Given some of the progressive and pseudo-libertarian whinging today, I can only say that no, she was not perfect; but, unlike most of the commentators I've read today (or then) she never quit trying to be the best she could and do the best possible job she could. It may not be your narrowly defined and cherry-picked philosophy, but that's okay, she did it her way. And she did it well.
She had a brain, and used it. She had a backbone, and that's more than I will say for many/most politicians on either side of the pond. Then or now. She believed in hard work, a level playing field, and individual responsibility. She tried hard to steer the state onto a new path; and, sadly, her efforts were not continued in my opinion.
I did not agree with all she did, just as I did not agree with all Ronald Wilson Reagan did. That said, I would put either of them down as the best leaders of their respective states in quite some time. The only reason I don't go for 100 years on both is that Sir Winston in the early days of WWII spikes it for the Brits.
That said, as Jonn notes, it was an amazing time when she ruled, and when she stood in partnership with President Reagan. The cold war ended without going hot; a number of other trouble spots and things were dealt with expeditiously, terrorists learned not to screw around in and with England, and Argentina learned the hard way that the British lion was not toothless and asleep.
Sadly, those days are gone, and to be honest I fear that which is to come. For now, however, I raise a toast the the Iron Lady with the iron balls the size of basketballs.