Wednesday, April 30, 2014

Bozo The President

Ronald Reagan: Feet of clay, mind of mush. Almost as startling as discovering ol' Cliven Bundy is a racist. Here is every schadenfreude-ulous word, some of which we have emphasized for added pleasure.
Margaret Thatcher and Ronald Reagan were often portrayed as geo-political soul mates, but government files declassified in London on Wednesday expose a deep British disdain for the president who was described in official papers as homophobic, uninformed, disinterested and, not to put too fine a point on it, “a Bozo.

The British Foreign Office files seen by The Daily Beast show that Prime Minister Thatcher was warned President Reagan had little interest in world affairs and was unable to sustain a serious conversation about contemporary politics.

The damning critiques, which expressed sheer incredulity that this man could occupy the White House, were shared at the highest levels of government before and after Reagan’s first State Visit to Britain in 1982.

Despite the hostility of her advisors, Thatcher appeared to strike up a close relationship with Reagan based on their shared values. They loudly battled Communism together and were determined to vanquish the post-war economic consensus, which had been based on the work of John Maynard Keynes, in favor of trickle-down economics and low taxes.

Successive British ambassadors in Washington were deeply unimpressed with the former California governor, however. Sir Nicholas Henderson, who was in the job when Reagan was elected, described him as a dogmatic and simplistic man. “He has clear-cut opinions, not to say prejudices, as was apparent to me when he told me à propos Keynes that it must not be forgotten that he was a homosexual,” Henderson wrote in his United States Annual Review of 1981.

Sir Oliver Wright replaced Henderson in Washington the following year but the dispatches he sent back to London were no more encouraging. “We have self-evidently a President—how shall I put it?—whom it is difficult to engage in a serious discussion on any subject of contemporary politics,” he wrote in October 1982.

Wright was aghast to find that smart and serious political operatives in D.C. appeared happy to work under Reagan’s leadership. “No one in Washington smirks when they are expounding the President’s views or communicating his policies,” he said. “No one in official and hardly anyone in non-official Washington decries his want of powers of analysis or his inability to argue a closely reasoned case.”

Wright’s summation of the twin threads of the Administration’s policy objectives was equally damning. He described Reaganomics as “unsophisticated… it’s component parts self-contradictory” and his foreign policy as cartoonish and based on Reagan’s Wild West heritage. “California is on the look out for baddies and Public Baddie No 1 is the Soviet Union… baddies, as we all know, have only one proper fate: to bite the dust.”

The Wright briefing from 1982, entitled The Reagan Administration or How the West Was Won. Second Impressions of the United States, concludes that the 1984 election still looked a long way off. “This then is the guy with whom we have to deal and with whose instincts we have to live, God willing, for at least the next two years. From a European point of view it is not an ideal prospect.”

It was such a hit when it arrived back at the Foreign Office in London that copies were produced and circulated throughout Whitehall and Downing Street. “We greatly enjoyed reading your ‘Second Impressions’ dispatch,” replied a senior diplomat. “While I do not expect anyone to take issue with your main themes, no doubt your observations will draw reactions.”

Indeed, on Wednesday the observations drew a reaction from Senator John McCain. He told The Daily Beast that he was sure Thatcher and the British public liked Reagan no matter what her senior staff thought. “I’m sure that there were many elitist Britishers, just like Americans, who called him a cowboy and all that stuff. I’m not surprised. The key to it is Margaret Thatcher said in the open and repeatedly that Ronald Reagan won the cold war without firing a shot,” he said. “All I know is that they were not totally in lockstep on everything. There are always people who will take shots at any leader but there’s also no doubt that Ronald Reagan remains the most popular president in recent history with the British people and that matters.”*

Within the grand halls of the Foreign Office on King Charles Street in Central London, it seems he was far from popular. In a dispatch from Washington dated March 18, 1982 Stephen Wall, an embassy official who would later work for numerous foreign secretaries and prime ministers, suggested that even Reagan’s closest staff were worried about his reputation. “The White House are certainly concerned that the President could acquire a national image as a bumbler which, like Ford’s image as a stumbler, could not be eradicated once firmly established in the public mind. The same thing happened to President [Jimmy] Carter.”

The missive was received back in London by David Barrie, a senior diplomat, who appended his own note. “My guess is that it’ll take some time before Reagan gets labeled as a Bozo by Middle America,” he wrote.

Another note added to a Washington dispatch, this time by Sir Derek Malcolm Day, Deputy Under-Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs in January 1982, bemoaned the Reagan White House’s unwillingness to cooperate with its allies. “There is still a disturbing tendency, if consultation does not produce an early and desired result as far as the Americans are concerned, for the Administration to go their own way virtually regardless of the consequences,” he wrote. “I fear that this may be a feature of life that we shall have to get used to with the Reagan Administration. Patience is not a strong suit in Washington these days.”

One can imagine that patience with the British envoys was in particularly short supply.

*TwoFour words on John McCain as a judge of character: Sarah "Terrorist Baptism" Palin.

28 comments:

ifthethunderdontgetya™³²®© said...

Today in Dickheads With Badges
~

OBS said...

Excellent find M. B. If only this stuff would puncture the bubble of mythology that's been steadily built around that old shithead ever since the '80s.

VCarlson said...

