Ronald Reagan: How an Ordinary Man Became an Extraordinary Leader

by Dinesh D'Souza

Ronald Reagan: How and Ordinary Man Became an Extraordinary Leader
292 pp. In this enlightening new look at one of our most successful, most popular, and least understood presidents, bestselling author and former Reagan aide Dinesh D'Souza shows how this "ordinary" man was able to transform the political landscape in a way that made a permanent impact on America and the world. Ronald Reagan is a thoughtful and honest assessment of how this underestimated president became a truly extraordinary leader.

Genres: Biography, History, Politics, Nonfiction, Presidents, American History, Biography Memoir

304 pages, Paperback

First published January 1, 1997

About the author

Dinesh D’Souza is a political commentator, bestselling author, filmmaker and a former policy analyst in the Reagan White House, Dinesh D'Souza graduated Phi Beta Kappa from Dartmouth College in 1983. He served as John M. Olin Fellow at the American Enterprise Institute, and the Robert and Karen Rishwain Fellow at the Hoover Institution at Stanford University. D'Souza writes primarily about Christianity, patriotism and American politics.

Reviews

[Amora · Rating 4 out of 5]

Over 35 scholars and people close to Reagan contributed to this book, including Mikhail Gorbachev himself! Former Reagan advisor Dinesh D'Souza gives us a personal portrait of Ronald Reagan that covers his successes and failures as governor of California and president. D'Souza goes over his experience with governing California, passing tax reform, the Iran-Contra affair, undermining the Soviet Union, and interacting with his cabinet and constituents. I love the detail out into biography and I loved every interview he conducted. Excellent biography.

[Brian · Rating 5 out of 5]

According to my high school and university US history textbooks, Regan was an actor who expanded the national debt tremendously and happened to be president during the fall of the Soviet Union.

This book clearly explains what Regan actually accomplished. It also lists the major criticism of his presidency, and addresses the merits or (more often) the falseness of each. It also analyzes his leadership skills and style and what made him successful. There is much to be learned not only from what he did, but how he did it.

Regan was an incredible man, who influenced the world for good in significant ways. Common history textbooks try to rob him of his greatness by avoiding the major issues of his presidency. This book tells what really happened.

[Carrie Daws · Rating 5 out of 5]

I don't read a lot of biography. I suspect the bottom line reason is because they are a lot of work for me. You see, I love the story behind people's lives,what helped shape them into who they became, what influenced their ideas to form the person who made the choices they made. But I have a basic problem: I get lost in the names.

This affects my reading in all genres, including fiction books with large scripts of people. I remember quite clearly the struggle to continue through the first several chapters in Ted Dekker's Circle Series. I had to consciously choose to keep reading when I hit Chapter 2 and realized I would have to keep track of people in two different worlds. At some point in many books, my mind drops the characters it deems of little consequence. Of course, this sometimes causes problems when these characters sneak up on me several chapters later and I'm furiously trying to remember why I should know them. (I love authors who include character lists with their books!)

And so, in spite of enjoying history and the backstories of people, I subconsciously avoid biographies. So it was with upon the recommendation of two different people that I highly respect that I picked up Dinesh D'Souza's book and trudged my way through it.

Ronald Reagan: How an Ordinary Man Became an Extraordinary Leader did not disappoint me, although I'm confident I've forgotten the names of three-quarters of the people the author mentions. Mr. D'Souza includes enough of Reagan's one liners and humorous stories to keep the reading entertaining while including insights that show he clearly watched and studied the man himself.

Possibly this section from the book sums the former President up the best: "He was a realist who had a low view of human nature; at the same time, he was an optimist who had a high view of human possibility. He was a tolerant man who nevertheless had fixed and unalterable convictions. He was gregarious and liked people, yet he was a loner who seemed happiest by himself." Reagan was clearly a paradox.

Yet as I read the stories the author chose to include, the commentary based on what he knew and the information he received from others, I gained greater respect for him as a man and as President. And I laughed many times at his wit and quips.

If you've ever wanted to know more about Ronald Reagan and understand some of his reasonings and motivations behind decisions he made, this is definitely a book you should consider.

[Stanky Leg II · Rating 4 out of 5]

Ronald rocks. He was one of the greats. This book felt like a fanboy ramble, but it was warranted.

