Long-Term Negative Consequence of the "Reagan Revolution"?

[dazzleman]

A lot of this article is true, but I don't see what any of it has to do with the Reagan revolution.  The country was far more polarized after 8 years of Clinton than 8 years of Ronald Reagan.

I think that in the last decade or so, liberals are more aggressively pushing their agenda, particularly their social agenda.  The conservative agenda on social issues is essentially a status quo agenda - traditional family values, traditional marriage, etc.  There's nothing in the conservative social agenda that wasn't accepted as mainstream until relatively recently.

I think it's pretty hard to argue with a straight face that a ban on gay marriage as proposed by conservatives is a big turn to the right.  Gay marriage has always been banned, and it's liberals who have made it an issue, not conservatives.

Liberals have created polarization by pushing for things like gay marriage and the acceptance of "alternative families" that many in the country believe are destructive to our social fabric.  Liberal crusades like feminism have had a big effect on society, and it has not all been positive.

This is not to say that liberals are wrong on all issues, but that for the most part, it is they who have initiated the push for certain changes.  I think some of them are good and some bad.

One thing that is highly polarizing is the use by liberals of the courts to push through unpopular social initiatives like legalized abortion and gay marriage.  I think it would be far better and less polarizing if these issues were handled through the democratic process.

[dazzleman]

Reagan really divided America, more so than anyone before him.

How?  Please elaborate.