About three quarters of the way through this book, I was ready to throw it out the window. I am biased on the issue of Ronald Reagan, I am a huge fan of his. I wasn't angry just because the book was mostly in criticism of Reagan, but I didn't like that it showed more bad than good, and I think that that is unfair. However, after reading through the whole book (an encouraged practice before making a judgement, and writing a review), I found that, while I believe that Kenneth Walsh is anti-Reagan, he did an okay job of portraying the good side of Reagan as well, but by no means sufficient. I don't think that this book is what it says it is: an unbiased portrait of the Reagan legacy; but rather, a censure in disguise.