Home
Archive
Newsletters
Video
Blogs
Discuss
About
Search
Donate
Advertise

Note to Obama: The Brightest Advisors Are Not Always the Best

By Frank Rich, The New York Times. Posted December 8, 2008.


The media haven't asked the tough questions they should about Obama's superstar cabinet.

Share and save this post:

      

      

Share on Facebook       

AlterNet Social Networks:
follow us on twitter
find us on Facebook

In Special Coverage

Belief:
Is Blind Faith in God and the Bible a Modern Invention?
Devilstower

Corporate Accountability and WorkPlace:
What Can the Morass of the 1970s Tell Us About the Current Economic Crisis?
Alejandro Reuss

DrugReporter:
Why Are We Locking Up Traumatized Veterans for Their Addictions Instead of Offering Them Treatment?
Penny Coleman

Environment:
Why Max Baucus' 'No' Vote on the Climate Bill May Really Help Its Passage
Jeff Mcmahon

Food:
Soda Helps Make Americans Unhealthy and Fat -- Will Soda Tax Prevail Despite Pushback by Beverage Industry?
Christine Spolar, Joseph Eaton

Health and Wellness:
Does the House Bill's Public Option Kill Off the Senate's?
Booman

Immigration:
Recent Democratic Victories May Grease the Wheels for Immigration Reform in Congress
Marcelo Balive

Media and Technology:
Glenn Beck, Sean Hannity, Rush Limbaugh Stoking GOP Civil War
Eric Boehlert

Movie Mix:
The Yes Men: Pranksters Out to Fix the World
Mark Engler

Politics:
What Obama Is Up Against in His Own Branch of Government
Russ Baker

Reproductive Justice and Gender:
"Precious" Star Claims the Spotlight
Emily Wilson

Rights and Liberties:
Ugly Truth: Most U.S. Kids Sentenced to Die In Prison Are Black
Liliana Segura

Sex and Relationships:
9 Silly Things People Say When They Hear You Don't Want Kids (And Ways to Counter Them)
Liz Langley

Take Action:
G-20 Meetings: Nothing Much Happened in the Suites, and There Was Too Much Punch in the Streets
Laura Flanders

Water:
Radioactive Wastewater in New York Raises More Concerns About Oil Drilling
Abrahm Lustgarten

World:
Afghanistan Is Worse Off Than Ever, Thanks to the Sham Army We're Propping Up
Chris Hedges

More stories by Frank Rich

Advertisement
Upcoming AlterNet stories on Digg

In 1992, David Halberstam wrote a new introduction for the 20th-anniversary edition of “The Best and the Brightest,” his classic history of the hubristic J.F.K. team that would ultimately mire America in Vietnam. He noted that the book’s title had entered the language, but not quite as he had hoped. “It is often misused,” he wrote, “failing to carry the tone or irony that the original intended.”

Halberstam died last year, but were he still around, I suspect he would be speaking up, loudly, right about now. As Barack Obama rolls out his cabinet, “the best and the brightest” has become the accolade du jour from Democrats (Senator Claire McCaskill of Missouri), Republicans (Senator John Warner of Virginia) and the press (George Stephanopoulos). Few seem to recall that the phrase, in its original coinage, was meant to strike a sardonic, not a flattering, note. Perhaps even Doris Kearns Goodwin would agree that it’s time for Beltway reading groups to move on from “Team of Rivals” to Halberstam.

The stewards of the Vietnam fiasco had pedigrees uncannily reminiscent of some major Obama appointees. McGeorge Bundy, the national security adviser, was, as Halberstam put it, “a legend in his time at Groton, the brightest boy at Yale, dean of Harvard College at a precocious age.” His deputy, Walt Rostow, “had always been a prodigy, always the youngest to do something,” whether at Yale, M.I.T. or as a Rhodes scholar. Robert McNamara, the defense secretary, was the youngest and highest paid Harvard Business School assistant professor of his era before making a mark as a World War II Army analyst, and, at age 44, becoming the first non-Ford to lead the Ford Motor Company.

The rest is history that would destroy the presidency of Lyndon Johnson and inflict grave national wounds that only now are healing.

In the Obama transition, our Clinton-fixated political culture has been hyperventilating mainly over the national security team, but that’s not what gives me pause. Hillary Clinton and Robert Gates were both wrong about the Iraq invasion, but neither of them were architects of that folly and both are far better known in recent years for consensus-building caution (at times to a fault in Clinton’s case) than arrogance. Those who fear an outbreak of Clintonian drama in the administration keep warning that Obama has hired a secretary of state he can’t fire. But why not take him at his word when he says “the buck will stop with me”? If Truman could cashier Gen. Douglas MacArthur, then surely Obama could fire a brand-name cabinet member in the (unlikely) event she goes rogue.