[Larry Taylor · Rating 1 out of 5]

sad ultra conservative propaganda

[Frederick Hammill · Rating 1 out of 5]

The author should invest in a more extensive editing process (and better editor!).

[Fred Kohn · Rating 3 out of 5]

Hoo boy, this book was a mixed bag! Half way through, I was sure I was going to give it two stars and open my review with, "The best thing about this book was that it wasn't horrible." But the last two chapters and epilogue were much more in keeping with the spirit of a biography then the early chapters I had been slogging through. Until then, the book didn't even really qualify as a biography. It was more of an apologetic, and apologetics is more suited for religion than politics.

D'Souza is a brilliant polemicist for the New Right, and his arguments cannot simply be waved off. I have done a fair bit of reading on Reagan's economic programs, and although it was painful to read the chapter on that side of Reagan, it was instructive as well. For example, I immediately noticed that when D'Souza writes, "Ed Meese told Reagan that the White house had a verbal assurance from the Democratic leadership on the Hill that for every dollar Reagan would approve in tax increases, Congress would approve three dollars in spending cuts" (p 102), that statement can be perfectly true, although any student of the so-called three-for-one deal knows that Ed Meese was completely mistaken. This required me digging back through my notes to find this passage from The Deficit and the Public Interest: The Search for Responsible Budgeting in the 1980s

In essence, the funny numbers, meant to impress voters and maybe markets, fooled the president. They also fooled Donald Regan and Ed Meese. When eventually somebody (Stockman blames Kemp) told Reagan that Congress did not give him any three-for-one, the president felt betrayed. Believing the administration had been "snookered," "screwed," "hornswoggled" on TEFRA, Reagan, Regan, and Meese became very suspicious of other compromises.

To Stockman, Baker, Darman, and congressional leaders, this sense of betrayal was ludicrous; no one ever said Congress would pass three-for-one. The resolution was clear enough about that. But when Stockman perceived, during the fight to pass TEFRA, that Reagan might have missed the point, there wasn't much the budget director could do. If he tried to clear up the confusion, Reagan might have changed his mind on TEFRA itself. Instead, Stockman let it slide and hoped for the best. He could not have anticipated the endless recriminations that would follow, outlasting him in the administration. In a letter to Reagan on January 16, 1984, for example, Senator [Bob] Dole [Head of Senate Finance Committee] had to write:

"The most frequently voiced objections to packaging new spending cuts and revenue increases together is that Congress would enact the new taxes but renege on the spending cuts. These critics cite as evidence the alleged failure of Congress in 1982 to deliver any of the promised three dollars in spending cuts for each dollar of tax increase. I respectfully submit, Mr. President, that you were not "taken in" by this budget plan."

So I actually learned a valuable tidbit from D'Souza's statement about Meese— that a lot of the smoke being blown around the Reagan administration came from this guy. This is also verified indirectly by comparing D'Souza's statement: "[An overall increase in tax revenues produced by a reduction of overall tax rates] obviously didn't happen, but no prominent supply sider said it would, and neither did the Reagan administration, whose budget projections, available for inspection in public documents, all show an expected loss in revenue due to the tax cuts (p 116)" to Stockman's account. This is a particularly brazen statement on D'Souza's part, because the public documents he is referring to were of course prepared by David Stockman, whom D'Souza calls "an economic genius but a political dunce" who should have been fired for going against Reagan's economic program! Stockman recounts in gory detail in The Triumph of Politics: Why the Reagan Revolution Failed how his budget projections were rejected by the supply siders in Reagan's administration, particularly Ed Meese:

At the end of the dessert, I passed out a stack of thick black binders, each one forty-two pages long. Groans around the table— another Stockman paper flood …

For the purposes of the August 3 briefing, I had continued to assume an early, powerful supply-side expansion— 5 percent real GNP growth. Nevertheless, page 20 should have been an eye opener. It showed that even with a forecast more compatible with the monetary policy actually in effect, the deficit would rise to $81 billion in 1983— and reach $112 billion by 1986.

When I had finished with this part of the briefing, I turned to look at the President. He looked . . . not very well, and it had nothing to do with his health. That was when he said I seemed to be agreeing with Tip O'Neill. Ed Meese jumped in, as he usually did when he saw that his boss was discomfited and at a loss.

"What about the revenue feedback from the tax bill?" he asked. "You haven't taken account of that in these scary numbers." His tone was slightly annoyed.

