Reagan is the definitive book on Ronald Reagan’s presidency, although I’m sure it will not be the final word, as writers continue to analyze his place in history.
Ronald Reagan the man remained an enigma to many of the people around him. Was he simple? Complex? Complexly simple? Cannon digs into Reagan’s personality in detail, and various chapters of President Reagan deal with Reagan’s humor, his intelligence, and other aspects of his personality.
The stereotype about Reagan is that he wasn’t the brightest bulb on the block. Cannon spends a good deal of time dissecting Reagan’s intelligence. He writes: “What I knew was that he understood all manner of things that suggested powers of analysis without possessing any visible analytic ability.” (p.111) What finally made things click for Cannon was psychologist Howard Gardner’s work on multiple intelligences. Briefly, Gardner suggested that rather than using an IQ test as a measure of intelligence, there are many different types of intelligence. Gardner’s work hasn’t always been well-received by the psychological community, but I think there’s something to it. Gardner told Cannon that Reagan ranked high in interpersonal intelligence, but low in logical-mathematical intelligence. Gardner emphasized Reagan’s reliance on stories and anecdotes as a prism through which he viewed the world. Gardner’s analysis makes sense—Reagan was superb at charming people and being well-liked. Seemingly everyone who ever met Ronald Reagan has good things to say about him personally. Reagan was good with people, but he was not the smartest person in the room, the way that Bill Clinton and Barack Obama are. I’d put George W. Bush in the same category as Reagan—not a genius by any means, but skillful at personal relationships. I think both Bush and Reagan were much smarter than the media made them out to be.
In my readings about Reagan, he strikes me as an odd mix of intuitive intelligence and a shocking lack of curiosity. During a 1983 summit, Chief of Staff James Baker asked Reagan why he hadn’t opened his briefing book. Reagan’s answer? “Well, Jim, The Sound of Music was on last night.” (p.37) Well, we always knew he was a fan of the movies.
Ultimately, Reagan found it hard to separate fact from fiction. He was fond of telling a story about a World War II pilot sacrificing himself to stay with his wounded machine gunner as the crippled craft nose dived towards the ground. But was the story true? Nope. Reagan said the pilot was awarded the Congressional Medal of Honor. A reporter went through all 434 Medal of Honor winners from World War II and couldn’t find any that matched Reagan’s story. That’s because Reagan’s story came from Reader’s Digest. (p.38-39)
Reagan also stretched the truth when he made it sound as though he had filmed Nazi death camps as Europe was liberated at the end of World War II. Reagan in fact did no such thing. He never left the United States during World War II. Reagan served in the First Motion Picture Unit of the Army Air Corps and helped make propaganda films for the military. Important work perhaps, but not the same as filming Nazi death camps. Even more bizarrely, Reagan made these to claims to Israeli Prime Minister Yitzhak Shamir and renowned Nazi hunter Simon Wiesenthal. (p.428-431) Reagan also claimed that he had saved a copy of the death camp film for himself and then showed it to people when they doubted the truth of the Holocaust.
The larger point about Reagan’s stretching of the truth with these stories is that he had a sometimes tenuous grasp on reality, and he was seemingly able to convince himself of just about anything. Consider, for example, Reagan’s infamous statement about Iran-contra: “A few months ago I told the American people I did not trade arms for hostages. My heart and my best intentions still tell me that’s true, but the facts and the evidence tell me that it’s not.” (p.580) It doesn’t really matter what your heart tells you if the facts and the evidence don’t match it.
I’d be fascinated to know what conservatives think of Cannon’s book, since it seems to me a thorough debunking of the myth of Reagan’s greatness. Ultimately, Reagan comes across as an extremely poor manager of people, despite his formidable charm and charisma. Could Reagan give great speeches? Sure, absolutely! The ceremonial aspect of the Presidency was one that Reagan whole-heartedly embraced and thrived in. (He was an actor, after all.) But the actual nuts and bolts of governance? That was much harder for Reagan.
As Cannon writes, “The limits of Reagan’s management style became more fully evident in the second term, when his detachment encouraged Chief of Staff Donald Regan to function as a surrogate president and the National Security Council staff to serve as a secret government.” (p.150)
Much of the second half of President Reagan is about the Iran-Contra scandal, in which NSC staff, with Reagan’s approval, secretly traded arms to Iran, hopeful that American hostages would then be released. Long story short, it proved to be a disaster. Some hostages were released, but then other Americans were captured. Supposedly the NSC staff were dealing with “Iranian moderates,” who would then hopefully become our friends. That didn’t happen. The profits from the arms for hostages deals were then used to fund the Contra rebels fighting the socialist government in Nicaragua. Needless to say, when all of this became public knowledge, it created a huge scandal and tarnished Reagan’s image.
Iran-Contra also highlighted Reagan’s weaknesses as a manager of his staff. Cannon writes: “On balance, Reagan was a strong man, but an extraordinarily weak manager. He restored public confidence in the presidency without mastering the difficult art of wielding presidential power.” (p.296) I agree with Cannon—by being so passive, Reagan surrendered a lot of power to his advisers for no good reason. Reagan was rarely decisive in his actions, and he rarely put forth his own initiatives or policy ideas.
Throughout Reagan’s presidency, his cabinet was sharply divided between Secretary of Defense Caspar Weinberger and Secretary of State George Shultz, who were usually on opposite sides of issues. (George Shultz just celebrated his 100th birthday on December 13th, and he marked the occasion by publishing an Op-Ed in The Wall Street Journal titled “The 10 Most Important Things I’ve Learned About Trust Over My 100 Years.”) Reagan tried to play conciliator in the disagreements between Weinberger and Shultz and take a middle path, but that just made things worse. At some point, Reagan simply should have chosen either Weinberger or Shultz and had the other man resign. (If it were up to me, I would have kept Shultz.) Weinberger and Shultz both opposed the arms for hostages trades with Iran that Reagan approved, but they were cut out of the decision-making process early on because of their opposition, and because of their mutual antagonism, they were unable to unify and work together to stop a foolish plan before it was implemented.
I think what will ultimately be seen as Ronald Reagan’s greatest accomplishment is the peaceful conclusion of the Cold War, and the INF Treaty of 1987, which eliminated an entire class of nuclear weapons. Despite his image in the popular media as a warmonger, Reagan was a peacenik when it came to nuclear weapons, and he long advocated for the elimination of all nuclear weapons. Reagan’s meetings with Mikhail Gorbachev are always fascinating to read about. Gorbachev was willing to deal with the West, in part because sky-high defense spending was bleeding the Soviet economy dry. Reagan and Gorbachev came agonizingly close to agreeing to eliminate all nuclear weapons during their 1986 summit at Reykjavik. I’ve always thought of the Reykjavik Summit as an agonizing failure, in part because of Reagan’s stubborn insistence that he wouldn’t scrap the SDI missile defense system. But if the United States and the Soviet Union had agreed to eliminate their nuclear weapons, what would the other nuclear powers have done? Would the other nuclear powers have agreed to eliminate their nuclear weapons as well? Ultimately, Reykjavik paved the way for the INF Treaty, an important step in the lessening of tensions in the Cold War.
George Shultz was a vital part of the negotiations for the INF Treaty, and in his Wall Street Journal op-ed, he reveals that he earned the trust of Soviet leaders when he saluted the fallen Russian soldiers of World War II at a wreath-laying ceremony in Stalingrad in 1973. Another important figure in the INF Treaty was Colin Powell, who was then National Security Advisor. In my review of The Rebellion of Ronald Reagan, I found it fascinating that Reagan was focused on when he should give Gorbachev a pair of cuff links. Powell kept trying to return the subject to Soviet missiles, but Reagan was stubbornly focused on the cuff links. Was this a sign that Reagan was mentally slipping? Or an indication of his interpersonal intelligence, that he knew the personal relationship he had with Gorbachev was as important as the weighty matters they were discussing? Thanks to Cannon’s book, I now know that the cufflinks were ultimately unimportant. Gorbachev did not seem impressed by them, perhaps because, as Colin Powell told Cannon, “I had been trying to tell Reagan that the Russians don’t wear French cuffs.” (p.696) All that time spent worrying about the cuff links for nothing!
Ronald Reagan was an interesting man, and although I disagree with most of his policies, I have no doubt that if I had met him in person I would have been charmed by his charisma. I’d be able to bring up that I went to Knox College in Galesburg, Illinois, where Reagan lived for a year or so during his childhood. No doubt that would have set him off on a series of stories about growing up in Illinois. President Reagan is the definitive book on Ronald Reagan’s presidency, although I’m sure it will not be the final word, as writers continue to analyze his place in history.
October 22, 2014
I have more historical insight now than Cannon had 20 years ago when he wrote this book. Iran-Contra had very little effect on American foreins in the Middle East heated up. It was a policy blunder of the highest magnitude. But its effect on the nation and the world was negligible.
As I stated earlier, Reagan started his presidency with a strong team within his executive office that balanced out what was a weak cabinet. Baker was a masterful chief of staff who ran the White House staff with efficiency, offset his boss’ weaknesses, and made sure that Reagan was well prepared for his duties each day. He had a stellar supporting cast in men like Michael Deaver, Richard Wirthlin, and Ken Duberstein.
The cabinet started out weak, but got better. However, Reagan relied very little on his cabinet. He also provided very little oversight of it. As a result, more government officials were convicted of crimes during the Reagan presidency than any other – even surpassing the Grant administration. George Schultz was an improvement over Haig and his appointment helped Reagan gain a better understanding of international relations. Jean Kirkpatrick’s name is now lost in history. But her work as the United Nation’s ambassador lifted the perception of the United States to levels not seen since the end of World War II.
While most cabinet officers were incredibly average, Reagan’s justice department was never up to par. William French Smith tolerated way too much corruption in a department whose sole purpose was to assure lawful conduct. One area where Cannon and I are in strong agreement is that Ed Meese was a total failure as an Attorney General and was an overall liability to Reagan at Justice and as deputy chief of staff. A man with a tin ear, callous attitude, and disregard for the necessity of compliance with the law and the perception of compliance was doomed to be a failure.