No, it’s the economic team that evokes trace memories of our dark best-and-brightest past. Lawrence Summers, the new top economic adviser, was the youngest tenured professor in Harvard’s history and is famous for never letting anyone forget his brilliance. It was his highhanded disregard for his own colleagues, not his impolitic remarks about gender and science, that forced him out of Harvard’s presidency in four years. Timothy Geithner, the nominee for Treasury secretary, is the boy wonder president of the Federal Reserve Bank of New York. He comes with none of Summers’s personal baggage, but his sparkling résumé is missing one crucial asset: experience outside academe and government, in the real world of business and finance. Postgraduate finishing school at Kissinger & Associates doesn’t count.


Digg!    Share on facebook   submit to reddit    Bookmark on Delicious   Stumble This  

See more stories tagged with: obama, frank rich, advisors

Liked this story? Get top stories in your inbox each week from AlterNet! Sign up now »


Advertisement
Advertisement

 

Comments Turn comments off sitewide Give us feedback »
Comments closed.
The comments for this story have been closed. Thank you to everyone who participated.
View:
Summers' Sexism
Posted by: EKSwitaj on Dec 8, 2008 2:18 AM   
Current rating: 4    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Summers' remarks about women not having the brains for science were not impolitic: they were sexist. Why are so many people unable to recognize this?

He did not simply list hypotheses that others had come up with: he listed hypotheses in what he said he believed to be the order of their importance as causes of gender imbalance in science and engineering. Then he backed up his claims with an anecdote, which doesn't exactly show the best grasp of science, does it?

Is he really the smartest? Is that what getting tenure young shows? Or does it show a grand ability to network and a tendency to think in ways accepted by the gatekeepers?

Would a woman of similar intellectual abilities have gained tenure so quickly? Not likely.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: Summers' Sexism Posted by: jennyqla
» RE: The real problem. Posted by: oregoncharles
» RE:luctantly, Posted by: oregoncharles
» RE: Hypotheses Posted by: oregoncharles
Yup
Posted by: Col. Jackleg on Dec 8, 2008 3:09 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Particularly when they are warmed over Clintonoids or formerly shunned Bushoids. The voters screamed in '06....so what. The voters shrieked in joy last month....so what. Its the same cesspool and the purported cleaners are the criminals that filled the tank in the first place. If the "bailout" hearings and Bush's pathetic justification tour are not enough to sicken you, simply add the grim details of the plight of working class Americans and the poor....probably the same tier.... and tell me that any Republican gives a shit. They don't....but what possible reason justifies the existence of Pelosi or Reid? Not bad enough, throw in Steny Hoyer or maybe Newt Gingrich...ouch. Have no fear, help is on the way, Jeb Bush is gonna seek Mel Martinez Senate seat in Florida and can't you just see a Jeb Bush/Sarah Palin ticket in 2012.....or maybe the more palatable Palin/Bush correction. Spare us Lord, we ain't got a hope without ya!

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

looks like the paradigm (the common perception) rather than the picks are the problem
Posted by: Suzon on Dec 8, 2008 3:38 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
and the paradigm that the market knows best has taken a well-deserved kicking.

This is actually a time for some careful optimism. The idea of trickle down was always rubbish, but now it's clear to see that it's not just unjust but tragic.

In the meantime, the internet has given us access to information about suspect institutions like the Federal Reserve and a place to exchange that information.

We the people may be on the way to recovering the democracy which has been hollowed out from within.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Obama and his team are just more of the same
Posted by: susann on Dec 8, 2008 7:07 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
More of the same kissing AIPAC's ass. More of the same kissing Wall Street's ass. More of the same kissing corporate America's ass.

One party; two factions.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Is it just me?
Posted by: BreeMass on Dec 8, 2008 10:08 AM   
Current rating: 1    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Or is it sort of nice to find that the only thing Frank Rich can come up with to complain about is how smart Obama's cabinet is? So refreshing...

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: Is it just me? Posted by: Quannah
» RE: Is it just me? Posted by: racetoinfinity
same as the old boss
Posted by: jon B on Dec 8, 2008 11:06 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I'm very disappointed in Obama's economic team. The group is nothing more than the old elitist guard that Bush and Clinton had on board, or had the same ideology.

