Apr 23

Reagan.com Email is a Misguided Effort

I heard a commercial with the booming and illustrious voice of Rush Limbaugh. After I recovered from banging my head against my desk, I reflected on what was said in the commercial.

Rush pointed to the popular free email providers (Yahoo, Google, and others) to remind you that they scan your email. To remind you that they sell your email address, and other information about you, to the highest bidder. To remind you that the use of these free email addresses may increase your risk of spam mail. In contrast, purchasing an email address from Reagan.com provides you with private and secure email, and your information will never be sold.

I was intrigued.

I found that Rush was not the only conservative advertising this servic. Fox, CBS, and many others also endorsed it, though for slightly different political reasons; they primarily portrayed it as an email alternative “for conservatives”. They said that, unlike these free services, Reagan.com email would not have you unknowingly contributing to “the liberals”. These are hard-and-fast definitions, people.

Michael Reagan, founder of Reagan.com and son of, you guessed it, Ronald Reagan, has this to say about his service:

[…] every time you use your email from companies like Google, AOL, Yahoo, Hotmail, Apple and others, you are helping the liberals. These companies are, and will continue to be, huge supporters financially and with technology of those that are hurting our country.

Because apparently liberals are the only ones that are interested in using technology to advance our country. And apparently “the liberals” are the only people benefiting from these huge corporations. Obviously, they would never help “the conservatives”. Regardless, this is a relatively empty claim as its never actually substantiated.


Politics aside, allow me to explain to you from a technical perspective why the commercials endorsing Reagan.com and even the information on Reagan.com is largely misleading.

First, let’s address the script Rush was fed in his advertisement. It is well known and accepted that free email providers, along with many paying internet providers as well, will harvest and sell your information to advertising companies. It’s well known because these companies clearly state this in their Privacy Policies. The claim is that the Reagan email service, which costs you $40 per year, does not do this. However, if you read through the Privacy Policy for Reagan.com, it is true that Reagan.com says they will not collect your information, but they do allow their affiliates to collect your information.

We may also use one or more advertising network providers to help present advertisements or other content on this website. These advertising network providers use cookies, web beacons, or other technologies to serve you advertisements or content tailored to interests you have shown by browsing on this and other websites you have visited. Advertising network providers collect non-personally identifiable information such as your browser type, your operating system, web pages visited, time of visits, content viewed, ads viewed, and other click stream data.

The key phrases here are that their “advertising network providers” have the right to collect information about “content viewed”. I don’t know about you, but the content I primarily view while logged onto my email is … email.

The use of cookies, web beacons, or similar technologies by these advertising network providers is subject to their own privacy policies, not our privacy policy for this website or its Service.

Reagan.com uses the affiliate networkadvertising.org for their ads (why they show ads on a service they charge for is beyond me). Ironically, if you look through the list of partners of Network Advertising, four companies may quickly jump out at you: Microsoft (Hotmail), AOL, Yahoo, and Google. Just to name a few. Which means much of the same ad revenue that these companies may generate from your use of their free email services may still be generated for them through your use of Reagan.com.

This last point is key to highlighting the disconnect between the claim of the Reagan.com email service and the reality of the internet’s interconnectivity. This disconnect has also recently been highlighted with the controversial SOPA and PIPA bills passing through Congress. You have politicians proposing bills, or in this case making a buck using the influence of politics, on technical subjects in which they have little to no understanding.

If privacy is what you seek, you cannot use the internet, and you certainly cannot use email (unless it is isolated to an internal network). Even if a given email was secure and private while on the Reagan.com servers, any incoming and outgoing messages will go through a server at some point somewhere in the world that is likely owned, operated, or affiliated with one of the internet or server giants, including Google. Coincidentally, even if you had a Reagan.com email address and sent an email to yourself, the email would still go through one of these external servers before returning to you.


Next claim. Reagan.com is email for conservatives, right? So supposedly using Reagan.com will support a conservative agenda rather than a liberal agenda. Perhaps directly, and on the very surface, but indirectly (and about half an inch below the surface down to bedrock) no. As I said before, you can’t take something as intertwined and complex as the internet and expect to take the biggest internet giants out of it. Ironically, on the same site that Michael Reagan is falsely boasting that his service will get you away from those Big Brother liberal companies, he provides instructions for how to configure his email service to work on your mobile device. You know, the one made by Blackberry, Apple, or Motorola (owned by Google) running the Android OS (also owned by Google).

Let’s give Reagan the benefit of the doubt. Let’s assume he’s not trying to insinuate it’s Big Business we should distrust. Maybe he’s suggesting Google, Yahoo, and the like sell your information to the government, and that’s where the privacy risk comes in. This is half true … although they don’t sell it. And, again, Reagan.com won’t get you away from this. Even when using Reagan.com, as soon as the email leaves the Reagan.com servers, the United States government will have the opportunity to seize and view the email. They probably won’t, unless you’re a terrorist suspect, but they always have the right, no matter your provider, thanks to the Patriot Act. Heck, even on the Reagan.com servers the government has the right to seize it under this act.