Meese was referring, of course, to the Laffer curve. The whole California gang (my emphasis) had taken it literally (and primitively). The way they talked, they seemed to expect that once the supply-side tax cut was in effect, additional revenue would start to fall, manna-like, from the heavens.

Since January, I had been explaining that there is no literal Laffer curve. "Higher real GNP and employment growth will not increase projected revenue by a dime," I reiterated. "Remember, we're putting the squeeze on inflation at the same time. That will bring down the growth rate of money GNP and federal revenue. The budget benefit of the cobined anti-inflation and tax cut program comes entirely on the spending side. We get lower outlays for unemplyment-related programs and indexed entitlements. But there is no revenue feedback. What you see is all we've got."

I had repeated this little lecture until I was blue in the face. But they never stopped asking about the magical Laffer curve. So, confident that the question would come up again in the face of my dire warnings about deficits, I had prepared a special tab in the new briefing book showing why there was no Laffer curve when you were trying to cure a high-inflation, low-growth economy.

As I looked around the table, it was evident that I had accomplished . . . nothing. Those who already understood (Anderson, Darman, and Weidenbaum) nodded their heads. The others were puzzled, bored, or annoyed.

OK so having said my peace about economics, I have to confess I am not that familiar with the issues surrounding Reagan's foreign policy. My general feeling here is that Reagan did better, and D'Sousa is on more solid ground in defending his hero. What I found to be true gold here were the endnotes, which alerted me to a lot of new material I was unaware of, and which is must read.

Summing it all up, although I find D'Souza a completely annoying New Righter who can only seem to see things in terms of conservative/liberal, hawk/dove, and those who love Reagan or hate him, he is a fine writer and a (mostly) logical thinker who is instructive to read.

[Daniel Wilson · Rating 5 out of 5]

What an insightful look into Reagan’s public and private life! D’Souza summarized Reagan’s paradoxical personality by writing, “He was a tolerant man who had fixed convictions. He liked people, yet he was a loner. He spent short hours at work, but accomplished a great deal. He was genuine in his religious beliefs, but didn’t go to church. He was an advocate of family values, but had difficult relationships with his children…” While much of the book dealt with Reagan’s economic and foreign policies, it also delved into his personal life. This was just an enjoyable book to read and to remember what it was like growing at the time when the Soviet Union was crumbling and the Cold War was winding down. My only qualm with the book is the final chapter where D’Souza lambasts Bush, Clinton, Dole, Gingrich, and others as horrible politicians compared to Reagan. He makes it sound as if Reagan was the only good politician since Washington.

[Bryn D · Rating 4 out of 5]

Not so much a biography as it is a snapshot of the character and philosophy of Ronald Reagan. This is a very good book to learn what Reagan stood for and how he conducted himself in policy making. What we learn was that he was a principled Conservative but not so stubborn to accept only all or nothing in his proposed legislation.

Though the author is one of today's most influential conservative authors, he does provide accounts of Reagan's failures and contradictions. For example Reagan was a strong family values advocate but was divorced and had a distant relationship with his kids. He was a warm person to all but had few close friends. He invoked God in his speeches but was rare church goer.

In a way I couldn't help but compare him to President Lincoln for they had very similar personalities.

-Both were treated by the press as country bumpkin ignoramuses
-Both had a cabinet that at times thought lowly of their boss
-Both were witty and known for their humorous stories and anecdotes
-Both were devoted to their eccentric wives
-Both were principled and took criticism with grace and not easily swayed by public opinion
-Both were amazing orators and wrote many of their own speeches
-Both were upholding the rule of law and a military policy of "peace through strength"
-Both stood up to major adversaries and risked/conducted wars based on principle to the ideals set forth by the Declaration of Independence and Constitution.

Overall this was a good book and at times read like a eulogy and provides readers with a general overview of Reagan's life, philosophy, and presidency.

[Michael · Rating 4 out of 5]

DInesh D'Souza before he went insane. This is a good overview of President Reagan's time in the American spotlight. I always liked Reagan. I imagine that for many people in my generation, Reagan was like JFK was for my parents' generation: better in memory than he was in reality. Both Reagan and Kennedy had that intangible, all too rare quality in a President: leadership (actually, the longer I live, the more I see how rare a quality that is in any organization). Both JFK and Reagan have a certain mythology surrounding them, and tend to be viewed through the ideological prism of the viewer. I enjoyed this book, and thought the author--a deeply conservative man--was as balanced as he could be. Obviously a big fan of Ronald Reagan, D'Souza still managed to cast a critical light on the former President's failings and weaknesses, which is all you can ask for in a biographer.

