Advertise on podcast: Truce

Give to help Chris make Truce Russia began attacking Ukraine in February of 2014. The full-scale invasion started in 2022. Since then, the people of Ukraine have fought to protect their homeland, while also trying to continue with their daily lives. They have to cook, take the kids to school, go to work, and fall in love. All the while, bombs are falling in their country. Hospitals, schools, energy sites, and homes are all targets. How are people in Ukraine addressing the mental health crisis there? On this special bonus episode, I'm playing a conversation for you that I had with my friend Jiří Pasz. He's an author, journalist, and photographer who travels the world looking for answers. What causes people to be evil? To be good? To act like humans? He is part of a collaborative project, Invisible Wounds. We'll also be playing clips from his discussions with Anatoli Raichinets (Deputy General Secretary of the Ukrainian Bible Society and a pastor of an evangelical church in Kyiv) and Grigori Semenchuk (Ukrainian poet, musician, and cultural manager). Sources: https://www.reuters.com/business/energy/russia-expands-attacks-energy-facilities-western-ukraine-2026-10-20/ https://www.pbs.org/newshour/show/ukraine-disputes-trumps-claim-of-energy-ceasefire-as-russian-diesel-deal-draws-fire https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/cjn5v21py07vo https://www.nytimes.com/2026/10/11/world/europe/trump-zelensky-diesel-energy-russia-.html https://www.dailywire.com/news/ben-shapiro-confronts-zelensky-on-christian-persecution-and-conscription-in-exclusive-interview Discussion Questions: What do you think about Donald Trump's plan to lift sanctions against Russian diesel? What role do we have in critiquing our elected officials? How do we know that we're not in a cult? Why is it important that we love our enemies? Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices

Give to help Chris make Truce Homeschooling is a controversial subject. It began as something done by counter-culture folks and morphed into a beloved practice by fundamentalists and evangelicals. It has yielded students who excel over their public school peers... but also a good many people who are woefully undereducated. There have been legal fights over this method of education for decades, including some that RJ Rushdoony championed. As we wrap up season 6 and ask, "What is the legacy of the Religious Right?" we must include homeschooling. It has become almost a litmus test in evangelical circles. If you don't homeschool your children, it can even cause some members of your church to question your parenting. Our special guest today is Shawn Peters, who co-wrote the book Homeschooling: The History and Philosophy of a Controversial Practice with James G. Dwyer. Sources: Homeschooling: The History and Philosophy of a Controversial Practice by James G. Dwyer and Shawn Peters Education in Massachusetts: Early Legislation and History by George Barrell Emerson How Stuff Works article about public schools Christian Reconstruction: RJ Rushdoony and American Religious Conservatism by Michael McVicar Questions: Do you know people who were homeschooled? How did they turn out? How did the movement get started? What role did RJ Rushdoony play in keeping it going? What are some positive things about public education? What are some negative things? Can Christians leave society and still expect it to act in Christian ways? Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices

Give to help Chris make Truce How do we interpret the Constitution? It seems like an easy question, right? It turns out, it's quite difficult. As we wrap up season 6 of Truce, we're exploring some of the things that conservative evangelicals got out of their partnership with the GOP. One of the things they got was constitutional originalism. Constitutional originalism is a theory of interpretation that holds the Constitution should be understood according to its original public meaning at the time it was adopted. Originalists argue that this approach anchors constitutional law in objective historical meaning, rather than in the personal values or policy preferences of modern judges. By tying interpretation to the text as it was originally understood, originalism aims to preserve democratic legitimacy: changes in constitutional meaning should come from amendments passed by the people, not from judicial reinterpretation. Supporters also claim that originalism promotes stability and predictability in the law by constraining judicial discretion. Critics of originalism counter that the Constitution was written in broad, open-ended language precisely to allow adaptation to changing social and technological conditions. They argue that strict adherence to historical meanings can freeze outdated norms into modern law and fail to address contemporary realities the framers could not have foreseen. In practice, critics also contend that historical evidence is often ambiguous, allowing judges to selectively invoke history to reach preferred outcomes. As a result, the debate over originalism reflects a deeper tension between constitutional stability and constitutional flexibility in a living society. Our special guest is Austin Steelman, historian at Clemson University. Sources: These Truths by Jill LePore Reagan by Bob Spitz Griswold v. Conn. from Oyez.org Article about Robert Bork Robert Kennedy's speech about Bork on C-SPAN (about 27 minutes in) Article about Gorsuch and originalism Article about Kavanaugh AP story about Barrett's philosophy Discussion: What is constitutional originalism? Why might some people like it? Dislike it? Are there questions in US law that are not addressed by the Constitution? What are some examples? How should those be addressed in an originalist worldview? In a worldview that sees it as a living document? Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices

Give to help Chris make Truce Kristin Kobes Du Mez is best known for her book Jesus and John Wayne, which looked at masculinity in American evangelicalism. Her new book, out now, does the same for femininity and positivity. Women today are often told to "live, laugh, love" and focus on the positive. They are to put mind over matter, even though that concept is not explicitly stated in the Bible. This attitude can make women susceptible to abusive relationships, scams, and multi-level marketing schemes. The book covers a wide swath of history, from Love Comes Softly to The Total Woman and the Little House books. Kristin and I had a lot of fun geeking out over history. I'm excited for you to hear it! Discussion Questions: What are some of the messages that women get in your type of Christianity? How do they differ from what men hear? What is Keswick Holiness? How did it inform the Pentecostal movement? What is New Thought? How do these ideas push people toward free-market capitalism? What about multi-level marketing? Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices

Give to help Chris make Truce Can you believe it? The Truce podcast has crossed the 200-episode mark! Actually, this is something like the 203rd episode... but we still need to celebrate! In this special bonus episode, Nick Staron joins Chris to answer listener questions like: What was the most difficult interview you've ever done? How do you decide how long a season should be? Which books have shaped your worldview? Have you ever considered doing a season on liberal Protestantism? and more! Thank you SO MUCH for your help in making this show. I really appreciate your prayers and that you're sharing this project with your friends. God willing, there will be a new episode in two weeks. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices

Give to help Chris make Truce Richard Vigueries. What can be written about him? His nickname was "the founding father of the Religious Right". He founded RAVCO, which was a fundraising organization that raised money for... well, who didn't it raise money for? In his book, Takeover, Viguerie laid out a detailed plan of how the far right could take over the Republican Party. It is a fascinating book, one that may not have had an overwhelming impact, but the idea within the book has. In this special epsiode, Chris walks listeners through the book and the impact of the ideas inside. Sources: Takeover by Richard Viguerie Reaganland and Before the Storm by Rick Perlstein The Evangelicals by Frances Fitzgerald God's Own Party by Daniel K Williams Revive Us Again by Joel Carpenter These Truths by Jill LePore A Choice Not An Echo by Phyllis Schlafly The Lord's Prayer Discussion Questions: Who was Richard Viguerie? What are some of his grievances? Why do you think he skipped the Republican presidents of the 1920s in his history? What did he think of FDR? Of Robert Taft? How do you see the conservative wound in this book? What were some of Viguerie's prescribed tactics for taking over the GOP? Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices

Give to help Chris make Truce Our season has spent a lot of time looking at how some evangelicals tied themselves to the GOP as the party became more conservative. But not every evangelical Republican was taken in by the conservative swing. In this episode, we're taking a look at Senator Mark Hatfield, an evangelical Republican who didn't follow the pack. Senator Mark Hatfield had a long and influential career in public service spanning nearly five decades. After serving in the U.S. Navy during World War II and earning degrees from Willamette University and Stanford University, Hatfield began his political journey in the Oregon Legislature, winning election to the Oregon House of Representatives in 1950 and then to the Oregon State Senate in 1954. He went on to become Oregon’s youngest Secretary of State at age 34 and was elected Governor of Oregon in 1958, where he served two terms and oversaw the expansion of the state’s infrastructure and environmental programs. In 1966, Hatfield was elected to the U.S. Senate, beginning a 30-year tenure that made him the longest-serving senator in Oregon’s history at the time. In the Senate, Hatfield was known as a moderate Republican who often put conscience ahead of party, particularly on issues of war and defense spending. Deeply shaped by his wartime experiences and Christian faith, he consistently opposed military authorization bills, including votes against the Vietnam War and the Persian Gulf War, and co-sponsored efforts like a nuclear freeze resolution. Hatfield twice chaired the powerful Senate Appropriations Committee, using that position to direct federal funds to Oregon for health, transportation, and research projects, and to support biomedical research at institutions like the National Institutes of Health. His independent approach earned him respect across party lines, and although the GOP shifted rightward over time, he remained a distinctive figure in national politics until his retirement in 1997. Sources: IMDB and Amazon reviews of the movie Bringing up Bobby Stand Alone or Go Home by Lon Fendall Transcript of the Keynote Address by Gov. Hatfield at G.O.P. Convention, NY Times, July 14, 1964 “CONVENTION ENDS; Extremism in Defense of Liberty ‘No Vice,’ Arizonan Asserts” New York Times, July 17, 1964 Before the Storm by Rick Perlstein With God on Our Side by William C Martin FBI files on Mark Hatfield from archive.org Conflict and Conscience by Mark O. Hatfield. Between A Rock and A Hard Place by Mark O Hatfield Nixonland by Rick Perlstein “When a Candidate Conspired With a Foreign Power to Win An Election” by John A Farrell. Politico website, August 6, 2017. H. R. 17123 “The Amendment to End the War” Bill Bright and Campus Crusade for Christ by John G Turner One Nation Under God by Rus Walton “Born Again Politics” New York Times by Gary Wills. August 1, 1976. Congressional record, February 28, 1978. Discussion Questions: How would you describe Hatfield's faith? How did Hatfield defy conservative Republican evangelicals? Why did Hatfield oppose the Vietnam War? Would you have the courage to do what Hatfield did? Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices

Give to help Chris make Truce Jimmy Swaggart was caught in a major controversy in the late 1980s. It involved the famous American televangelist, who was a leading figure in Pentecostal Christianity. In 1988, Swaggart publicly admitted to “moral failure” after reports surfaced that he had been involved with a prostitute, behavior that directly contradicted the strict moral standards he preached. The revelation led to his suspension by the Assemblies of God, his church denomination, and caused significant damage to his reputation and ministry. Swaggart delivered a widely televised, tearful confession, which became one of the most memorable moments in religious broadcasting, symbolizing broader concerns at the time about hypocrisy, accountability, and power among high-profile televangelists. This proved to be a problem for Pat Robertson, who was running for president. Just as he needed his conservative brothers and sisters on his side... they disappeared or chose another politician. When he lost the race, he continued his streak of being shelved by politicians. He and other evangelicals with large followings placed their hope in politicians to save them. Only to find disappointment. Sources: The Evangelicals by Frances Fitzgerald Reaganland by Rick Perlstein Pat Robertson: A Life and Legacy by David Edwin Harrell Jr. Andrews, T. M. (2017). The Rev. Marvin Gorman, who prompted Jimmy Swaggart's downfall in the '80s, dies at 83 Art Harris, W. P. (1988, Feb 26). Jimmy Swaggart's secret life in the world of no-tell motels 'shouting, weeping' Preacher was just another man on prowl. Toronto Star RNC National Convention speeches 1988, around 2:35:00 God's Own Party by Daniel K Williams PETER STEINFELS (1989, Jun 12). Moral majority to dissolve; says mission accomplished. New York Times Rolling Stone Magazine article on Jay Sekulow. By Andrew Perez, January 3, 2024 Washington Post article about Robertson's death Discussion Questions How did success become a problem for the Moral Majority and Christian Coalition? Why is it a problem that we keep being marketed to with fear? How could conservative evangelicals argue both that they were the majority AND a persecuted minority? Why does it matter? Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices

Give to help Chris make Truce. Pat Robertson’s bid for the 1988 Republican presidential nomination (often discussed in 1989 contexts because of its aftermath) marked a notable moment in American politics, as a prominent televangelist moved out of religious broadcasting and directly into the national political arena. After building a large following through his Christian Broadcasting Network and The 700 Club, Robertson formally entered the Republican primary race in late 1987, having first set an unusual condition for his candidacy: he would run only if three million Americans pledged support through petitions to pray, work and contribute to his campaign—an effort that succeeded and gave him a built-in grassroots base. His platform blended standard conservative Republican positions—such as lower taxes and strong defense—with a strong emphasis on social and moral issues informed by his evangelical Christian worldview. During the 1988 primary season, Robertson surprised many political observers by finishing second in the Iowa caucuses, ahead of Vice President George H.W. Bush and indicating the mobilizing power of evangelical voters in early nominating contests. However, he struggled to maintain momentum as voting moved to later states: his support weakened in more diverse primary electorates, and he did not win a competitive share of delegates nationwide. Ultimately, Robertson suspended his campaign in 1988, later endorsing Bush, who went on to win the nomination and presidency. In the aftermath of his presidential run, Robertson organized the Christian Coalition in 1989, which became a significant force in mobilizing conservative Christian voters and shaping Republican politics in the 1990s and beyond. His campaign was plagued by the public falls of other televangelists like Jim and Tammy Faye Bakker. Our special guest for this episode is John Wigger. Sources PTL: The Rise and Fall of Jim and Tammy Faye Bakker’s Evangelical Empire by John Wigger Pat Robertson: A Life and Legacy by David Edwin Harrell Jr. God's Own Party by Daniel K Williams "Clean Up Radio Everywhere" (Season 3, Episode 22) WKRP in Cincinnati Prime Time Preachers by Jeffrey K. Hadden and Charles E. Swann. Fager, C. (1982, May 05). Falwell and co.--on the skids... or speeding up? In these Times Interview with Frances Fitzgerald on the Gospel Coalition The Evangelicals by Frances Fitzgerald Reaganland by Rick Perlstein “CBN'S Pat Robertson: White House Next?” Saturday Evening Post, March 1985. by Cory SerVaas M D. and Maynard Good Stoddard. ABC News story on the Bakkers Interview with Falwell on the Bakker scandal Discussion Questions A lot of evangelicals with large followings are super into entrepreneurship. Why is that? How does it change evangelicalism? Why would it be risky for Robertson to have extraction interests in poor countries? How did the public falls of televangelists impact Robertson? What is there to be learned from the Tim and Tammy Faye Bakker scandals? Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices

Give to help Chris make Truce. The Iran-Contra Affair was a major political scandal in the United States during the second term of President Ronald Reagan in the mid-1980s. At its core, the affair involved the secret sale of arms to Iran—despite an arms embargo—in the hopes of securing the release of American hostages held by Hezbollah in Lebanon. These sales were initiated covertly by members of the U.S. government, who believed they could foster better relations with moderate elements in Iran while also achieving humanitarian aims. The operation violated official U.S. policy and Congressional restrictions, particularly the Boland Amendment, which explicitly prohibited aid to the Contra rebels in Nicaragua. The second part of the scandal involved diverting profits from the Iranian arms sales to fund the Contras, a right-wing rebel group fighting the leftist Sandinista government in Nicaragua. The Reagan administration had viewed the Contras as essential to stopping the spread of communism in Central America. However, Congress had explicitly forbidden further military aid to the Contras, making the diversion of funds both illegal and secretive. Key figures in the affair included Lieutenant Colonel Oliver North of the National Security Council, who helped coordinate the operation, as well as senior officials like National Security Advisor John Poindexter. When the operation was exposed in 1986, it triggered a political firestorm and led to multiple investigations by Congress and an independent counsel. While President Reagan claimed he had no knowledge of the diversion of funds, the scandal significantly damaged his administration’s credibility. Several officials were convicted of crimes related to the affair, though many were later pardoned by President George H. W. Bush. The Iran-Contra Affair remains a powerful example of executive overreach and the risks of conducting foreign policy outside the bounds of democratic oversight. Sources: Nixonland by Rick Perlstein Vietnam Ken Burns documentary, especially episodes 2 and 7 Time article about the credibility gap Reagan's 1981 inaugural address on C-SPAN Reagan: An American Journey by Bob Spitz fun video about the video game Contra Brief article about the Boland Amendment PBS article about Iran-Contra Way Out There In the Blue by Frances Fitzgerald article about North's time as NRA head article about Oliver North Fox News website about Oliver North Los Angeles Times article “Religious Right Drums Up Support for North” September 3, 1988 The Evangelicals by Frances Fitzgerald Shadow Network by Anne Nelson Battiata, M. (1987, Sep 26). "Beverly LaHaye and the hymn of the right; leading her women in support of Reagan, bork, and SDI: The Washington Post (Pre-1997 Fulltext)" article about Robert Bork Discussion Questions: What was the Iran-Contra scandal about? Why did the US support the overthrow of Nicaragua? Should politicians be held accountable for their lies? How? What crimes/ actions are enough to make you stop supporting a politician? What happens when we tie our Christian faith to politicians? Political movements? Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices

Give to help Chris continue to make Truce A bunch of evangelicals like Tim LaHaye, Pat Robertson, and Jerry Falwell pushed many in the evangelical movement to support Ronald Reagan for president. The New Right tied them to the Republican Party. But... what did they get for their efforts? In this mini-episode, Chris lays out some of the few things they got. And some of the things that Reagan did that upset these evangelicals with large followings. One thing they didn't like was the appointment of Sandra Day O'Connor as the first female Supreme Court judge. But Reagan did dedicate a day of prayer and offered an amendment to protect prayer in schools (though it was never going to pass). It's possible that what Reagan really left these evangelicals with large followings was not legislation, but permission to use deeply flawed individuals to achieve their goals. Sources: God's Own Party by Daniel K Williams The Invisible Bridge, Nixonland, and Reaganland by Rick Perlstein Proclamation 4999. National Family Week 1982 Reagan: An American Journey by Bob Spitz The Evangelicals by Frances Fitzgerald New York Times article about the O'Connor opposition Christianity Today article about O'Connor's opposition New York Times Article “Reagan Proposes School Prayer Amendment, May 18, 1982. Bill Bright and Campus Crusade for Christ by John G Turner Article on National Ice Cream Day Letter from Gary North to Paul Weyrick Article on the US overthrow of Grenada Revive Us Again by Joel Carpenter Discussion Questions: What did evangelicals get from Reagan? How did these evangelicals with large followings continue after Reagan? Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices

Give to help Chris make Truce Ronald Reagan’s economic policies, often referred to as “Reaganomics,” were based on supply-side economics. His administration focused on reducing the role of government in the economy by cutting taxes, especially for corporations and high-income individuals, with the belief that this would stimulate investment, job creation, and overall economic growth. The Economic Recovery Tax Act of 1981 was a cornerstone of this approach, slashing income tax rates across the board. Reagan also prioritized deregulation, aiming to reduce government oversight in industries such as banking, energy, and transportation, under the idea that less regulation would foster greater business efficiency and innovation. At the same time, Reagan significantly increased defense spending while aiming to cut domestic programs, which contributed to a substantial rise in the federal budget deficit. While the economy experienced a period of strong growth and declining inflation during his presidency—especially after the early 1980s recession—critics argue that the benefits were unevenly distributed. Income inequality widened, and the national debt tripled by the end of his two terms. So... was it worth it? Who benefited from his programs? And what does that say about us as a nation? Sources: Article about Reagan's radio program The Invisible Bridge and Reaganland by Rick Perlstein The story of Tom Smith, the bread manufacturer Reagan: His Life and Legend by Max Boot Way Out There in the Blue by Frances Fitzgerald Reagan: An American Journey by Bob Spitz A bio of Bob Taft A helpful article about the savings and loan crisis Discussion Questions: What does the term "Reaganomics" mean? Why is trickle-down economics helpful to the rich and not the poor? Do you think that Americans favor the rich? Why? How have your opinions about the rich and the poor shaped your faith? Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices

Give to help Chris make Truce The Strategic Defense Initiative (SDI), announced by President Ronald Reagan on March 23, 1983, was a proposed missile defense system intended to protect the United States from nuclear attacks, particularly those launched by the Soviet Union. Often dubbed "Star Wars" by critics, the initiative aimed to develop a space-based shield that could intercept and destroy incoming intercontinental ballistic missiles (ICBMs) before they reached U.S. territory. The plan called for the use of advanced technologies, including ground-based interceptors, space-based lasers, and other futuristic weapon systems, many of which were in the early stages of research or purely theoretical at the time. Reagan's vision for SDI was rooted in his desire to shift U.S. defense policy away from the Cold War doctrine of Mutually Assured Destruction (MAD), which relied on the threat of retaliatory strikes to deter nuclear war. Instead, SDI aimed to make nuclear weapons "impotent and obsolete" by providing a defensive solution that would render enemy missiles ineffective. The initiative sparked intense debate, both domestically and internationally. Critics argued that it was technologically unfeasible, enormously expensive, and risked escalating the arms race by undermining existing arms control agreements like the Anti-Ballistic Missile (ABM) Treaty. Despite its ambitious goals, the Strategic Defense Initiative faced numerous scientific and budgetary challenges, and many of its proposed technologies never moved beyond the conceptual or experimental stages. Nevertheless, SDI played a significant role in the strategic dialogue between the U.S. and the Soviet Union during the 1980s, influencing arms negotiations and highlighting the role of technological innovation in defense policy. By the early 1990s, after the Cold War ended, the program was scaled back and eventually evolved into the Ballistic Missile Defense Organization under subsequent administrations. Sources: Way Out There in the Blue by Frances Fitzgerald Reaganland by Rick Perlstein JFK Library article about the missile gap PBS article about Reagan's security plans Reagan's "evil empire" speech Article from harvest.org about their predictions for Magog Bill Graham's sermon, which uses the fear of communism to create a sense of urgency Armageddon and the Coming War with Russia pamphlet by Jerry Falwell Bill Bright and Campus Crusade for Christ by John G Turner Discussion Questions: What was the Strategic Defense Initiative? What were its goals? Why did they keep it around even after it was obvious it didn't work? Does Reagan fit the mold of conservatives of his time? Of conservative Republicans through American history? Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices

Give to help Chris make the show! Ronald Reagan was an odd choice for evangelicals. For one, he and his wife regularly consulted a medium. He was a Hollywood actor, which should have put him at odds with fundamentalists. Also, Christians have a long history of charity and compassion, while Reagan's policies cut aid to poor people. But in 1980, a lot of evangelicals turned to the Republican Party to vote for him over the evangelical Jimmy Carter. What happened? Jimmy Carter gave audience to evangelical audiences, though not in the same way as Reagan. Carter told people to conserve, while Reagan's optimistic consumerism played to the rising prosperity gospel. Reagan delivered his famous endorsement of evangelicals at the Religious Roundtable, while Carter was suspiciously absent. Also, evangelicals have built up a strong craving for leaders. They love a strongman leader. So when Reagan showed up and promised to be tough, they went for him. Today, we're examining some of the reasons that Reagan became a favorite of evangelicals. And why... maybe that doesn't make sense. Sources: Article on shibboleths Reaganland by Rick Perlstein The Invisible Bridge by Rick Perlstein The Evangelicals by Frances Fitzgerald A Prophet With Honor by William Martin James Robison's speech at the Religious Roundtable 1980 GOP Platform Reagan's GOP acceptance speech in 1980 Reagan's inauguration speech Discussion Questions: What is a shibboleth? How do you test if someone is really a Christian? What if they're a politician? Does it matter? Why did Reagan seem like an unlikely match for evangelicals? How did Reagan impress evangelicals? What did this make you think about James Robison? Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices

Give to help Chris make Truce Before he became president, Reagan was the head of the Screen Actors' Guild. When it came down to backing his followers or helping big business, he chose business. The same was true when he fought air traffic controllers. In this way, you can see the influence of Ayn Rand. Reagan grew up as a poor kid, but he later became a famous radio star and movie icon. When his star faded, he became a political guest speaker and found a new path forward. In this episode, we're going to better understand the groundwork for the Reagan presidency. Our special guest is historian and author Rick Perlstein. Sources: Reagan: An American Journey by Bob Spitz US v. Paramount Pictures from Justia article from the Reagan library Reagan: His Life and Legend by Max Boot The Invisible Bridge and Reaganland by Rick Perlstein CNN article on Paul Manafort Reagan's speech at the Neshoba County Fair NPR article on the infamous "welfare queen" Discussion Questions: Why is it valuable to understand Reagan's role in messing with his union? How did his treatment of his union parallel that of his actions against air traffic controllers? What do you think of Reagan and his legacy? Why have some Republicans lifted him up as the ultimate conservative? Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices