The fuss over Ronald Reagan at 100
Enough already with the Ronald Reagan overkill. Thank goodness it will be another century before his next 100th birthday.
Just to put things in perspective, I did an advanced search of The Post's archive to see whether the other recent 100th presidential birthday - LBJ's in 2008 - got anywhere near the amount of ink that The Post has devoted to Ronald Reagan's centennial. Lo and behold, I couldn't find even one mention of Lyndon B. Johnson's 100th.
Two accomplished presidents, both of whom left indelible imprints on our public life, each of them admired and despised by large segments of the population.
Yet one totally ignored by The Post on his 100th birthday while the other has been the object of a steady stream of articles to commemorate the event.
Granted, LBJ's 100th was in August, right in the thick of the 2008 presidential season, but still.
Partisanship this extreme I would have never expected from The Post.
Ralph A. Blessing, Washington
Ann Hornaday's Feb. 7 Style article on Eugene Jarecki's documentary "Reagan" described Ronald Reagan as a "child of the Depression and Franklin Roosevelt's New Deal."
Reagan was born in 1911; he was 18 and a college student at the time of the stock market crash in 1929, generally held to be the beginning of the Great Depression.
He was 21 and a college graduate when FDR was elected, and was working in radio by the time Roosevelt was inaugurated and launched the New Deal in 1933.
No matter how clever the phrase, to call Ronald Reagan a "child" of the Depression or the New Deal simply makes no sense.
Ed Olivares, Fredericksburg