Will Bunch poses an important question on how we get back to "the reality based Reagan." I would argue that the country has started the process over the past four years with the sound rejection of the Republican orthodoxy as represented by George W. Bush, Dick Cheney, and Grover Norquist. Some in the Republican Party, particularly among the conservative wing, will continue to promote their version of Reagan that fits their ideology. This will have success in some areas such as Arizona where the populace is more conservative and inoculated fully with the mythology through organizations such as the Goldwater Institute (the South is also a prime target as well as pockets such as Orange County). Yet, on the national scale, it appears that the ideology has been largely rejected on many levels as evidenced by the congressional changes in 2006 and 2008 and the presidential election of 2008. Also, look, how successful have the Reagan supporters been at pushing their agenda over the past four years regarding the change in the dime, putting a Reagan memorial on the National Mall, and other efforts outside of the small pockets of conservative orthodoxy.

I also think that the historical record will add to the process, however, it will take time. The typical historical argument revolves around a process. In the initial stages, the people closest to the president (Eisenhower and Kennedy for example), set out to glorify his presidency, partly for self-serving reasons to make themselves and their activities look good. Also, sprinkled in are attacks on the president from his political opponents. In both cases, research and objective truths are victims in favor of polemics. However, as historians, political scientists and journalists start digging, they find a different view that often challenges the rigid orthodoxy of the court historians (in Reagan's case people like Peggy Noonan) so that a fuller picture develops. There are already good works such as those by Lou Cannon and Michael Schaller that have done a good job in this area and more on their way. It will take time, but I can attest to the fact that the majority of younger Americans really do not know much about Reagan (students starting at the university next year were typically born in 1991) and the "reality" based research and writing will shape that generation more than the polemics and the nostalgia that influence today's debates. I think the process is also accelerated by having public debates such as this one as sparked by Mr. Bunch's work.

Finally, I think that the process will accelerate even more because of the backlash by people who truly believe in Reagan and have become disgusted by the gross manipulation of his legacy by those associated with Bush and Cheney. I talked about this in detail in the conclusion of the set of essays that I organized called, Deconstructing Reagan: Conservative Mythology and America's Fortieth President. Books have already begun to appear as well as good articles such as Mickey Edwards (a founding member of the Heritage Foundation) in the Los Angeles Times (24 January 2009) entitled, "Reagan's GOP: Hardly" which appeared a day or so after Mr. Bunch wrote a good article in the same publication. Led by Reagan's closest advisers as well as the family members, the "true" defenders of his legacy have started denouncing the gross distortions of the people discussed in Tear Down This Myth. They recognize that Reagan's image has been in mainstream America damaged by the association with the hard line conservatives who Reagan would have spoke out against on many levels for their harshness, bigotry, and other negative actions. This will likely split the conservatives on many levels, especially as Bush and Cheney intensify their efforts at being memorialized within the party. The guilt by association will lead the Reagan people to further distance themselves from Bush, thus adding to a schism within the party where many of the ideologues still find themselves torn, particularly those on issues such as abortion where Bush's record actually is much better for the pro-lifers than that of Reagan. This is a process already underway, although I fear that the focus on Obama may help drive them together for the short-term.