There’s a phrase that somebody said once goes something like:

Is it really free if it costs you your privacy?

That’s up to you to decide, really. But if you believe internet companies are the only ones tracking personal information about your daily habits … well, let’s just say you should stop shopping at Target. Or Wal-Mart. Or Best Buy. Or really any major chain in America. Personally, I don’t think a corporation tracking your habits to better serve you with ads related to your interests is an invasion of your privacy.

The cost of Reagan’s supposedly private and secure email service is $40 per year. This service is rented from a man who has no technical expertise and is not a server administrator. His Terms of Service clearly and painfully guarantee you nothing in terms of support, up-time, warranty, or back-up. And if you’re expecting new features in the future … well, don’t hold your breath.

On the other hand, companies like Google and Yahoo have incentive to provide you with new features. They have incentive to guarantee you up-time, because every second their servers are down is ad revenue lost for them. They have dedicated support teams to ensure their servers are always running at peak health, and they have redundantly connected servers and farms, just in case.

Reagan’s servers go down? I’m sure they’ll get it back up eventually. But, you know, you’ve already paid them your $40, so they don’t lose money by the second when the service is down. And it is owned by a politician … so don’t expect a quick turnaround.



    That email service is only ‘for conservatives’? No matter what sevice you have you get spam and crap. I was a sub for the Government and they have ‘secure’ servers and they get spammed. $40 bucks, I’d rather spend that on a gallon of gas, HHAAHAHAA

  • Laudavero7

    Is anyone else unable to type onto the “compose message” screen on reagan.com?  Not all of the keys I tap on the keyboard appear as text on the screen!  Problem has been going on for weeks now.  Have sent three messages to them in their designated area for contact (where the typing does appear on screen), but have had no reply or help.  My Email typing works fine on aol and gmail and a private institution’s site, too. Anyone else experiencing technical difficulty after paying for this Email?

    • jkozuh

      Try composing the message in a word-processor or some other email software, and then copy and paste into REAGAN.COM … .

      • oufannco

        Really? You have to go through another level of editing in order to get things to work LIKE THEY SHOULD in the first place? Sounds like Michael Reagan is not putting any of the $40 you gave him into R&D. More like into his own pocket or whatever SuperPac he deems important. Google has the best email GUI out there and, it is very flexible. If you loose the page because your browser crashes, your composed email is automatically saved. I would seriously worry about a company that doesn’t put 100% of their profits back into the company’s continued betterment during their first two years. If they don’t, it’s a recipe for failure, the end of your reagan.com email address and the end of your $40.

  • Ela Wójcik

    Great analysis, sir!!! Thanks a lot.

  • Papy

    I don’t know about you guys, But I know someone is allway’s looking at my Es they decide what I send What I cannot send They shut down the enternet while I am reading something they don.t want me to read,Nothing I can do. so I live with It 

  • begining

    I can not get to my account ?

  • Pingback: The Money Tree | Privacy Policy()

  • jkozuh

    my ISP is very “Politically Correct” and will shut my email down for days if I use certain words in the SUBJECT (eg, Homosexual, Muslim, Islam, etc). This is why I am thinking of using REAGAN.COM; I want to restore my … FREEDOM OF EXPRESSION … !!!!!!
    Does anyone have some thoughts on this aspect of REAGAN.COM … ???????

    • It looks like your ISP is Century Link, and they do not scan and shut down service based on things like this. If this is happening to you, it’s unlikely that it’s your ISP, and I would recommend having someone professional have a look at your computer and home network.

      Regardless, using a service like Reagan.com email would not be anymore protected from the prying eyes of your ISP than Gmail, Hotmail, or any free service.

      • jkozuh

        Thanks, Alex.

        My ISP is Time-Warner and maybe it takes a complaint from someone who receives one of my emails and finds it offensive, before T-W will shut me down.

        If REAGAN.COM got a complaint from an offended recipient, would they react the same way … ??? Maybe it depends on whether or not the recipient has a lot of influence at REAGAN.COM. I guess politics enters into all relationships … .

        • My recommendation would be for you to call Time-Warner. As I said before, it is unlikely that they’re shutting you down for the reasons you are suggesting. There is either some other issue with your account, or there is an issue with your computer.

          But as I said before, using Reagan.com as your email would not provide you anymore protection from an ISP, since everything you do always must be filtered through the ISP. That is the very nature of an ISP.

    • mangolynn

      No thoughts on that issue, but I have a Reagan.com email address and I don’t like it at all. For one thing, help desk is open 9-5 PST Mon-Fri, so don’t have an after hours issue! The program sucks, basically.

  • Curry

    I have been with Google for some time – detest what Google is doing in China…February of 2008, sent a letter to our new president. Two weeks later I began receiving unsolicited email from the WH. It took a while to figure out how to contact Google, and when I did, the emails stopped. jkozuh is correct – with Google, certain words are disallowed – censored – certain conservative and Christian blogs are hamstrung – can’t post to the blog, sometimes cannot get the main article,sometimes the blog won’t open. The fact that the government is watching our emails for certain words is detestable – you are of course correct about going through a server, so any notion of “privacy” is questionable at best. All a question of knowing the facts behind the claims and proceeding carefully.
    – Curry 

  • J.A.

    I am conservative, old, and not very computer savvy. What you say makes sense to me. As out of touch as I am, I did wonder how my message could remain private once it reached someone else’s inbox. Thank you. I will save my $40.



    • A simple Google search for me, or clicking the links at the top of my site, will lend the answer to who I am and what I do; then you can judge for yourself if my reputation is at stake with a post like this.

      Switching to Reagan.com email will not resolve the spam issue based upon any searches, because, as you said, that still even happens with privacy turned on. Turning privacy on is at the grace of the developer of the site, so the privacy buttons on browsers are, to some degree, a joke on the average user. Much of the information transmitted goes through your browser as much as it does your Google search, so the solution is not to find a more “private” email service, as Reagan.com claims to be, but to find an email service with the best spam filter.

      Personally, I have never been disappointed in the Gmail spam filter. But there are plenty of third-party desktop clients that have good spam filters that can be trained as well, for instance, Mozilla Thunderbird.

      • TII

        I agree about the spam filter on gmail.
        I have never received a solicitation after sending mail using gmail.
        No matter who our provider is, there is ALWAYS someone or some group that is able to access our information.
        True privacy is non-existant.

  • Any Google type service is legally allowed to scan your content. They are the owners of their servers, which the content passes through, therefore the content is subject to their terms. This is one reason why they consolidated all their various privacy policies into a single policy, which applies to all services, several months ago.

    The laws your suggesting to tweak would be laws governing a private company and its private business. The internet is a global institution not governed by any one company (except, to some degree, ICANN) or country. The U.S. government does not own it (anymore), therefore they do not have the authority to regulate it. Each component of the internet is subject to the private company that owns that portion of the global network.

    Regardless, instituting restrictive laws to prevent these companies from doing this or that would hardly be different than placing firmer regulations on big banks in the United States, which, as I understand it, is something most people that could be duped into a Reagan.com email address would be against.

    • Descanti

      I really didn’t want to go there, but I do get the no-so-subtle sting of political discourse in your response. Are we to believe that “Reaganites” or the unwashed who dare to sign-up with Reagan.com are the only people who benefit from big banks? That seems a little naive. Your argument regarding private business doesn’t hold water. Are there not tens of thousands of private businesses under assult right now by federal, state and local laws and regulations? Why should the the private internet holders be given special dispensation? The post office doesn’t cut open and read my mail anymore than UPS or FedEx does my packages. Nice try.

      • Sorry if my response sounded like I was defending Google or other internet companies that do this. I wasn’t defending them, merely representing the current state of things. The lack of regulation, and the amount of people drawn to a service like Reagan.com, are both examples of how much the average person as well as the government misunderstand how the internet works. I’m pretty sure you and I are making the same point, not arguing against each other, but I could be wrong.

        And obviously people that use Reagan.com are not the only people who use big banks … I’m not sure what your point was there. My point was an analogy laced with a healthy amount of sarcasm, because talking politics without sarcasm is far too boring. As you initially said, I’d love to discuss this without involving politics. But a service like Reagan.com is 100% a political game, so it’s impossible to do so.

        • goodmatt 10

          I’d love for anyone to answer the eternal question that I can never get a liberal (or whatever you define yourself as) to answer, you want “regulations”? Like what, be specific, and most importantly, who are these honest, incorruptible saints you know of that are going to enforce these regs?

          Don’t get me wrong, I have my issues with “the right” as well, but it’s so easy to just throw around all these catchphrases and buzzwords, yet generally when I press people on either side of the aisle for details, they either go silent, or go psycho on me and start hurling all the usual venom.

          • Ah, specificity. An art lost on us all.

            My politics are pretty middle-of-the-road. Now a San Franciscan who grew up in the Midwest, I’m often called “liberal” simply because that’s how I appear to many old friends who are far-right. Call me liberal, call me progressive. It doesn’t much matter to me. Labels are subjective based on the position of the person applying them to us.

            Point being, I hear absurd generalities and reasonable specifics pretty equally from both sides of the aisle. I don’t think one side holds the corner market on honest politicians. I am, of course, speaking generally at this point, because I didn’t actually see a specific question from you ;). So I’m rambling. If you’d like me to address something specifically, ask me a specific question and I’d be happy to.

      • Robert Petersen

        if you think FedEx and UPS won’t open your packages you should examine your service contract again. In some areas 1 out of 5 packages are opened to inspect for contraband or fraud. I watched my neighbor go off to prison after assuming they would never open his package. Now as for the USPS, they actually have to get a warrant to search your mail, unlike private carriers who can do whatever their contract allows.

  • This service smelled to me a bit anyway but I appreciate this intelligent analysis. And your disclaimer is golden.

  • Jan C

    After reading your post and some of the comments, I have decided not to use Reagan.com. Thank you for helping me make an informed decision.