Our economy is shot to hell and it's because of these elitists and their failed ideas and theories. As Frank Rich pointed out they all had their hands in or near the Wall Street cookie jar and of course "had no idea" the cookie jar was really empty.

Rich didn't mention Fed Chair Ben Bernanke. On the team but not chosen as he was appointed by Bush. Bernanke is a proclaimed "expert" on The Great Depression. Interesting that prior to the mortgage meltdown and subsequent Wall Street exposure of stupidity and theft, that Bush should opt for a Great Depression "expert." What did Bush know back then?

But here's something Bernanke hopefully is thinking about but probably isn't....that the efforts of massive government FDR programs during the 1930s was initiated at a time of a balanced government budget. Today all these bailouts and coming down the pike the Obama public works projects are to pulled out of the hat of massive government debt. We already are above $10 trillion on the national debt, and that figure is rising faster than they can print money. Give it a number of months, a year or so, and we're going to see hyperinflation.

Let's be clear about something, we are IN a depression. Deflation is the problem as we speak, prices for most things are spiraling down because demand to consume has sharply dropped. And we ain't seen nothing yet. Until we can identify a bottom to the housing market, deflation will reign. You won't know the bottom until the home prices have sagged to a point where they don't move anymore, up or down. This could take awhile.

Any effort to suppress the price fall in housing would only delay the inevitable. They are trying to do that right now, when the Fed is intervening with mortgage rates. This either will have little to no affect or will cause another housing bubble (minor). The economy has spoken in response to all the shenanigans on Wall Street and the recklessness of mortgage companies, and once the economy has spoken so loudly, trying to shut it up is nearly useless.

The Obama economic team of incompetents will fail because their ideology will win out. If they wanted to be in control of the economy, they would first slam those Wall Streeters with every law and regulation they could think of and throw the bums out. They won't do that as the bankers are their friends. It's as simple as that.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Oh, PALEEEEEEEEEEEEEZ!
Posted by: CovertRage on Dec 8, 2008 11:08 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I think we ought to let Obama take oath before we go to holding his administration accountable for a mess that was born during the Reagan-Bush years.

As fate would have it, no one's crystal ball, ouigi board, tea leaves, tarot cards, or leaky magic 8-balls have been precisely accurate to date. Because a couple photo-opportunists with bad records have been pictured with Obama makes his plan no more moot and his team anymore ineffectual than being photographed with John Wayne Gacy made Rosaline Carter a serial murderess. Rubin was not Obama's only economic advisor during the campaign. Furthermore, the calamity that has befallen CitiGroup was not the product of Rubin's making alone. A whole lot of folks at Citi thought it was cute to be the first beast from the financial sea to boast a trillion in profits, the majority of whom supported Grampy McCain.

Let's be fair and reasonable. America hasn't faced the desperation in which the nation is now steeped since the Herbert Hoover reign of fecklessness. Granted the term "best and brightest" was intended to reflect a certain level of sardonic cynicism. Still, though, change is inevitable over time. Perhaps it's high time America change the meaning of that term. Right now, we can actually benefit from the sum products of our best and brightest, only if we're going to play our cards right.

Sure, this economy is a real mess - YES! And, the newly selected Obama economic team, for all intents and purposes, has no legitimate real world experience in any arena, espeically the 9th ring of hell. But, that, in and of itself, can actually work in our favor, with sacrifice and a national commitment to match skill with deliberated execution. The bottom line, though, is we have to start somewhere with someone doing something RIGHT NOW! Face it, America has screwed the global economic pooch, the bastardy of whose resultant poverty is going to be a little harder to unload on what's left of our coalition of the willing than that plan to pull the head off Saddam's cousin in a mock trial.

All of Obama's detractors and naysayers have either failed or flagrantly refused to come up with other viable constructive alternatives. All we seem to be getting is a whole lot of craven fearmongering and super-critical harping on Obama's adhesion to higher economic Clintonism, as if Bill Clinton was the worst President in the history of the American economy. Well, here's a news flash for those who tend to so quickly forget - the worst Presidents for economy in recent years have been Reagan, Poppy41, and that Cheney Vader manipulated doufas Dumya43. At least under Bill Clinton, America had jobs, domestic productivity, and enjoyed the trite false security of a slow-waning surplus, but a surplus nonetheless. Yeah, Wild Bill ruled from the convenient center, lost the Dem majorities to Newtered GinGrinch, lost what was left of his reputation to Monica Lewinski, pardoned a snake Mark Rich, and got caught trying to take the White House silver with him to New York. But, he managed to do all that, maintain a 67% Presidential approval rating, leave the economy of planet Earth intact, and LEAVE AMERICA A SURPLUS!!! In a devil's advocate defense of Big Dog, not a bad job at all!

So, let's relax, wait, and see. After all, we don't have the luxury of a glorious plethora of good options or an endless supply of qualified personnel to deploy these untested economic restoration vehicles. This is a raging inferno for which we're already way too late with our bucket brigade. So, screw this blame game! I personally commend Obama for making productive use of the current economic pissing contestants by having his team in place to start pissing towards the economic flames at midnight Jan 20, 2009! It's more than we've gotten from Dumya in 8 years.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» 43 brought to you by 42 Posted by: leafsong1
» RE: 43 brought to you by 42 Posted by: CovertRage
» RE: Oh, PALEEEEEEEEEEEEEZ! Posted by: jareilly
» RE: Oh, PALEEEEEEEEEEEEEZ! Posted by: CovertRage
» RE: Personnel are Policy Posted by: oregoncharles
» That's a big "if"! Posted by: CovertRage
» RE: I don't think... Posted by: oregoncharles
» RE: I don't think... Posted by: CovertRage
» RE: "Hillarycare" Posted by: oregoncharles
Consider the Source
Posted by: radical53 on Dec 8, 2008 11:31 AM   
Current rating: 1    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Although it is true that the brightest aren't necessarily the best advisors, the brightest certainly have more potential. I think it's interesting that this article was not written by an Alternet or Mother Jones person, for example. Instead, it was written by a "journalist" from the New York Times. It might just as well have been written by someone from CNN, NBC, or CBS.

Intelligence is dangerous, you see. There is a need to control the discourse and maintain it at a 5th grade level. These so-called journalists have become part of the power elite. They are shaking in their boots right now because they aren't sure if Obama will blow the lid off their whole con game.

I am hoping Obama can put some major changes in place before the media starts picking his administration apart with half-truths, distortions, and ignorant commentary. I hope he recognizes that health care is the big one, followed by global warming and green energy.

The major distractions of bailouts, recession, and terrorists could introduce critical delays to Obama's intended reforms. My advice is to stay focused on the programs proposed in the campaign and give lip service to the media, not the other way around.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

A few points
Posted by: willymack on Dec 8, 2008 12:14 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
The title of the article is what I'm commenting on, although I did quickly scan the article. It basically says that some people can be "too smart for their own good", and by extension, the whole country. The absurdity of the first purport should be obvious; just look at what a pack of nitwits, headed up by the Chucklehead-in-Charge has done for (to) us these past eight years. Could a staff of scholarly individuals, concerned with our national well-being be worse than that? Now, let's look at our president-elect. He's a calm, urbane, highly educated, and dignified gentleman with a brilliant wife and two beautiful daughters. You want change? We got change. Now, let's all get behind him and help him in becoming what could be our next Lincoln.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» a few more points Posted by: jon B
Who cares about the cabinet, is Obama ending the War?
Posted by: Reader11722 on Dec 8, 2008 12:23 PM   
Current rating: 1    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
How much longer will these needless wars for Israel continue? Will it 'change' under Obama? Highly doubtful. Israel already owns Obama after he picked Rahm Emanuel, the son of a terrorist, as Chief of Staff. Obama will probably let Mossad slide on their 9/11 involvement and Obama will continue the Middle East wars. So who won the US election? Israel did, as always.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» anti-semitism? Posted by: jon B
» RE: anti-semitism? Posted by: using
What gets my goat about this whole thing......
Posted by: Spiritgirl on Dec 8, 2008 1:20 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
First off the President elect has not even taken office yet! And while I have my own qualms about some of the people that he has picked for the next Administration notwithstanding - can we at least allow the man to occupy 1600 Pennsylvania Ave. before we storm it!

Next - if the media on the whole had done their due diligence before, the current mis-manager in charge just might not have been installed in the first place. Let us start with his record as CEO of various businesses none of which were successful, let us go to his record as Governor of Texas - again another series of disasters! High H.S. drop-out rates, high rates of illiteracy, high crime rates, high rates of impoverished people! As a Governor his record was horrendous enough to keep him out of the Oval Office, but did anyone report on that! His questionable Military Service (which reporting on got Dan Rather fired), and that was more than enough retaliation for "the celebrity media" to gain the lesson, do not report on negative events because retaliation will be swift!

Let us not talk about the BS that led not just to Afghanistan, but to IRAQ - calamity that it is, a city drowned - while a nation watched, the fantastic avarice and greed that have grown to immense proportions by CEO's and executives, the takeover of our government by total incompetents, and yet no questions asked!