Criminy. I look forward to reading that dispatch. 'Twas during the Raygun years that I lost my childlike faith in the press, as they cooed over Ronnie, chuckled over "The Teflon President" (and failed to use the ™ now I think of it), and (occasionally) reported actions that made it clear that St Ronnie was in on Iran-Contra or had no control over his aides. Or both, of course. I still say he should have been impeached.

Dennis said...

Give us one reason why it should, OBS. All of these are mere generalizations said by Reagan's many detractors at the time in the US, and it's no revelation now to find that some Brits would echo those generalizations.

Reagan isn't quoted anywhere as espousing 'trickle-down economics', either. This report is recycled crap. Pretty much what you'd expect from the Daily Beast.

Some gem of a find.

Eat shit & die, Dennis. said...

You mean old "cut-and-run" Reagan who ordered the Beirut mission in which 200 Marines died?

The idiot that provided Moslem fanatics in Afghanistan with weapons?

The idiot that provided Moslem fanatics in Iran with weapons?

The cruel bastard that secretly arranged for hundreds of US hostages to be kept in Tehran until the very moment he took office on Jan. 20, 1981?

Yeh, if only he'd been a Democrat, the GOP could've given him the BENGHAZZZZZIIIIIIII! treatment.

But since he was a Republican, they simply ignore his many fuckups and pretend he was competent.




Pupienus Maximus said...

Oh. My.

bbkf said...

“We have self-evidently a President—how shall I put it?—whom it is difficult to engage in a serious discussion on any subject of contemporary politics,” he wrote in October 1982.

blah, blah, blah, mr. reagan. blah, blah, blah, blah, mr. reagan, blah, blah...

Dennis said...

What are Moslem fanatics, ESADD?

Is this a group of architects in the Middle East somewhere? Or just tourists?

Dennis said...

beebs,

Just an FYI, there are several good books on Reagan that explain quite evidently how many if the things said about him early in his presidency about his political acumen turned out to be untrue, such as these by some Brits written back in 1982. If you'd like to expand your horizons, I'd be glad to recommend several to you.

Dennis said...

MB, I kind if like it here. Mind if I take my shoes off and stay a while?

Someone who knows the troll all too well said...

Don't fall for it, MB.

First he takes off his shoes, then he dumps a big smelly load all over the carpet.

Ahem.... said...

http://www.foxnews.com/story/2006/01/30/aide-reagan-left-marines-vulnerable-in-beirut/

Weird Dave said...

Well Dennis (if that is your real name), I can't presume to speak for our kind and genial host, but I don't mind.

I do, however, want to know the names of those books you be talking about.

M. Bouffant said...

Censorship Editor:
The only Comment Crime in this dump is spam or revealing someone's secret identity. Otherwise, it's a free speech paradise. Read the disclaimer though. Yes, it's a threat.

And realize these were Regan's allies who found him so lacking. Just as reactionaries love to revile "liberal" Hollywood celebs, many of them are ninnies too. It's show biz, Jake.

M. Bouffant said...

Bromodosis Editor:
St. Nick on a stick, put those ugly shoes back on, & try a shower once a wk. or so!!

Dennis said...

Two things to bear in mind, MB.

There is a statue of Reagan in London, one of the very few foreign leaders bestowed with that honor.

And this is the country that have us Piers Morgan.

????? said...

Why don't you show honor to your hero, President Bozo, by moving to London?

Anonymous said...

It's these kinds of opinions that give Rick Perry so much hope.

Shirt

Dennis said...

Simply letting you know that what some Brits said about Reagan in 1982 upon first impressions is hardly newsworthy or relevant now. Fenwick called this a hidden gem. There's a reason for that. It's only relevant for people who continued to hate him and wanted to believe he was a dope. That didn't include those Brits. Many people often make the mistake of misjudging other people's intelligence. It's fairly common.

Weird Dave said...


There is a statue of Reagan in London, one of the very few foreign leaders bestowed with that honor.


At the other end of the political spectrum, there is the massive bust of Karl Marx in Highgate Cemetery, erected in 1954 by the Communist Party of Great Britain.

On the other hand, I did like the Piers Morgan crack.

Dennis said...

Full disclosure, I saw it somewhere else and can't take credit. I'd give that person credit, but I think his name was guest. But thanks, I liked it, too.

I'm not sure your point about the Marx statue, though. You guys thought he was fairly intelligent, didn't you?

Weird Dave said...

Uh, the point is there are many statues in London. Some, even, of foreign leaders (not that Marx was).

And, if you read the link you would have seen his statue was paid for by private American money.

OBS said...

Sorry M.B. didn't mean to accidentally attract the stupid obsessive troll.

Dennis said...

I'm complying with the rules, OBS. But don't sweat it, this Captcha thing drives me bonkers.

Nyuk, nyuk, nyuk! said...

his statue was paid for by private American money.

Smackdown!!

Smut Clyde said...

one of the very few foreign leaders bestowed with that honor.

Dennis is repeating Breitbart there so don't expect much in the way of truth. As well as Marx, statues come to mind of Gandhi, Roosevelt, Lenin, Lincoln, de Gaulle and Mandela (after that I got bored). To be short, London is FULL OF STATUES.

Nyuk, nyuk, nyuk! said...

Yeah, but Reagan's statue is the only one made completely out of horseshit!

I fought the lawn. And the lawn won. said...

Why is it that the so-called free market never offers me Ronald Reagan toilet paper?