Worth reading if you like history, politics, and Reagan. Unfortunately, Mr. D'Souza has taken a turn toward crazy town in recent years (this book was published in 1998). I fear that the author has, quite literally, become unglued by the Presidency of Barak Obama. It's unfortunate because D'Souza's first few books were really good. Now he's producing movies that say President Obama is a Kenyan anti-colonial Muslim or something. It's sad.

Four out of five stars just because the author recently dumped his wife of many years for some young hoodsie. Jerk.

[Zach Koenig · Rating 5 out of 5]

Because a Ronald Reagan installment in Arthur Schlesinger's "The American Presidents" series has not been released yet, I had to turn elsewhere for my next President fix. I chose the right source here, as Dinesh D'Souza crafts a marvelous bio of one of the more interesting Presidents in the history of the Oval Office.

What I like about this book is that even though it is relatively clear that D'Souza is a "Reagan fan", he starts the book with all the criticisms thrown at Reagan in the years since his presidency. He then systematically goes through all of those points, showing BOTH how they are wrong AND how they are right. D'Souza is ready to admit where Reagan may have been weak, while also more than willing to examine Reagan's critics and show where they may have been wrong as well.

I also like how D'Souza examines the personal side of Reagan as much as the political side, as he realizes the two are deeply linked. That is the approach I like in bios, where the author realizes that the personal affects the professional and vice-versa.

All in all, this bio of President Reagan was exceptional. D'Souza writes in a format that is accessible to all, while not dumbing-down the content whatsoever. In this glad, I'm kind of glad that I had to stray from my typical "American Presidents" series!

[Adam · Rating 4 out of 5]

Explains some of Reagan's eccentric characteristics both as a man and as a leader. Not apparant to me in previous studies is Reagan's aloof attitude when it comes to personal relationships. He was intimately close with his 2nd wife Nancy. However his cabinet, staff, and even his children seem to have a much different interpretation.

What this has that Reagan's Diaries do not is a connection from his personality to the major events of his Presidency. Reagan was able to stick to his wills on highly criticized goals like taxes, Reaganomics, and the beginning of the end of Communism... both in the Soviet Union and Central America. What's particularly interesting is the Reagan Gorbechev relationship. It's not entirely Reagan strong-arming the Soviet Union. Gorbechev's willingness to adopt more of a western lifestyle for his people has a noticeable contribution in the decline of Communism.

The author is clearly pro Reagan, goes so far in certain places that I think it's speculation on the author's part. For example the part where he explains that Reagan had been stringing along Sam Donaldson in the press conferences, in some kind of subliminal feat of willpower....not sure how the author could possibly know that.

[Connor Mcdermott · Rating 4 out of 5]

In this chapter of the book the author explains how Reagan looks like he is a bad politician because he was an average student at a school that wasn't very good which made him not a very smart man. It was also said that he was a distant person and hard to talk to.

In this chapter it is extensively discussed how the tax cut policies that Reagan put into place effected America. It was good for some people but during this time a lot of people were laid off of their jobs. It was also discussed how Reagan admired hardworking Americans.

In this chapter of the book the main focus is how Reagan dealt with the cold war. It discuses how he is often criticized for the way he handled it but as usual the author defends Reagan but the evidence is not very strong so one could think he did not do a good job.

In this chapter it describes how when Reagan was governor in the 1960s he developed his interest in the nuclear missile defense program. It said how he started it and how The Soviet union collapsed and the cold war came to an end.

In the epilogue of this book it was discussed how the presidents after Reagan performed while in office. It discussed there good and bad actions in office. The epilogue did not really touch upon his life afterward surprisingly.

[Joseph · Rating 3 out of 5]

The best parts where was near the end of the chapters 'The Man Behind the Mask' and 'Spirit of a Leader.' There were other chapters that weren't bad either 'They Don't Call it Readanomics Anymore." Then were a few that I skimmed over more. Overall pretty good and some of things he outlines of what he did accomplish and all the foes he faced were very good. He laid out the groundwork of how many critics were quick to blame or dismiss, then when proven wrong those same people then twisted things they said. It is interesting to see how much opposition he faced in the first some odd months to year into his presidency, which still holds true to now as Trump has taken office. Back then they said give the guy a chance, but I guess things change...

