Steve, I threw in the word “liberal” with Cannon to make the point that he worked for the liberal Washington Post during the Reagan presidency. I did not mean to suggest that he’s a contemporary liberal media type like Al Hunt (although Hunt used him recently to suggest Gov. Arnold should raise taxes in Sacramento just like Ronnie. ) I did not mean to suggest he has not played a role in recent years in correcting history-mangling slurs like those in “The Reagans.” He has extra credibility in these corrections precisely because he worked for a liberal newspaper and was not some in-the-tank, official camp chronicler.

Also, it should not be forgotten, as you note, that conservatives were not always wild about Cannon’s work during the Reagan presidency. In my research comparing Reagan and Clinton scandals years ago I came across this, which suggests Cannon was at one time frustrated by excessive positive coverage of Reagan.

Newsweek media critic Jonathan Alter described the ethos on December 15, 1986: “After six years of state-of-the-art White House media manipulation and large-scale public indifference to criticism of the President, reporting about his shortcomings finally had found an audience.” Washington Post reporter Lou Cannon told Alter: ‘People are finally listening to what’s wrong with him.’”