*******************************
The "Gipper" turns 90 tomorrow.  The following column published yesterday in
the "Mother Country" is a wonderful tribute to the man and will bring back
some fond memories for those of us who still revere and thank "Dutch."
Enjoy. - Chuck
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

(London) The Sunday Times
February 4 2001 OPINION 
http://www.thesundaytimes.co.uk/
by Andrew Sullivan
 
He will turn 90 on Tuesday, but in all likelihood he will barely be aware of
it. The cruelty of Alzheimer's has robbed Ronald Reagan of the capacity for
clear memory. But that doesn't apply to the rest of us.

He seems, in some respects, a historical oddity now, his political and
cultural presence obscured by the Clinton psychodrama and the Bush dynasty.
But his successors do not begin to compare - either in achievement or
legacy. Reagan is still, in my view, the architect of our modern world.

Reagan stood for two simple but indisputably big things: the expansion of
freedom at home and the extinction of tyranny abroad. He achieved both. When
he came to office, top tax rates in the United States were 70%. Against the
odds, Reagan slashed the top rate to 28% and ignited the economic boom that
is still with us.

But unlike George W. Bush, and certainly unlike the hopelessly confused
Michael Portillo, Reagan understood what tax cuts were about. Back in 1976,
he made the case in one of his innumerable radio addresses:

"Our system freed the individual genius of man. We allocate resources not by
goverment decision but by the millions of decisions customers make when they
go into the market place. If something seems too high-priced, we buy
something else. So resources are steered toward those things people want
most at the price they are willing to pay."

Classic Reagan. Simple. Intelligible. True. Some people believe he was a
moron, incapable of intellectual engagement. A brief perusal through his
dozens of addresses will put the lie to that. He grappled directly and
bravely with the main issues of his day. He was a believer in the media as a
way to communicate ideas that could change lives. In this sense, he was one
of the most intellectual presidents in history.

If he was right about taxation and the role of government, he was also right
about the other great question of his day: the Soviet Union.

I will never forget the moment I heard his "evil empire" speech. It was
broadcast on Radio 4, with sceptical British commentary about this
inflammatory new president who knew nothing about the complexities of late
communism. But for all the criticism, what came through to my teenage brain
was an actual truth. Yes, the Soviet Union was evil. Who now doubts that?

He alone saw that communism was destined to be put on the "ash-heap of
history", as he told the House of Commons. And he helped put it there.

Think of Tony Blair and Bill Clinton. In the 1980s, they were nuclear freeze
supporters. And yet both now thoughtlessly enjoy the soft and easy fruits of
a greater man's courage.

The critics harp on the enormous deficits of the Reagan era, but the truth
is that federal revenues boomed on Reagan's watch. What created the deficits
was an unprecedented increase in defence spending - the bargaining chip that
eventually forced the Soviets to surrender.

You could easily argue that this was a price worth paying for an early end
to an expensive conflict. Even the straggling defenders of perestroika now
concede that Reagan's intransigence speeded the collapse of the Soviet
empire. The deficits were therefore a fiscal bargain.

And on most of the current pressing issues, Reaganism still has plenty of
credibility. The main cloud on the fiscal horizon - the long-term insolvency
of the government-run pension system - stems from a programme Reagan
opposed.

The end of the federal welfare entitlement was also presaged by Reagan. In
the early 1970s, when he was governor of California, he alone opposed the
question of whether to federalise that entitlement. It took 30 years and
Bill Clinton to recognise finally the validity of Reagan's point.

Reagan's unlikeliest dream - nuclear missile defence - is also still with
us. Lampooned as "star wars", it will soon regain the pre-eminence it
deserves in America's military defence, as Donald Rumsfeld aggressively
moves it forward.

The contrast with Clinton couldn't be clearer. Clinton was a group-hugger,
obsessed with the press, fixated on spin, devoted to polls. Reagan was
aloof, distant even from his own family, focused on a few important themes
and delegating everything else.

He was devoted to his second wife with a romantic zeal, wore a coat and tie
at all times in the Oval Office, a room he considered sacred; he was also
pricelessly funny. As he was wheeled into the operating room after a bullet
almost took his life, he looked at the solemn, green-suited doctors and
said: "Please tell me you're Republicans."

A natural populist, Reagan spent hours handwriting letters to obscure pen
pals he had befriended in the past, never dreaming he was too important to
ignore such tasks of courtesy. He was a democrat to his fingertips who
didn't need a "common touch" because he was so effortlessly a common man
himself.

It takes time to recognise greatness and it sometimes appears in the oddest
of forms. When he dies, this country will go into shock. For Americans know
in their hearts that this unlikely man understood the deepest meaning of
their country in a way nobody else has done for a generation.

< END >