How about a world at peace, a Berlin Wall coming down an agreement with the Russians to reduce military weapons, inflation numbers restored to acceptable levels and a restored economy. 64% John. He didn't have that by accomplishing nothing.
The Berlin Wall coming down didn't have much to do with Reagan. At least not in isolation from what happened before he came into office. Carter had already begun the military buildup before Reagan came into office, although it is true that Reagan took it to new heights. But while that and his famous "Mr. Gorbachev, tear down this wall" are given by the RW a lot of credit, IMHO that is very disputable. The USSR and its East European satellites were already teetering on the edge of disaster economically, with Poland being the first to rebel with the Solidarity Movement--something that began in 1980, before Reagan even came into office.
As for inflation--even one of Reagan's key economic advisors, Bruce Bartlett, has agreed that Volcker did the "heavy lifting" in bringing down inflation by raising short term interest rates to very high real levels, bringing on a recession that was one of the important factors in Carter losing the election. The Iran embassy takeover was the other factor, and that probably would have been resolved before the election had Reagan's people (including Bush Sr) not meddled by going to Iran and getting them to hold off on releasing the hostages until after the election in return for helping to arm Iran--both sides kept their side of the bargain, with Iran releasing the hostages right after Reagan was inaugurated (and no, it wasn't because Iran was "afraid" of Reagan, as it has been portrayed by the RW--if they were afraid of Reagan, they wouldn't have bombed the Marines in Beirut, killing hundreds:
In 1982, the Islamic Republic of Iran established a base in the Syrian-controlled Bekaa Valley in Lebanon. That base is still operational today. From that base, Iran's Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC) "founded, financed, trained and equipped Hezbollah to operate as a proxy army" for Iran. [45] Some analysts believe the newly formed Islamic Republic of Iran was heavily involved in the bomb attacks and that a major factor leading it to orchestrate the attacks on the barracks was America's support for Iraq in the Iran–Iraq War and its extending of $2.5 billion in trade credit to Iraq while halting the shipments of arms to Iran. [46] A few weeks before the bombing, Iran warned that providing armaments to Iran's enemies would provoke retaliatory punishment. [Notes 1] On September 26, 1983, "the National Security Agency (NSA) intercepted an Iranian diplomatic communications message from the Iranian intelligence agency, the Ministry of Information and Security (MOIS)," to its ambassador, Ali Akbar Mohtashemi, in Damascus. The message directed the ambassador to "take spectacular action against the American Marines." [47] The intercepted message, dated September 26, would not be passed to the Marines until October 26: three days after the bombing. [48]
Much of what is now public knowledge of Iranian involvement, e.g., PETN purportedly supplied by Iran, the suicide bomber's name and nationality, etc., in the bombings was not revealed to the public until the 2003 trial, Peterson, et al v. Islamic Republic, et al. [7] Testimony by Admiral James "Ace" Lyon's, U.S.N. (Ret), and FBI forensic explosive investigator Danny A. Defenbaugh, plus a deposition by a Hezbollah operative named Mahmoud (a pseudonym) were particularly revealing. [49]
en.wikipedia.org
Reagan proved that they had nothing to fear from him by withdrawing from Lebanon and not retaliating. A real accomplishment all right. Indeed, instead of any retaliation, the Reagan admin continued the policy of arming both Iran and Iraq to keep them fighting each other, something that they and the CIA thought was Oh So Clever at the time.
As for his approval rating--I don't care rate Presidents according to their approval rating at any given time during or even after the presidency. Reagan had a nice smile and a cheery wave. Whoopee.
As for Carter--
He established a national energy policy that included conservation, price control, and new technology. In foreign affairs, Carter pursued the Camp David Accords, the Panama Canal Treaties, the second round of Strategic Arms Limitation Talks (SALT II), and returned the Panama Canal Zone to Panama. He took office during a period of international stagnation and inflation, which persisted throughout his term. The end of his presidential tenure was marked by the 1979–1981 Iran hostage crisis, the 1979 energy crisis, the Three Mile Island nuclear accident, the Soviet invasion of Afghanistan, the United States boycott of the 1980 Summer Olympics in Moscow (the only U.S. boycott in Olympic history), and the eruption of Mount St. Helens in Washington state.
Carter was hindered by the high energy prices that shocked the economy. Yes, there was bad inflation, but given the sudden rise in energy prices due to mideast unrest, the alternative to the inflation was a severe recession. Much of what he dealt with--as with most presidents--was the cumulative result of events that were beyond his control. The mideast crisis was something that had long been in the making, going back to WWI and the way in which the West dismantled the Ottoman Empire and continually meddled in Arab and Iranian affairs over the decades. I don't think he dealt with the embassy takeover very well, but, as I pointed to above, that was only partly his doing--Reagan's people made it worse than it should have been. He tried and succeeded in defusing the Israeli-Arab conflicts with Camp David Accords. He also tried to address the energy crisis with things like CAFE standards and supporting alternative energies like solar, but Reagan essentially dismantled nearly everything he did, including removing solar panels from the White House and basically never mentioning conservation. Of course, he didn't have to because energy prices went down sharply during his admin--something that, again, he had very little to do with but greatly benefited from--both in lowering the inflation rate and increasing economic activity. Carter began the both the move toward deregulation and, after the invasion of Afghanistan, the military buildup in the US. Reagan continued both of these, but as with his tax cuts, he overdid both of them. Sure, he got a juiced economy by doing that, but he also paid for it by increasing the debt more than any other president in percentage terms--and it was unnecessary. He also helped to enflame the anti-government streak in American political culture to ridiculous levels, something that we are also paying for today with an absurd libertarian movement.
Talk about inventing your own history--his accomplishments, such as they are, are deeply tainted. |