  • Romney2012

    Alex- Any info regarding where contributions are made by the various Internet carriers? Also some of the carriers (Yahoo) seem to have a constant liberal bent to their news articles. They will title an article negatively about Romney but when one reads teh article it wil lsay that the results are the same regardign Obama. This gets irritating and makes one want to get to an unbiased carrier.

  • JM

    Suddenly my sign in does not work. So I try to reset my password. Guess what, it does not work after hours. No help or response to your problem when you need it at off hours.
    Service is very poor.

  • Steve

    Currently I use Hotmail and yesterday I
    received 73 spam email messages. I am constantly bombarded with political ads
    which I cannot turn off. I hate going to my email box to receive mail only to be
    overwhelmed with spam. Where can anyone go to get rid of these ads and

    • Jim

      use the “in private” setting on your IE browser, and then sign up for Reagan.com private email. I have had it a year now, and never get spam!

      • Private browsing is always a good start, though the implementation of that is not based on any standards and still dependent on the browser company and the site you’re visiting. Private browsing merely tells the browser to request a “private” version of the site from the site itself, but the webmaster(s) of the site determine whether or not this is actually respected.

        It certainly helps to prevent local storage of history, but it won’t necessarily prevent third-party tracking or targeted advertising.

  • Fred K

    OK, Conservative here and was seriously considering joining Reagan.com.
    However I saw the FB icon there, and it made me wonder, as did the fact that I couldn’t actually see what my account would look like logged in.
    While I picked up the tone in your post, and M. Reagan is not a politician AFAIK, your technical points are simply factual and valid.
    Aside from the other fact that most emails one might send to the Google’s and Yahoo’s, etc, are going to be scanned anyways.

    As far as Reagan not having technical expertise, you are correct. However one would expect that he hes the intelligence to hire professionals to properly manage technical infrastructure.
    I could probably flip your argument, and level similar though far more damning an riposte and question exactly what expertise does Obama have as it relates to much of anything outside of Constitutional Law that gives him any authority to spend Trillions of debt dollars as some sort of expert on Healthcare or Macro-Economics.

    Thanks though, for helping me save $40.

    • It wouldn’t be “flipping my argument” as my argument has nothing to do with Obama at all, and, frankly, I would probably agree with you. Though I am more liberal than conservative, I never suggest that I fully support Obama (and I never mention him at all in this post), I am merely pointing out the absurdity behind the system that Reagan has put in place, which is, in my opinion, 100% political. (You don’t need to be a politician to have a political influence.)

  • Legna

    Great insight and analysis..as alwasy Rush L is just another Capitalist looking how to promote interest parties. I almost fell for the trap after listening to Rush show (gosh, how it can be so Hipocri……!!! You really helped another new tech savvy wanna be to save $40. Please keep up the good news up there and Thank YOU!!!

  • Curious

    I am a conservative and I must say I find your article curious. However, for me I still dont care. I jumped on board with the email address just because I liked the Reagan name. Note, I personally never give out my real info to the free providers like google,ect. so I never had a problem. And I wish I would have thought of the idea of reagan.com–I applaud anyone who is clever enough to come up with a well sought after product. All that having been said I will go read my contract and see if what you quote is on there. If it is then I will admit it is wrong and uneccesary to advertise such a claim because people would have bought into the Reagan name anyway.

  • Curious

    P.S. I have never had a problem,so far, with spam on Reagan.com

  • shane

    I have a reagan.com email and it basically sucks but I keep it for one reason and one reason only…. It is the only email that I can find that has few enough subscribers to allow me an email using only my first name without a bunch of numbers. I am a conservative but I really don’t care if my email provider is. I even wear Patagonia clothes…. Hahaha. If I could find a free email that was just starting then I would get in on it and open up. I have a gmail acct but its so long using first and last name plus a bunch of numbers…… Do you no any in the start-up faze?

  • Bill

    The article by Alex Laird regarding Reagan.com email service is fallacious. The word ‘liberal’ does not appear anyplace on the Reagan.com web site, not even in “the terms of service”.

    • You are correct, the word “liberal” is never used on Reagan.com (at least not that I saw). I never said it was. I said those endorsing his service were using it, and I said he used it himself in interviews with the media (there is a link to this direct quote in this post), but I never claimed the word was used on Reagan.com.

  • Marc Mitcham

    Hey Alex, I guess you would call me a conservative in the political spectrum but I was wondering about the ‘private’ email offered by Reagan.com commercials and your article saved me $40 a year. Thank you for taking the time to write it and for clearing things up.

  • Liz Parker

    Thanks for taking the time to write this! I am sure I am not the only one that appreciates it. I do plan on going ahead and opening a Reagon.com email though… it was more a matter of where do I want to spend my money – the big companies that have screwed me countless times or go with a smaller company. You have to pay yahoo, gmail, etc. a yearly fee around $40 to be able to link to your Microsoft Outlook or Mozilla Thunderbird – which I like, so I have to PAY either way. Yahoo service is the worst ever – I have an account that was compromised that I pay for yearly, and for 3 months can’t get access to it or they won’t shut it down- yada yada yada – I think you get the point – I am frustrated with them. So, basically you get what you pay for and yes the internet is not private. Really it seems it is a matter of where you want to spend your money. To me keeping free enterprise alive and competive spirit alive is worth every penny going to the small fish Reagon.com. (although I give to them all – b/c who has only ONE email??? lol) Thanks for you post – I didn’t like the BS about the email being private and very glad to see someone else called them out on it! BTW: I am a conservative – which to me means: using common sense, learning and doing things everyday to live smarter not harder, use less, have less and live more! – Keeping life simple.

