I SPENT MOST OF THE PAST WEEK TRYING TO DECIDE WHETHER TO ERASE MY RONALD REAGAN POST. In spite of my sincere efforts to be impartial towards the man, it seems I stirred up quite a hornet’s nest. Was it ill-timed criticism on my part, or petty partisanship? I guess it doesn’t matter now, since the post is officially gone.

Why did I wait so long to delete it? I decided to ensconse myself in the local library this past week, and read up on our former 40th President. I had thought this to be an advantageous move; it would give me the chance to truly understand Reagan’s policies and why they worked, or why they didn’t work.

Strange thing is, for every book I found that applauded the Gipper’s presidency, I found another that criticized it. Same goes for articles on the Net. Now, to be fair to Reagan, every source I found gave him credit for hastening the demise of the Soviet Union. No one doubts that Reagan’s policy of confronting Communism, as opposed to merely trying to contain it, forced the monster to retreat into its stygian den.

Reagan’s leadership style and domestic policies, on the other hand, met with differing responses. For every, “Reagan delegated much of the day-to-day responsibilities to others, because he had faith in the intellectual capacities of his Cabinet, and this allowed him to focus on a limited number of issues which he felt were at the core of his presidency,” there was a, “Reagan delegated much of the day-to-day responsibilities to others because of his intellectual limitations.”

For every, “Reaganomics worked. By cutting taxes to the rich, Reagan stimulated economic growth by inspiring the wealthy to invest in new capital, create jobs, and manufacture cheaper products,” there was a, “Reaganomics was a disaster-in-progress. Reagan couldn’t offset the loss of tax revenue while simultaneously building up the military without running huge deficits. And in the long term, no amount of reduced government spending (Another of Reagan’s core ideas) would have been able to offset the accumulated debt and interest.”

I actually read some of Rush Limbaugh’s take on why Reagan is the greatest American president ever. Then I read some of Al Franken’s argument why Reagan isn’t. The ball bounced back and forth all week. Stellar job market growth. Cuts to important government programs. Rediscovered American vitality and strength. Huge budget deficits. Reagan the Great Communicator. Reagan the consummate politician who wouldn’t take a stand on controversial issues.

By the end of last week, I took in so much that I could no longer decide what I really thought about the man. Had Reagan been a great President? Or had he just been acting the role of President for eight years? Did he really bring America back to its former glory? Or had he fooled everyone?

I didn’t figure out my answer until last Friday evening. I turned on the TV, and there was the Reagan funeral being broadcast live from California. It was very solemn, yet never somber. Hearing the Reagan family minister speak of Reagan on his way to heaven that very minute made the proceedings not a little uplifting. The way Reagan would have wanted it, one supposes. A generation of Reagan children gave warm and thoughtful eulogies to their father. There was no shortage of funny and moving stories from his old friends, old workmates. No shortage of testimony regarding Reagan’s inexhaustable sense of humor, nor his inextinguishable sense of optimism.

I’m not ashamed to say I teared up when the 40th First Lady, Nancy Reagan, was shown approaching her husband’s casket, and lay the side of her face against its surface. I changed the channel briefly. Nancy Reagan deserved this moment of privacy, I felt. When I switched back a few seconds later, the First Lady was standing again, assisted by an Armed Forces officer in uniform. As I watched her slowly being led away, I couldn’t help thinking of that line by Marlene Dietrich during the last scene in Orson Welles’ “Touch of Evil:”

It took place during an argument between an honest Mexican cop named Antonio Vargas, and Menzies, a California policeman. Vargas has just killed Menzies’ partner, the corrupt policeman Hank Quinlain. Menzies says Quinlain was a good man. Vargas disagrees.

Dietrich, who was watching them, says, “He was some kind of a man. Who cares what people say?”

Seeing and hearing the forty-gun salute performed for him, and the parade of loved ones bearing their grief for his passing, I found myself thinking the same thing about Ronald Reagan. Yes, he had been our President during an important decade in the history of the world, and his policies had caused no small share of controversy. But he had also loved a good woman. He had sired children, and raised them. His feet had tred on earth, and air had passed through his lungs. And he had made people glad to have known him.

In spite of all the partisan views we are tempted to raise, we must, in the end, say that Ronald Reagan had been some kind of a man. In spite of any doubts we may harbor about his greatness, we must, in the end, realize it doesn’t matter what any of us say.