Reagan’s second term was less successful primarily because of the appointment of Donald Regan as Chief of Staff. Where Baker cultivated the press on behalf of Reagan, Regan disdained the press. When he did talk to them, it was for his own aggrandizement. Instead of offsetting Reagan’s weaknesses, he played to them to ingratiate himself. Presidents need to be protected from their own impulses and the bad ideas of others. Baker was exceptional. Regan was horrible. It was Regan who allowed Iran Contra to land in the Oval Office. When Howard Baker replaced Regan in 1986 at the behest of Nancy Reagan and Republican members of Congress, Reagan regained his footing and was able to move his tax reform plan through a congress controlled by the Democrats.
Cannon concludes by saying Reagan was successful in that he dared to dream great dreams, see greatness in America, and communicates well with the American people. He goes on to state that Reagan was too far removed and too disengaged from the day to day operations of government or even the activity of his own cabinet. Both conclusions are probably true. However, Reagan subscribed to a management style employed by many in the public and private sector. Select good people for the job and let them do the job. With few exceptions, Reagan did this.
What Cannon does not say, and is without contention, is that Reagan left the country and the world a better place than when he found it. That is the proper measurement of an effective president and Ronald Reagan stands higher than most of his predecessors in that regard.
As I stated earlier, Reagan started his presidency with a strong team within his executive office that balanced out what was a weak cabinet. Baker was a masterful chief of staff who ran the White House staff with efficiency, offset his boss’ weaknesses, and made sure that Reagan was well prepared for his duties each day. He had a stellar supporting cast in men like Michael Deaver, Richard Wirthlin, and Ken Duberstein.
The cabinet started out weak, but got better. However, Reagan relied very little on his cabinet. He also provided very little oversight of it. As a result, more government officials were convicted of crimes during the Reagan presidency than any other – even surpassing the Grant administration. George Schultz was an improvement over Haig and his appointment helped Reagan gain a better understanding of international relations. Jean Kirkpatrick’s name is now lost in history. But her work as the United Nation’s ambassador lifted the perception of the United States to levels not seen since the end of World War II.
While most cabinet officers were incredibly average, Reagan’s justice department was never up to par. William French Smith tolerated way too much corruption in a department whose sole purpose was to assure lawful conduct. One area where Cannon and I are in strong agreement is that Ed Meese was a total failure as an Attorney General and was an overall liability to Reagan at Justice and as deputy chief of staff. A man with a tin ear, callous attitude, and disregard for the necessity of compliance with the law and the perception of compliance was doomed to be a failure.
Reagan’s second term was less successful primarily because of the appointment of Donald Regan as Chief of Staff. Where Baker cultivated the press on behalf of Reagan, Regan disdained the press. When he did talk to them, it was for his own aggrandizement. Instead of offsetting Reagan’s weaknesses, he played to them to ingratiate himself. Presidents need to be protected from their own impulses and the bad ideas of others. Baker was exceptional. Regan was horrible. It was Regan who allowed Iran Contra to land in the Oval Office. When Howard Baker replaced Regan in 1986 at the behest of Nancy Reagan and Republican members of Congress, Reagan regained his footing and was able to move his tax reform plan through a congress controlled by the Democrats.
Cannon concludes by saying Reagan was successful in that he dared to dream great dreams, see greatness in America, and communicates well with the American people. He goes on to state that Reagan was too far removed and too disengaged from the day to day operations of government or even the activity of his own cabinet. Both conclusions are probably true. However, Reagan subscribed to a management style employed by many in the public and private sector. Select good people for the job and let them do the job. With few exceptions, Reagan did this.
What Cannon does not say, and is without contention, is that Reagan left the country and the world a better place than when he found it. That is the proper measurement of an effective president and Ronald Reagan stands higher than most of his predecessors in that regard.
June 8, 2015
Cannon covers Ronald Reagan in his last starring role in this heavy biography of the man and survey history of his time as President. It is an effective followup (though written earlier!) to "Governor Reagan", which I also review here.
Cannon has a great feel for the man, spending the first third of the book laying out Reagan's personality, psyche, and personal history before turning to application of what we learned about Reagan the man into how he performed his greatest role. And Cannon is mostly sympathetic to Reagan in this role--he finds him consistent with his personality, his vision, and his ability to represent American ideals. Cannon finds that Reagan was consistently underestimated throughout his political career, but was still a consummate leader:
"While he needed more assistance than any other modern U. S. president in the day-to-day operations of the presidency, Reagan held firm to a core of unshakable opinions . . . . It was Reagan, not his staff, who set the agenda and setablished the priorities for the major accomjplishmenets and debacles of his presidency. It was Reagan who wanted the tax cuts and the military buildup. It was Reagan, although not Reagan alone, who wanted to negotiate with Mikhail Gorbachev. And it was Reagan, again not alone, who advocated the sale of U. S. arms to Iran in exchange for American hostages."
And in these quotes we also see the Reagan who was distant from his staff, tired easily, and had little grasp of government and the technical issues of the implementations of his visions in budget and spending decisions, governance, and foreign policy. Cannon does not shy away from these problems, and in fact shows how Reagan, both the man and the role, were responsible for the signal failures of his presidency--the failure to deal effectively with terrorism against American's in Lebanon, and the Iran-Contra scandal. Cannon seems to spend comparatively too much time in Lebanon, confusingly tied up in arcane names and actions, perhaps to set the scene for the history of Iran-Contra, which he tells much more clearly and concisely. In fact, as one who remembers Iran-Contra as journalism unfolding daily over years in bits and pieces of newsprint, Cannon provides an excellent synposis of the decisions, actions, and lack of oversight that became a political, legal, financial, and consitutitional disaster.
Fortunately, Iran-Contra wasn't the last act for Ronald Reagan, as he showed his leadership abilities in dealing with the Soviet Union, and Cannon is able to conclude his study with "Visions and Legacies" mostly positive, and always honest. For me, a college graduate in 1982 who entered a world overshadowed by economic disaster at home and eminient spectors of terrorism, Soviet Russia, and nuclear war abroad, Ronald Reagan was the President whose leadership and policies made my world and and my country strong again. Looking back over 20 years of history with Cannon's assessment, I can still appreciate the strengths and recognize the weaknesses of the man who still remains in my mind one of our greatest Presidents.
Cannon has a great feel for the man, spending the first third of the book laying out Reagan's personality, psyche, and personal history before turning to application of what we learned about Reagan the man into how he performed his greatest role. And Cannon is mostly sympathetic to Reagan in this role--he finds him consistent with his personality, his vision, and his ability to represent American ideals. Cannon finds that Reagan was consistently underestimated throughout his political career, but was still a consummate leader:
"While he needed more assistance than any other modern U. S. president in the day-to-day operations of the presidency, Reagan held firm to a core of unshakable opinions . . . . It was Reagan, not his staff, who set the agenda and setablished the priorities for the major accomjplishmenets and debacles of his presidency. It was Reagan who wanted the tax cuts and the military buildup. It was Reagan, although not Reagan alone, who wanted to negotiate with Mikhail Gorbachev. And it was Reagan, again not alone, who advocated the sale of U. S. arms to Iran in exchange for American hostages."
And in these quotes we also see the Reagan who was distant from his staff, tired easily, and had little grasp of government and the technical issues of the implementations of his visions in budget and spending decisions, governance, and foreign policy. Cannon does not shy away from these problems, and in fact shows how Reagan, both the man and the role, were responsible for the signal failures of his presidency--the failure to deal effectively with terrorism against American's in Lebanon, and the Iran-Contra scandal. Cannon seems to spend comparatively too much time in Lebanon, confusingly tied up in arcane names and actions, perhaps to set the scene for the history of Iran-Contra, which he tells much more clearly and concisely. In fact, as one who remembers Iran-Contra as journalism unfolding daily over years in bits and pieces of newsprint, Cannon provides an excellent synposis of the decisions, actions, and lack of oversight that became a political, legal, financial, and consitutitional disaster.
Fortunately, Iran-Contra wasn't the last act for Ronald Reagan, as he showed his leadership abilities in dealing with the Soviet Union, and Cannon is able to conclude his study with "Visions and Legacies" mostly positive, and always honest. For me, a college graduate in 1982 who entered a world overshadowed by economic disaster at home and eminient spectors of terrorism, Soviet Russia, and nuclear war abroad, Ronald Reagan was the President whose leadership and policies made my world and and my country strong again. Looking back over 20 years of history with Cannon's assessment, I can still appreciate the strengths and recognize the weaknesses of the man who still remains in my mind one of our greatest Presidents.
May 12, 2024
When I was looking for a list of books about American presidents, someone who reads a lot about history recommended “President Reagan: The Role Of A Lifetime” by Lou Canon.
As a journalist, Cannon covered Reagan from his California years through his presidency. As a result, this 900-page book has many interesting stories, many of which had never been reported before.
It’s less biography and more of a behind the scenes look at a man who knew how to play to an audience whether on a Hollywood stage or a political rally.
In the 1980s, Ronald Reagan's presidency was marked by a significant ideological shift in American politics, commonly referred to as Reaganism. Reagan's rise to power in 1980 was fueled by a campaign centered on the promise of economic revival and a return to traditional American values. He famously asked voters, "Are you better off today than you were four years ago?" His victory over incumbent President Jimmy Carter signaled a turning point in American politics, ushering in an era of conservative governance.
Economically, Reagan inherited a troubled landscape characterized by high interest rates, soaring inflation, and elevated unemployment rates. However, over the course of his presidency, he implemented a series of policies collectively known as Reaganomics. These policies included tax cuts, deregulation, and a focus on free-market principles. By the end of his presidency, interest rates had fallen, inflation had been brought under control, and unemployment had decreased significantly. This economic turnaround contributed to Reagan's popularity among many Americans, who credited him with improving their financial well-being.
Reagan's message of individual freedom and limited government resonated strongly with segments of the population, particularly young voters and business leaders. He sought to dismantle government regulations that he believed stifled economic growth and hindered individual liberty. This deregulatory agenda, coupled with tax cuts for businesses and high-income earners, appealed to entrepreneurs and investors, leading to a resurgence of confidence in the American economy.