    • Liz,

      You shouldn’t need to pay any fees to access mail through a POP or IMAP client like Outlook or Thunderbird using Gmail. The majority of features with Google Apps, unlikely its Microsoft or Yahoo! counterparts, are free. The only thing Gmail charges for is increased space beyond the 10gb offered for free. Then you can upgrade for monthly fees (still usually less than Reagan.com). I do agree though that Live Mail and Yahoo! services are terrible, so asking me to pay for a service that should be standard (like accessing my mail from a third party client) is ludicrous to me.

      I’m glad you found the article helpful, even if you still plan to get a Reagan.com email address. The article was never meant to dissuade you from the service as a whole (as many people defensively try to tell me was my intention), it was merely highlighting the hypocrisy of the advertising. I’m glad you could see that, and I wish you the best of luck with your paid email service.

      Since you shared your views, I’ll share mine: I’m a moderate liberal. This means essentially the same thing to me as being a conservative seems to mean to you. The most important thing to me isn’t what you believe, or what I believe, but how that belief is presented to others. The key to me is respect and being careful not to generalize, especially when generalizations are based on false information. I have no problem with conservativism. My problem is only with the attitudes of both conservatives and liberals.

  • JeromeD

    Regarding the TOS, I believe that refers to information collected via cookies (which were included in the terms). The standard cookie harvest for such partners is behavioral data – CTRs, time stamps, the like. You can get form data, but to the best of my knowledge there’s no cookie out there that harvests email contents. This doesn’t mean they can track you all the time – you can disable or remove the cookies, and clear cache etc. before visiting the site. Rather confident the contents of the emails themselves are free and clear of any sneaky stuff – it’s simply the standard tracking cookies you gotta watch out for, if paranoia is your thing. At least, that’s my understanding.

    • By nature, I’m pretty much the opposite of paranoid. Most people say I’m too trusting. Paranoia is what leads you away from a free and easy email solution, like Gmail, to an inexperienced provider such as Reagan.

      Highlighting the reality of any Terms of Service would paranoia anyone, if they were skeptical by nature, because the entire point of a Terms of Service of Privacy Policy is to protect the company, not the user, from litigation. My goal was merely to highlight that the policies dictated by Reagan are no different than that of other email providers.

      You are correct that the Terms of Service are referring to cookies, which I stated in the blog. But I believe your understanding of cookies is misinformed (or it’s possible I’m not understand what you’re saying). A single site will store numerous cookies on your computer, each one containing different categories of information. A cookie is designed by the developer and can store whatever information we choose to have our web application store. The Terms of Service are what dictate to the end user what we claim we have or have not put into your cookies. But if we choose, we can store your plain-text password in the cookie, though obviously your reputability wouldn’t last very long if you made a practice of this. But that also means we could stuff the entire contents of an email into a cookie, which these Terms of Service would allow for. It’s true that a standard cookie, and likely the cookies actually used by Reagan’s site, wouldn’t usually do this … and frankly, neither do the cookies from the free email providers. But that wasn’t the point. The point was they’re still protecting themselves, just like the free providers, by allowing themselves the legal right to do exactly what the other providers do, which in their ads they claim they won’t do.

      • JeromeD

        No I hear ya, I’m just saying that at the end of the day, this is an article about what they and their affiliates collect and I’m poking at what I think the “truth” is, vague disclaimer aside. TBH I’m not even sure (as I don’t use Reagan and have my own hosting) whether or not you are even prevented from using the service with cookies disabled. I’m merely voicing my guesstimate that they stuff they collect is rather mild and not encompassing the contents of my email. Still, just a guess I’m basing on Google’s explicit and rather extensive mentioning of some of it’s previous TOS’es of the ways in which it scans your email (which I’m assuming is legally required) compared to something like this which is more boilerplate. My company provides a service with many millions of users, but while we do have clauses in our EULA/TOS that give us virtually free reign over the data, we don’t even have a system integrated to parse it and create sales profiles even if we wanted to. [It would be rather easy if we were to use their data and sell them corresponding things, but much tougher to try to guess, based on activity, and sell them new things we think they’ll like]. At the end of the day, I think Reagan is a step in the right direction, as it is hopefully making the email scanners take notice. That said, I don’t see why someone wouldn’t simply cut out the middle man, buy and host their own domain (or buy the hosting) and get however many email addys…

        • Agreed, we’re both arguing the hypothetical of the situation, which is what makes it a bit of an interesting topic to actually get freaked out about ;). Still, what Reagan does with the information and what their advertising partners do with the information are two different things. Reagan may have good ethics, but that doesn’t keep their partners accountable. My biggest issue was with the way the way they were presenting themselves in the advertising, which was clearly (and in my opinion intentionally) misleading.