So as we (you) rush in to make sure that this time there is not a repeat - please remember, can he sit in the Oval Office first!!!

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» Hell no, we have to be on his ass! Posted by: Pissed Off Woman
Cadre of the self-intersted, dumb, and diverse, eh?
Posted by: ABetterFuture on Dec 8, 2008 1:33 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
You really want four more years of "diverse" yes-men and yes-women?

Where'd that get us again?

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

More distrurbing than Rubin is Paulson & Goldman Sachs
Posted by: sonofloud on Dec 8, 2008 1:56 PM   
Current rating: 4    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
The $700 billion of taxpayers' money, in the plan suggested by Paulson, will buy enough of the toxic obligations to allow the companies to avoid bankruptcy. Not coincidentally, a major beneficiary of the scheme will be the investment bank Goldman Sachs. Paulson resigned as CEO of Goldman Sachs to become the Treasury secretary in 2006, having amassed a personal net worth of $700 million during his 32-year tenure at the bank (on average, $21.9 million per year).
There are hundreds if not thousands of Main Street banks and thrift institutions which played no part in the real estate securitization/derivatives game. Certainly the $700 billion could be made available to them instead, at low but positive interest....
from "The $700_billion bailout: one more weapon of mass deception"

PS lest not forget both Citibank and Goldman Sachs are major Obama donors

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» follow the money Posted by: jon B
Arrogance that Amounts to Stupidity
Posted by: oregoncharles on Dec 8, 2008 2:19 PM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
That's the problem with "the best and brightest." That, and self-serving out of a feeling of entitlement.

It's a danger to watch for, not a reason to put stupid people in positions of power.

In Summers' case, for an example, the results of his work in various crises are terrible: evidently he isn't nearly as smart as he thinks he is.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Why Ivy League?
Posted by: Sparks56 on Dec 8, 2008 2:43 PM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I think what Mr. Rich is really saying is that not all the best and brightest find their way into an Ivy league institution. I cite Harry Truman and Abe Lincoln as two examples. I also think our current president has well established the value of an Ivy League certification. By itself; not much.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» Hell, why not Ivy League? Posted by: CovertRage
» RE: Well, gee... Posted by: photon's feather
» Can YOU read? Posted by: CovertRage
» RE: Can YOU read? Yes. Can you? Posted by: photon's feather
» RE: Oh, I forgot to say... Posted by: photon's feather
OBAMA'S ECONOMIC PLAN: A BOTTOM TO TOP ECONOMIC PLAN HAS WORKED FOR MANY
Posted by: nubianem on Dec 11, 2008 5:48 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Obama's economic plan and agenda in which investment in infrastructure is emphasized is right on target. While there is the emphasis on creating jobs, the public is open to the idea. Yet, Americans must not be 'NEW-ORLEANS SHAFTED' where jobs are created BUT THESE JOBS ARE TAKEN OVER BY NON-AMERICANS FLOODED IN TO DO SLAVE-WAGE LABOR, AS WAS THE CASE IN NEW ORLEANS.

The 'bottom to top' economic practice has worked miracles for centuries in various cultures, including the pre-integration Black American business sector, the Afro-Caribbean communities of the US, the present Korean communities of the US and the 1940's - 1960's Jewish refugee (from WWII) community of New York who learned about 'Susu Economics,' (see Authorhouse dot com ) from Jamaicans and other Afro-Caribbeans.

In order to make the bottom to top system work, Obama's economic and justice team MUST TAP INTO THE VERY YOUTH AND ABLE-BODIED PEOPLE WHO ARE BEING THROWN INTO CAMPS BY RACIST, UNFAIR AND FAILED POLICIES.

While the rest of the world are investing in their future generations, we have a habit of throwing people in camps for simple infractions, or sullying their names and reputations, thus making it difficult for them to gain employment. THIS INJUSTICE IS ONE OF THE REASONS WHY AMERICA WILL STAGNATE. Nations cannot apply facistic economic policies (pri-industrial complex economics and semi-slavery laborers) and expect to compete with the rest of humanity who are investing in thier future.

Obama's economic plan needs good ideas? Do we have any?

see online, "

'Susu and Susunomics,"

iuniverse.com

'Susu Economics'

AuthorHouse.com

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

  • AlterNetYour turn

Support AlterNet
Do you value the information you're getting from AlterNet? Please show your support with a tax-deductible donation.


Feedback
Tell us how we're doing.

Advertisement
Advertisement