Despite his focus on economic issues, Reagan also made significant strides in foreign policy. He advocated for a strong national defense and pursued a confrontational stance toward the Soviet Union, famously labeling it an "evil empire." Reagan's unwavering commitment to military strength and his belief in American exceptionalism resonated with many conservatives and contributed to the eventual collapse of the Soviet Union.
However, Reagan's presidency was not without controversy and criticism. His administration faced scrutiny for its handling of social issues, including its response to the AIDS epidemic and its approach to race relations. Additionally, Reagan's policies led to a dramatic increase in income inequality, with the wealthiest Americans benefiting disproportionately from his economic agenda.
Furthermore, Reagan's management style was characterized by a degree of detachment from the day-to-day operations of government. While he was known for his charisma and communication skills, Reagan often delegated decision-making to his advisers, leading to internal conflicts and power struggles within his administration.
The book provides account of the internal dynamics within the Reagan administration, offering insights into the personalities and power struggles that shaped policymaking. It delves into the role of key figures such as David Stockman, whose strategic maneuvering and mastery of budgetary intricacies influenced Reagan's policy decisions, particularly in Social Security reform.
Moreover, it examines Reagan's communication style and management approach, highlighting his reliance on scripted narratives and his tendency to delegate decision-making to aides. The excerpt portrays Reagan as a charismatic figure with a deep connection to the American people but also as a leader who struggled to engage with complex policy issues and manage his administration effectively.
In terms of foreign policy, the excerpt explores Reagan's efforts to confront the Soviet Union, emphasizing his commitment to bolstering U.S. military capabilities while also seeking opportunities for diplomatic engagement. It provides context for initiatives like the Strategic Defense Initiative (SDI), framing them within Reagan's broader vision of achieving nuclear disarmament and enhancing U.S. security.
Furthermore, Cannon’s book delves into Reagan's response to international crises such as the Chernobyl disaster, showcasing the challenges of navigating complex geopolitical dynamics and managing public perception in the face of global events.
Five Significant Highlights From The Book:
• Reagan's presidency symbolized a significant ideological shift towards conservatism, commonly known as Reaganism, which emphasized individual freedom, limited government intervention, and free-market principles. This shift reshaped American politics and set the tone for subsequent conservative administrations.
• Economically, Reaganomics, a set of policies including tax cuts, deregulation, and emphasis on free-market principles, led to a remarkable turnaround. High inflation, soaring interest rates, and unemployment rates were reversed, contributing to Reagan's popularity among many Americans who saw improvements in their financial well-being. However, critics argue that these policies also widened income inequality, benefiting the wealthy disproportionately.
• Reagan's confrontational stance towards the Soviet Union, labeling it an "evil empire," and his commitment to bolstering U.S. military capabilities played a significant role in the eventual collapse of the Soviet Union. His unwavering belief in American exceptionalism resonated with conservatives, but his policies also escalated tensions between the two superpowers.
• Despite his foreign policy achievements, Reagan faced criticism for his handling of social issues. His administration's response to the AIDS epidemic was perceived as slow and inadequate, contributing to public health concerns and highlighting disparities in healthcare access.
• Internally, Reagan's management style was characterized by delegation and detachment. He relied heavily on his advisors to make decisions, leading to power struggles and conflicts within his administration. This approach, while allowing Reagan to focus on communication and public relations, also resulted in challenges in effectively managing policy implementation and internal dynamics.
As a journalist, Cannon covered Reagan from his California years through his presidency. As a result, this 900-page book has many interesting stories, many of which had never been reported before.
It’s less biography and more of a behind the scenes look at a man who knew how to play to an audience whether on a Hollywood stage or a political rally.
In the 1980s, Ronald Reagan's presidency was marked by a significant ideological shift in American politics, commonly referred to as Reaganism. Reagan's rise to power in 1980 was fueled by a campaign centered on the promise of economic revival and a return to traditional American values. He famously asked voters, "Are you better off today than you were four years ago?" His victory over incumbent President Jimmy Carter signaled a turning point in American politics, ushering in an era of conservative governance.
Economically, Reagan inherited a troubled landscape characterized by high interest rates, soaring inflation, and elevated unemployment rates. However, over the course of his presidency, he implemented a series of policies collectively known as Reaganomics. These policies included tax cuts, deregulation, and a focus on free-market principles. By the end of his presidency, interest rates had fallen, inflation had been brought under control, and unemployment had decreased significantly. This economic turnaround contributed to Reagan's popularity among many Americans, who credited him with improving their financial well-being.
Reagan's message of individual freedom and limited government resonated strongly with segments of the population, particularly young voters and business leaders. He sought to dismantle government regulations that he believed stifled economic growth and hindered individual liberty. This deregulatory agenda, coupled with tax cuts for businesses and high-income earners, appealed to entrepreneurs and investors, leading to a resurgence of confidence in the American economy.
Despite his focus on economic issues, Reagan also made significant strides in foreign policy. He advocated for a strong national defense and pursued a confrontational stance toward the Soviet Union, famously labeling it an "evil empire." Reagan's unwavering commitment to military strength and his belief in American exceptionalism resonated with many conservatives and contributed to the eventual collapse of the Soviet Union.