          But I agree. It’s far cheaper and easier to simply purchase your own domain name, rent server space, install Roundcube, and live worry free. And when you do that, for less than $40 a year, you can usually do far more than any of these pay (or free) services are offering you.

  • Was never gullible enough to believe in the privacy thing and I know that everything is a business model. I signed up for it because I thought it was unique and I was switching from Comcast to Wowway and needed to set up a new email account anyway so why not? I found the Reagan email service sucks but kept it anyway..sheer laziness on my part. Now I find my account has been suspended. No answer as to why. As a proud member of the black helicopter crowd I think it has something to do with the link to a website I sent my friends (I don’t send many), I was suspended when I got home from work. So much for privacy LOL But I did learn that there is a website our gubmint doesn’t want spread around.

    It was a curious site…now it’s much more in my book. Says I stumbled across something I’m not suppose to know….

  • Pingback: VPN for Private Browsing » The Internet Home of Alex Laird()

  • Ernul

    Reagan.com CS sucks BIG time. They do not answer technical questions so you must wait (how long is unknown) if you’re unable to do email with them. JUNK !
    Rush picked a loser here folks !

    • Col C

      Can you actually contact gmail or yahoo?

      • Yes. They (Google at least) also have a treasure trove of knowledge base articles that are very useful, and help forums on which employees and other users are fairly responsive.

  • Melissa Wolf

    Thank you for your honest evaluation of the product and your transparency on your political stance. Your logic and research is sound. I’m a conservative, and was considering using their service. This article changed my mind.

  • Sky

    I was attracted to Reagan email for the same reasons discussed in these post. However I am very sorry that I did. I do not think I have ever encountered a more shoddy unprofessionally run service in my life. I have had numerous technical problems and as it stands right now I have contacted customer support 13 times on the last problem (the inability to even respond to emails from others), this problem has persisted now for almost a month and despite any action on my part all I get is an automated response that states they have received my message. If I did not have email through MSN I would have been screwed. The live chat does not work and they say they are only open for the hrs of 9-5 that is also not true as I cannot get a response from them period. I had my very small website connected with email to Reagan and now I have to redo my website due to their dishonest operation. I am doing a charge back on my card for their fees. I am exsploring filing civil action in small claims and needless to say I am going to continue to spread the word and shout from the top of the mountain on complaint boards blogs etc… Stay away from Reagan.com or you will regret it in my opinion and experience.

    • Approve—
      Alex Laird

      Phone: (319) 360-8771
      Email: alexdlaird@gmail.com
      Website: http://www.alexlaird.com

      Sent from Mailbox for iPhone

    • MikeInSanDiego


      A month ago my email account vanished completely. I was using it and it degraded and then crashed. I went to log back in and it said my email didn’t exist. Since I had that email used everywhere it needed it so I actually was able to by the very same Reagan.com email AGAIN. They owe me another $40! After I got it up I my outlook emails from the old site were broken… I lost two years of emails, etc.

      I contacted CS three times in the last month with no help. Two weeks ago I found Michael Reagan’s email and contacted him: ‘mailing@michaelreagan.com’. No results!
      When I first got the Reagan.com I liked it for most of the positive reasons posters in this post have mentioned. I’m glad I found your post.
      I love the Reagan name and what they are doing is a disgrace! Regardless of personal beliefs, there is not much more phony than a hypocrite!

  • KS

    I am trying to get a phone number to contact Reagan.com LLS, based in Chicago Illinois. Very disappointed in the lack of customer service. Rush keeps pushing this email website. As it operates right now, I would not recommend this site to anyone. Michael Reagan, are you listening? Can you please provide a customer support telephone number?

  • skdaddle

    I have had my reagan.com address for a little over a year now, and shortly after I paid my first year’s annual renewal fee I started getting spam emails in my junk box. I emailed reagan.com tech support twice for a way to block them but have not heard back from them yet.

    The spam emails all have two things in common… they use my reagan.com name in front of @(multiple email addresses). Here are just a few of many and more arrive every day:
    (myreagan.com name)@adbarbieri.com
    (myreagan.com name)@airtelbroadband.in
    (myreagan.com name)@aurorawerks.com
    (myreagan.com name)@babaev.com
    (myreagan.com name)@deruyterav.nl
    (myreagan.com name)@jazztel.es
    (myreagan.com name)@jwtrucks.com
    (myreagan.com name)@miprofi.com
    (myreagan.com name)@movistar.cl
    (myreagan.com name)@mtnl.net.in
    (myreagan.com name)@osakaair.com
    (myreagan.com name)@phillyplanet.com

    and, they all are Phizer related ads pushing online meds of every type and price imaginable. You are overwhelmed with the selection.

    I have to INDIVIDUALLY type each email address into my reagan.com blacklist page to get them blocked, only to find more NEW email addresses with my name in front of them the next day… very frustrating.

    Today I wrote an email letter to Rush Limbaugh, the one who first got my attention with his over the air waves touting of how wonderful this new private, secure email address would be to have. I bought into it. I am learning that there is no back end support for the front end payments I have made.

