Honor, but don't “Gloss Up” History in the Process

It is right and fitting that we honor, respect and remember President Reagan, the 40th under the Constitution, at his passing. However, I believe it is a disservice to him, his Presidency and American history to selectively report and reflect.

We should remember the good he did as President:

Engaging the Soviet Union:

That engagement lead to historic arms reduction and elimination treaties.

We should also remember the bad which happened under his watch:

Iran-Contra:

Those illegal actions led to the deaths of tens of thousands of Iranians and Nicaraguans.

Aaron Brown said it best last night on CNN's NewsNight:

"Good evening again, everyone. Back when Joe DiMaggio died, I wrote the obituary for my then employer and found myself struggling with how to be both respectful and accurate. Mr. DiMaggio was not always the nicest of men, but you don't want to quite say it that way.

So I settled on this. "He was, truth be told, prickly sometimes." Close enough and fair enough.

I mention this because we are faced with a similar, though far larger challenge where President Reagan is concerned. As the head of state we all mourn his passing and we celebrate his life. All of us can do that and should. That isn't about politics, it's about country.

But as a political leader, which the American president also is, there were successes and failures. There was controversy and achievement. And our coverage should reflect all of that, the good days and the bad. Iran-Contra is a chapter, as are the tax cuts. Beirut is as much a part of the story as Berlin.

It is a line we will walk carefully and respectfully over the next week."

I only hope the "fair and balanced" news sources walk the same way.