However, Reagan's presidency was not without controversy and criticism. His administration faced scrutiny for its handling of social issues, including its response to the AIDS epidemic and its approach to race relations. Additionally, Reagan's policies led to a dramatic increase in income inequality, with the wealthiest Americans benefiting disproportionately from his economic agenda.
Furthermore, Reagan's management style was characterized by a degree of detachment from the day-to-day operations of government. While he was known for his charisma and communication skills, Reagan often delegated decision-making to his advisers, leading to internal conflicts and power struggles within his administration.
The book provides account of the internal dynamics within the Reagan administration, offering insights into the personalities and power struggles that shaped policymaking. It delves into the role of key figures such as David Stockman, whose strategic maneuvering and mastery of budgetary intricacies influenced Reagan's policy decisions, particularly in Social Security reform.
Moreover, it examines Reagan's communication style and management approach, highlighting his reliance on scripted narratives and his tendency to delegate decision-making to aides. The excerpt portrays Reagan as a charismatic figure with a deep connection to the American people but also as a leader who struggled to engage with complex policy issues and manage his administration effectively.
In terms of foreign policy, the excerpt explores Reagan's efforts to confront the Soviet Union, emphasizing his commitment to bolstering U.S. military capabilities while also seeking opportunities for diplomatic engagement. It provides context for initiatives like the Strategic Defense Initiative (SDI), framing them within Reagan's broader vision of achieving nuclear disarmament and enhancing U.S. security.
Furthermore, Cannon’s book delves into Reagan's response to international crises such as the Chernobyl disaster, showcasing the challenges of navigating complex geopolitical dynamics and managing public perception in the face of global events.
Five Significant Highlights From The Book:
• Reagan's presidency symbolized a significant ideological shift towards conservatism, commonly known as Reaganism, which emphasized individual freedom, limited government intervention, and free-market principles. This shift reshaped American politics and set the tone for subsequent conservative administrations.
• Economically, Reaganomics, a set of policies including tax cuts, deregulation, and emphasis on free-market principles, led to a remarkable turnaround. High inflation, soaring interest rates, and unemployment rates were reversed, contributing to Reagan's popularity among many Americans who saw improvements in their financial well-being. However, critics argue that these policies also widened income inequality, benefiting the wealthy disproportionately.
• Reagan's confrontational stance towards the Soviet Union, labeling it an "evil empire," and his commitment to bolstering U.S. military capabilities played a significant role in the eventual collapse of the Soviet Union. His unwavering belief in American exceptionalism resonated with conservatives, but his policies also escalated tensions between the two superpowers.
• Despite his foreign policy achievements, Reagan faced criticism for his handling of social issues. His administration's response to the AIDS epidemic was perceived as slow and inadequate, contributing to public health concerns and highlighting disparities in healthcare access.
• Internally, Reagan's management style was characterized by delegation and detachment. He relied heavily on his advisors to make decisions, leading to power struggles and conflicts within his administration. This approach, while allowing Reagan to focus on communication and public relations, also resulted in challenges in effectively managing policy implementation and internal dynamics.
July 9, 2025
Review – President Reagan: The Role of a Lifetime by Lou Cannon
(Original early 1990s edition – written post-presidency, pre-Alzheimer’s diagnosis)
I read the original edition of this book — the one released in the early 1990s, after Reagan left office but before his Alzheimer’s diagnosis was public. That timing mattered to me. I wanted to see how Reagan’s presidency was viewed in real time, before the mythologizing took hold. I wasn’t looking for a legacy biography, but something closer to the raw, complicated figure.
What stood out most was how balanced and honest Lou Cannon is. Having covered Reagan for decades, he avoids both hero worship and harsh criticism. That kind of neutrality is rare, especially so soon after a presidency. Cannon lays out Reagan’s strengths, blind spots, missed opportunities, and political skill with fairness.
The book still feels relevant. Social Security was already a political minefield during Reagan’s time — and it still is today. Economic issues like government spending, tax policy, and deficits remain just as contentious. It’s frustrating to see how much hasn’t changed. Reagan’s belief in supply-side economics and limited government is still central to conservative politics, but Cannon shows the gap between Reagan’s rhetoric and the realities of governing.
The structure shifts midway — from a chronological account to chapters focused on specific policy areas and leadership themes. That worked well for me. It breaks the presidency into clearer parts instead of just a timeline.
If this book came out today, many conservatives might call it a hit piece. Reagan’s legacy has been elevated to almost mythic status, alongside presidents like Lincoln and FDR. Honest critiques often get dismissed as unfair attacks. But that’s what makes this book valuable. Cannon doesn’t try to tear Reagan down, but he refuses to play along with the myth. He shows a president who could inspire and lead but also one who was passive and often disengaged. Reagan avoided confrontation and struggled to take sides during internal disputes — a quality that shaped his leadership and the administration’s dynamics.
Cannon also doesn’t shy away from showing signs of Reagan’s mental decline in his second term. While he never makes a diagnosis, he documents plenty of moments where Reagan seemed out of touch or mentally foggy. That feels strikingly relevant now, given the current debates about presidential age and cognitive fitness. Reagan was the early warning sign of how hard it is to manage a presidency when a leader starts to fade.
