Monday, December 08, 2008

The Best and the Brightest

I'm not usually a fan of Frank Rich, who really should have stayed in the Arts section of the paper.  In today's Times, however, he has a long Op-Ed that really strikes at the the heart of my concern over Obama and his coming Administration.  In a nutshell, Rich reminds readers that David Halberstam was not being complimentary when he described the brilliant young minds that got us into Vietnam as "The Best and the Brightest."  It's very appealing to imagine an Administration filled with wunderkinder, but sometimes these very bright folks lack the wisdom that comes with real experience.

That's always been my gripe with Obama.  No question he is a bright guy (although I doubt he is any brighter than any number of people I know and I don't want them to be President either).  But he's never run anything and he has no record on which we can judge his wisdom or lack thereof.  Just being bright is not enough.

People made much of the fact that Abraham Lincoln was similarly inexperienced when he became President in a time of national crisis.  What most people forget is that Lincoln's first few years in office were almost unmitigated disasters.  The much-vaunted Team of Rivals was mostly a Team of Annoying, Back-stabbing Distractions that ate up much of Abe's time.  His management of the Civil War was horrible and Union armies were getting their asses kicked all over the place as Lincoln dithered with a succession of generals who did nothing but bring disaster.  It was not until Vicksburg and Gettysburg that Union fortunes began to change.  And if Sherman had not delivered Atlanta in 1864, it seems pretty certain that Lincoln would have been a one-termer.


2 comments:

Tony Alva said...

John Cole over at Balloon Juice posted something about this piece too…

"If General McClellan does not want to use the army, I would like to borrow it for a time."

-A. Lincoln–

It’s a four year process at West Point which the “Best and Brightest” are challenged to become great military leaders, or figure out for themselves that perhaps they were born to do something else with their big brains. Anyone who has spent time there can attest to your point and concern here. Much like your alma mater, the academy selects a very small quantity of top shelf candidates for each plebe class which reports in July. Before the beginning of their first academic year two months later 50 will be gone. There are leadership qualities that can be taught. One can always study and learn their way into being “intellectual”, but can one become proficient enough in both areas while in a classroom to propel them to greatness in the real world? While it’s studied to death, we’re still a long way from crystal ball success.

A very dear friend of our family, a guy who BARELY graduated from WP, is now a full bird turning down offers to work at the WH (he wants to retire). This guy really struggled academically, but was a natural leader with a STRONG sense of duty. I don’t thing I’m exaggerating at all by saying soldiering was simply his “calling”. His story is not unlike thousands who came before and after him. Then there are the George Custer’s that prove the converse, and many others in between those two extremes. I think guys like my friend overcame their shortcomings and rose to greatness by acknowledging their deficiencies, and with steely eyed determination, dedicated themselves to overcoming them.

Will Obama end up being like my friend, or will he be a George Custer? Or perhaps he’s natural born? We’re just going to have to wait and see. I’m certainly rooting for his success at this fragile point in our history.

Dave Cavalier said...

You'd enjoy a book I once saw about the Goats of various classes at the USMA and how they fared.

I have to look it up for you.