    Don’t get me wrong, I like the idea of having my own personal email address with the Reagan name affiliation attached to it. What I don’t like is that now I am finding out it may be the WRONG Reagan name that I am thinking I have… Michael Raegan is apparently only making money off his Dad’s name. Without his father’s reputation I doubt Michael would have been able to pull off his own email address company like this.

    While I wait for a reply to the email pleas I have sent I will continue to monitor my junk box daily. If I don’t hear something back soon, I will find better use for my next year’s subscription renewal fee…

    • Michelle Zhuang

      Maybe if you do not respond for a while the mail would die off.

  • spindog

    I’d be happy just to get the POS reagan.com to work at all, it’s impossible to contact them because it’s on their “secure” website..which won’t load so they have no “customer support” for their users. Really, something with Reagan’s name should actually work. Sorry for the rant but the site sucks and I’m an ardent conservative.

  • Mark Clarke

    It’s just so sad nowadays-regardless of which side of the fence your on
    our government has the final say on most everything—Update: Now on our
    health. {Hmm-thinking of moving to the woods/live off the land, but my
    luck my first lunch is a endangered critter as explained by the game
    warden taking me off to jail}

  • Roorang Boonshoes

    Libs – a never ending source of amusement…..

  • 17_woods

    Noteworthy how you liberals are snarky in every debate. Even of a technical nature. Demonstrates your insecurity.

    • Snarky indeed. Sharply critical of things we disagree with or find hypocritical. It’s the natural inclination of all humans, as is evidenced by your own comment.

      Stand up for what you believe in and know to be true and I respect you, regardless of your political assumptions. In my observation, that’s the difference between the most liberals as compared to most conservatives. To be liberal is, by definition, to be more lenient tolerant, and to be conservative is to be, well, snarky.

      Thanks for reading!

      • goodmatt 10

        Odd, as someone more in middle I find the exact opposite, there are certainly plenty of insufferable people on both sides, but it’s kinda funny you don’t see the irony in your own words.

        Just look at the way you take it upon yourself to make this bold, arrogant claim about what a liberal is and what a conservative is.

        I certainly don’t doubt that’s how you see yourself, but I don’t find much tolerance at all from liberals. Make a list of things for me that your average liberal despises, yet tolerates and defends people’s right to it, I’d be shocked if you can even name one.

        I’d say you might be thinking more about libertarians than liberals.

        • Alas, the sarcasm of that last sentence was apparently lost in the ether. Dammit, Google, why have you still not invented expressly to avoid this confusion!

  • roger and donna crane

    Alex, thanks for the info. I am a conservative!!! but I appreciate the truth in any form, and I have no doubt that you told the truth. First of all, why would you lie? Really, in this day? Second, I do see how things work in general, and it makes perfect sense. I am always telling my wife that her idea of maintaining privacy by not giving out telephone number, etc. is a myth. One just needs to make sure he’s not doing anything shameful, then he doesn’t need to care who knows it. Again, thanks, because I am tired of the google stuff, but hey, I also like and need to go to the internet. So, that’s the price. I’ve given out my email countless times!!! Demagogerie(?) must take a backseat to truth.

  • Jeff Perry

    Do a mx record look up for Reagan.com. Their mail server is emailsrvr.com. Emailsrvr.com is a email hosting service that sells white labeling email hosting. They may claim all they want that they do not monitor your email and the fact is I am sure they don’t. I know that to be the case because they do not host the server. Now does emailsrvr.com monitor email? Well like they claim on Reagan.com it is possible.

    • While this wasn’t the case when I originally wrote this post, it doesn’t surprise me that they’ve shifted to this stack, and this only further illustrates my point: their marketing relies on misdirection and their business model depends on its users not understanding the technology … an ironic dependency given the “problem” they are critical of and claim to solve.

  • goodmatt 10

    I think you could have given this information without all the bias. I am not in either camp, frankly, I find no wealth of knowledge on either side of the aisle, but there is no doubt most of these internet companies either lean left or pander to the left so that is why I looked into this.

    I do thank you for looking into this, and I certainly have to verify your claims, however, I don’t see how any business is going to be able to completely disconnect itself from major companies, with stocks, mergers, etc that is next to impossible, so I think you are being a bit unfair with some of your criticisms.

    I do agree tho, a site I pay for should not have ads, I see no reason to pay when they are going to have ads for revenue.

    • I never suggested a business should be completely disconnected from major companies, so that’s hardly me being harsh. Rather, Reagan.com made that claim itself, I’m merely calling out the impossibility and lie of that claim.

      This service is entirely duplicitous, marketing a service that they themselves cannot deliver, and they are capitalizing on people’s ignorance to achieve their sales. If calling bullshit on that is being harsh, sign me up.

  • calditz1

    Thanks for the article. Saved me $33. Though you may be a liberal, good advice is good advice and is welcome from any quarter.