One small critique: Cannon leans a little too hard on Reagan’s acting background. It’s relevant, but by the second half of the book, it starts to feel repetitive.
Overall, this gave me a more realistic and layered view of Reagan. He wasn’t an empty figure, but he wasn’t the untouchable conservative icon either. If you’re looking for a political biography that avoids both worship and cynicism, this one’s worth your time.
(Original early 1990s edition – written post-presidency, pre-Alzheimer’s diagnosis)
I read the original edition of this book — the one released in the early 1990s, after Reagan left office but before his Alzheimer’s diagnosis was public. That timing mattered to me. I wanted to see how Reagan’s presidency was viewed in real time, before the mythologizing took hold. I wasn’t looking for a legacy biography, but something closer to the raw, complicated figure.
What stood out most was how balanced and honest Lou Cannon is. Having covered Reagan for decades, he avoids both hero worship and harsh criticism. That kind of neutrality is rare, especially so soon after a presidency. Cannon lays out Reagan’s strengths, blind spots, missed opportunities, and political skill with fairness.
The book still feels relevant. Social Security was already a political minefield during Reagan’s time — and it still is today. Economic issues like government spending, tax policy, and deficits remain just as contentious. It’s frustrating to see how much hasn’t changed. Reagan’s belief in supply-side economics and limited government is still central to conservative politics, but Cannon shows the gap between Reagan’s rhetoric and the realities of governing.
The structure shifts midway — from a chronological account to chapters focused on specific policy areas and leadership themes. That worked well for me. It breaks the presidency into clearer parts instead of just a timeline.
If this book came out today, many conservatives might call it a hit piece. Reagan’s legacy has been elevated to almost mythic status, alongside presidents like Lincoln and FDR. Honest critiques often get dismissed as unfair attacks. But that’s what makes this book valuable. Cannon doesn’t try to tear Reagan down, but he refuses to play along with the myth. He shows a president who could inspire and lead but also one who was passive and often disengaged. Reagan avoided confrontation and struggled to take sides during internal disputes — a quality that shaped his leadership and the administration’s dynamics.
Cannon also doesn’t shy away from showing signs of Reagan’s mental decline in his second term. While he never makes a diagnosis, he documents plenty of moments where Reagan seemed out of touch or mentally foggy. That feels strikingly relevant now, given the current debates about presidential age and cognitive fitness. Reagan was the early warning sign of how hard it is to manage a presidency when a leader starts to fade.
One small critique: Cannon leans a little too hard on Reagan’s acting background. It’s relevant, but by the second half of the book, it starts to feel repetitive.
Overall, this gave me a more realistic and layered view of Reagan. He wasn’t an empty figure, but he wasn’t the untouchable conservative icon either. If you’re looking for a political biography that avoids both worship and cynicism, this one’s worth your time.
April 21, 2019
This book is massive and it took me forever to complete given that I was reading it in chunks while also reading other books. Anyway, one of my reading goals for a little while now has been to read a good biography on every US President. Reagan proved tough as most of what's written about him is very agenda driven and as a person he was pretty enigmatic. He guarded his real self very strongly and most of what we have today about Reagan is from his acolytes and worshipers who want him carved on Rushmore. Cannon's book has a through insider's view throughout given that he followed and wrote about Reagan for a long time. However, it's very balanced. You get a sense of him as a person, good and bad, and a full picture of his cabinet and times. If you want to understand where the Republican party is in the modern US you have to understand Reagan and how he's the connective tissue between Nixon and Trump.
The only major drawback of this book is that it was published so soon after Reagan left office that the impact of his presidency and legacy wasn't digested and thus couldn't be reported. Also, given the clear signs of Alzeihmer's in Regan's final term this book speculates he's tired or bored in instances in which it's obviously Alzeihmer's.
Well worth a read--if you like Reagan you're going to be challenged here and if you don't, you might also find reason to reconsider him at times. I come away from this book with the (not original) thought that most of those who lionize Reagan and look back on his presidency with such strong nostalgia are simply remembering who they were and where they were at during his years in office, that's what they miss. This book definitely gives you a picture of how those who did well under Reagan did very well and those who did poorly did very poorly--and the fallout if those years would effect the US forever after.
The only major drawback of this book is that it was published so soon after Reagan left office that the impact of his presidency and legacy wasn't digested and thus couldn't be reported. Also, given the clear signs of Alzeihmer's in Regan's final term this book speculates he's tired or bored in instances in which it's obviously Alzeihmer's.
Well worth a read--if you like Reagan you're going to be challenged here and if you don't, you might also find reason to reconsider him at times. I come away from this book with the (not original) thought that most of those who lionize Reagan and look back on his presidency with such strong nostalgia are simply remembering who they were and where they were at during his years in office, that's what they miss. This book definitely gives you a picture of how those who did well under Reagan did very well and those who did poorly did very poorly--and the fallout if those years would effect the US forever after.
February 8, 2023
This is a close up look of Reagan in the context of his Presidency.
On the plus side, it is a (seemingly) unbiased description, warts and all. You come to know the man and the President. You read his strengths (his sunny disposition, his amazing communication skills, his commitment to the ideals he holds dear, his unwavering interest in ridding the world of nuclear weapons) and his weaknesses (inability to resolve conflicts, inability to understand complex issues, being swayed by the last person who persuaded him, tendency to tell jokes during weighty discussions, falling asleep if the subject did not interest him). It is a balanced view.