[Kyth Palma · Rating 5 out of 5]

A great book to appreciate and analyze who Ronald Reagan was. A great president who was doubted and undermined. Rose to become an excellent communicator, an impressive decision-maker, shrouded with great mystery of who he really was. An adroit leader who transformed America back to its greatness, spread democracy and created a booming economy in using unique strategy in approaching economy. His administration was a remarkable time for Americans. Considered to be one of the greatest American Presidents to the likeness of Franklin D. Roosevelt.

[Jasmyn · Rating 5 out of 5]

This was a great book about an incredible man--I read this right after we got back from our European trip, since we stood in Berlin and had Julie quote him as saying "Mr. Gorbachev, tear down this wall!" and I had no idea he was that forceful during the Cold War. He also passed away while we were in Europe and there were things about him written in all the European papers. A man of great courage and conviction--I loved this biography.

[Steve · Rating 5 out of 5]

A wonderfully written biographical defense of Reagan's presidency. D'Souza is fair and includes both Reagan's blunders and achievements. This is a good book to recap Reagan's own autobiography, An American Life. It is much shorter and leaves out a lot of details. The book is also replete with Reagan's witticisms and D'Souza's own humor. A must read for any Reaganite, or a gift to those other folks...

[Jenni · Rating 5 out of 5]

One of the most interesting, informative, and moving books I've ever read. Despite the intensity of political/historical information, the book is surprisingly easy to read and moves quickly. This is the history of Reagan no student will find in any text book. Ought to be required reading. Brilliant.

[Becky · Rating 5 out of 5]

I've always wanted to know more about Reagan and this was a great book to get to know him better. He truly was what a leader ought to be. Of course he had flaws, but he was who America needed at the time and he served selflessly and courageously - in a way that reminds me of how the founding fathers served, not as politicians, for power or gain, but as leaders and servants.

[John · Rating 5 out of 5]

This is one of the best biographical books I've ever read. By the end it had accomplished something all such books should aspire to; to make you feel as though you have spent time with the subject. The book is worth it alone for the chapter contrasting Reagan's prescience regarding the decrepitude of the Soviet Union with the gormless admiration demonstrated by Ivy League so-called experts.

[Lisa · Rating 3 out of 5]

D'Souza includes a short history of current events in the 60s and 70s that led to the challenges faced by Gov. and Pres. Reagan. That was very helpful for me. This seems to have been written during a time when Reagan wasn't yet considered "one of the greats" like he is today (to me!). I had a hard time putting this book down.

[Aaron · Rating 5 out of 5]

I'm glad that I made the time to finish this book. What an extraordinary man at an extraordinary time in history. We'll never know how different our world would be had JFK not been assassinated. I'm glad that Reagan survived the same attempt on his life. As I travel the world I can now see the difference Reagan made in hindsight.

[Brian Davis · Rating 5 out of 5]

The WORLD needs another Ronald Reagan right now. That is all I could think about reading this book. His brand of leadership...devoid of concern about political consequences and totally dependent upon moral concience and faith is so far from what we see from most leaders today.

[Steve C · Rating 5 out of 5]

It's been a while, and I can't remember the details. But this was truly a great book. Reagan was a great man and people continually tried to be a part of his inner circle. But he let no one in except for his wife.

[Nate · Rating 5 out of 5]

I found that it gave a fair and well rounded view of Reagan. It showcase his strengths and did not whitewash his weaknesses or failings. If you are seeking to learn of the greatest president that America has seen in the last hundred years, then I recommend this book.

[Eric · Rating 3 out of 5]

I always enjoy reading about Reagan. D'Sousa's book was informative but nothing was new was gleaned compared to other books about Reagan I have read. If you have seen or read any recent works by D'Sousa, you can see how he has matured and honed his craft since this book was written in 1997.

[s h · Rating 5 out of 5]

Great subject matter. The political humor had me laughing uncontrollably at times. Once started I couldn't put the book down losing sleep and missing meals. Definitely Dinesh's best book followed by "Letters to a Young Conservative".

[Matt · Rating 5 out of 5]

Excellent book!

[Sheralyn Belyeu · Rating 5 out of 5]

Funny and perceptive book about Ronald Reagan's political successes and leadership skills.

[Lisa · Rating 5 out of 5]

Love it! Love it!