  • Col C

    Google, Yahoo, and Facebook (although Facebook isn’t an internet provider, they are absolutely biased towards the liberal left, and have censored “What’s trending” to remove conservative content), as far as proof is concerned, how do you prove it? I know by the content, but Facebook has been accused directly and specifically by former employees, that they did indeed censor conservative content . Google and Yahoo have as well, (the proof is in the content of their stories, dah!) of course they would say they are open to all forms of thought, they are not, and I too have been censored on my Google account, I no longer use it for anything political. When I was a political coordinator for an organization, it would close down my access if I was sending out group emails with certain subject matter, but I did not have trouble with sending single emails.

    • Facebook actually is an ISP (they own Internet.org), Yahoo is not (unless you consider the SBC, which I’m pretty confident is no longer in existence). Google and Facebook are also pretty open about their policies, what you can and cannot use their services for, what they will censor, etc. You may disagree with what they choose to censor/ban and why, but that doesn’t make it a conspiracy—it’s in their Terms of Service, and their open to the media about the liberal slant their algorithms propagate.

      • Col C

        Facebook’s Zimmerman telling staff to censor what is trending on Facebook just because it is conservative, and then Zimmerman saying he is open to all viewpoints, obviously both these stances can not be true at the same time. You are also admitting that their algorithms propagate liberal theology. Since they are a private company, they can do what they want, but they should be up front about it.

        • Zuckerberg. Zimmerman is a different guy entirely ;).

          I won’t play battle of the news sources—you’re free to believe what you like. I don’t deny that the algorithms may have suppressed certain views over others (and, more than likely, the opposite views at other times—but of course that won’t get attention from conservative outlets looking for a conspiracy). But as someone who works in the tech industry and with Facebook before, I will stipulate that machine learning is far more complicated than people speculate. It’s easy to say “it’s biased!” without understanding the complexity of what the machines are parsing to deliver the most applicable content to us at any given time.

          • Col C

            Oh, I agree, it’s impossible to monitor all content, and I knew it started with a Z, lol, there really is a Zimmerman?

  • Ryan Hammerbeck

    Cool. A liberal that can calmly express an argument. 95% of the libs I’ve met or observed just scream and protest and call you a fill-in-the-blank-ist if you don’t comply with their way of “free thinking”. Especially in these “hate Trump because the news experts tell us to” days. I’m not being sarcastic either, I really appreciate it. I never intended to get a Reagan.com email (just info) but if I where, you would’ve saved me $40. Thanks, and again I’m not being passively aggressive or anything. I really do appreciate when people can express different opinions without allowing emotions or blind devotions to get in the way.

    • Sorry you’ve had such bad experiences. Close minded people are everywhere. I grew up in a pretty conservative bubble, so my experience has been just the opposite of yours—the angry, self righteous people shouting were the conservatives, and I’ve often found refuge in calm, rational discussion with liberals. But that’s not to say I don’t also know plenty of level headed, agreeable conservatives, many of them being my own family members.

      The important thing is that we recognize that these people aren’t no the norm. There are crazies on all sides (and there are more than two sides), but that doesn’t mean the “other side” is exclusively made up of those people, or that their view is wrong or bad—it’s just different. We never make any progress when any of us are screaming at each other, so the individuals doing that are doing everyone a disservice.

      • Ryan Hammerbeck

        Amen brutha! Cheers and keep it up! Let’s do away with labels and just work out our differences or live with them. And yes, I probably have had an abnormal experience with both sides of the aisle.

  • RomanEmpire

    I understand now, having read the article your point; thanks for the info.

  • Rose

    I thank you for your article. I found it to be very informative.

    I am not a liberal but I do like to stay informed and anytime I can learn something I’m happy to do so.
    I listen to Rush and other conservative talk show hosts and I have heard the commercial for the Reagan email on quite a few times.
    I was going to check it out and I came across your article. And your article actually changed my mind .
    I I figured, why should I waste $40?
    Thank you

  • GMichael Dorsey

    I have used Reagan Email for several years but now I can no longer get to my account to get my Email. There is no way to get any customer support or is there no way to get to them to get a refund of my renewal that I very recently paid. I no longer consider email service from Reagan email a good

  • James John Haseltine

    I am very conservative and a strong admirer of President Ronald Reagan. I came across Reagan.com and with all their hype, along with their association to Ronald Regan I signed up for a special promotion they were offering for two years for the price of one. The first year went off without a hitch, but at the end of the first year my service was disabled. I contacted their customer service by chat and had to email them a screen shot of my membership page, which clearly showed both years as being paid for the single payment. He did immediately reactivate my account and since it was the weekend, he sent a message to billing for their records.
    After seven months, my account we disabled and when I contacted customer service and all they would say is they never offered the two for one promotion and I only paid for one year. I was forced to pay another $40.00 to gain access to my account, since it was my main email, I filed a complaint with BBB and all Reagan.com would provide were the records showing the one time payment and the chat logs from the last session. They refused to provide the chat logs, screen shot email, or message sent to billing at the end of my first year, which would have proven my version.
    Their actions and practices are a far cry from the reputation of our great President, Ronald Regan. Anyone thinking of paying for this email service based on it’s supposedly connection to Reagan, should be extremely leary!