The negative? If you are not interested in the minutiae of the various meetings and the people's agenda etc then this book is not for you. (But you can get a summary of it in my detailed review at https://bookspluslife.wordpress.com/2023/02/07/book-president-reagan-the-role-of-a-lifetime-by-lou-cannon/ A very educative and detailed book on all things Reagan focused on his Presidential years. Lou Cannon has written another book on his Governership years of California.
-- Krishna
On the plus side, it is a (seemingly) unbiased description, warts and all. You come to know the man and the President. You read his strengths (his sunny disposition, his amazing communication skills, his commitment to the ideals he holds dear, his unwavering interest in ridding the world of nuclear weapons) and his weaknesses (inability to resolve conflicts, inability to understand complex issues, being swayed by the last person who persuaded him, tendency to tell jokes during weighty discussions, falling asleep if the subject did not interest him). It is a balanced view.
The negative? If you are not interested in the minutiae of the various meetings and the people's agenda etc then this book is not for you. (But you can get a summary of it in my detailed review at https://bookspluslife.wordpress.com/2023/02/07/book-president-reagan-the-role-of-a-lifetime-by-lou-cannon/ A very educative and detailed book on all things Reagan focused on his Presidential years. Lou Cannon has written another book on his Governership years of California.
-- Krishna
June 24, 2025
lengthy, but well detailed. it doesn't quite follow a biographical timeline, rather starts at the beginning of reagan's presidency. lou seems like he's a reagan fan, and the book has a somewhat favorable or at least sympathetic tone toward reagan. the thing that upsets his bias is that lou is dedicated to telling the facts, which make reagan look really, really bad. this is my first dive into reagan and how he was so what i gleaned may be wrong, but lou paints him in a light that i think is meant to be sympathetic but instead portrays reagan like a bumbling idiot who was manipulated by his aids and was in over his head. in our current political climate, it's hard not to take the impressions from this book and see how they compare to trump's own bumblings. i'm probably going to try to read more of reagan's life, and from authors who oppose him and authors are less dedicated to telling the truth and want to potray reagan's life as favorably as possible. but this biography gave me a meaty idea of how reagan worked in a fairly unbiased way from what i can tell
July 13, 2017
This is in the top tier of books about the Reagan administration (though "Veil" and "Landslide" are better when it comes to discrete portions of the presidency). It works because it's also a bit of a memoir of Lou Cannon's time spent covering Ronald Reagan. Book is a bit of a perspective shifter for me - my opinion before reading it was that Reagan was one of the worst presidents of the last century (though in recent months he has been lapped), because you had no idea who was minding the store. Cannon confirms that Reagan was incurious and lazy, though he was well-served during his first term. Ronnie was shitty during the second term, though.
November 12, 2025
So glad I finally found a book that doesn't try to biographize Reagan as a messianic figure for politics lol. This definitely doesn't. The author followed around Reagan for 20 years, and the books thesis is that Reagan really wasn't that smart about politics at all, but he was a really good actor and was able to sell that he did quite well. He paints Reagan as well-meaning and idealistic, but somebody not able to comprehend a lot of the important machinations of politics and policies. It was actually really suprising how little of a role Reagan played sometimes in 8 yrs of presidency, with his staff sometimes being the only decision-makers.
August 16, 2021
Cannon does an admirable job of presenting a sympathetic yet critical treatment of Ronald Reagan. The book is arranged somewhat chronological and somewhat thematically. For example, he discusses the Iran-Contra situation chronologically but in chapters primarily devoted to that topic. The same is true of economics, foreign affairs, etc. Well-researched and, I think, balanced in its treatment of various people and events, it was an informative and well-written look at President Reagan, his administration, and legacy.
October 5, 2022
Nobody better to learn about Reagan, the plusses and the minus, wins and losses. The truth - this isn't a book that's going to say Reagan was some robot programmed by other, smarter people. Cannon covered Governor Reagan and had interviewed him and his staff members. One point subtracted because it's old - there are new insights - so you might need H.W. Brand's book or another supplement to capture some of the memoirs that only came out after his death.
July 20, 2017
A detailed study of events of the Reagan presidency, linked to a thorough look at the president's psychological makeup. Although basically sympathetic to Reagan, the author does not hesitate to explore thoroughly the frequent failures of his years in the White House.
March 10, 2018
A real mythbuster for fiscal conservatives.
October 1, 2018
A detailed, even-handed biography that helped me better understand the first president I remember.
April 8, 2019
Good book but you can tell the author is extremely biased. Goes overboard in describing Reagan's flaws..
November 15, 2020
An exhaustively thorough biography on one of our worst presidents.
The author is most likely conservative because he doesn't talk about anything negative about Reagan at length at all.
The author is most likely conservative because he doesn't talk about anything negative about Reagan at length at all.
April 12, 2021
One of the best presidential biographies in memory.
November 24, 2022
A terrific examination of Reagan’s presidency.
Displaying 1 - 30 of 62 reviews