Frank Rich: The Brightest Are Not Always The Best

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.

Read the whole story here.

Comments

[munki]

In general, that is correct...
Like in Corporate America - abuse-greed and self first...
Some best entrepreneurs are brilliant in what they do - PASSION.

Many of Obama's choices are NOT self first... do have PASSION...
Those who cares and can teach and capable of surround themselves with those who can carry through the tasks...plus hands on experience.

I may not be the smartest person in the world, but I know my forte - ability to articulately negotiate bridge cultural gap - wouldn't you say that your up bringing combined with traveling - willingness to listen to others view including opponents - make you a smarter person... could be a global street smart?

[canucklivinginUSA]

I haven't read the amount of drivel on here, because all I see is a bunch of leeches latching to yet another negative article about Obama. BLAH, BLAH, Obama is making the biggest BLAH, BLAH, BLAH, BLAH, BLAH, BLAH, BLAH, BLAH, BLAH, BLAH

[Rule Of Law]

I want to thank the academy and also, the readers who finally allowed my posts up well and safely past the cycle. Thank you, and thank you Mom and Dad.

[20090120]

Frank Rich has a short memory.....
"Michael DeWayne Brown (born November 8, 1954) was Undersecretary of Emergency Preparedness and Response (EP&R), a division of the Department of Homeland Security (DHS), a position generally referred to as the director or administrator of the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA). He was appointed in January 2003 by President George W. Bush and resigned in September 2005 following public outcry over his handling of the preparation and aftermath of the devastation wrought by Hurricane Katrina. (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Michael_D._Brown).

I could go on...and on....and on from these past 8 years of painful lessons learned, but it's easier to remind MSM about the past and the devastation it's had to prevent repeating painful history in the near future...got it Frank.

[Rule Of Law]

Isn't this what we've come to EXPECT from the NYT?

He conveniently ignores that the Viet Nam war had been going on since Eisenhower--a republican, and a general who should have known better, if anyone should!

[Frenbar]

Every Obama choice has one common thread, they are masters of conventional wisdom. The same tired, stale, thinking that got us to where we are today.

[Nonamnesiac]

His front line team are all neoliberal and warmongerer idelogues with a record of employing voodoo economics/Reaganomics/Rubinomics and/or supporting the Iraq war and occupation masquerading as "pragmatic centrists".

[Rule Of Law]

2--And that the war reached its peak in violence--the carpet bombing of N. Viet Nam and the defoliation of the South, expense--its peak in the cost of both men and material--and international law breaking (invasion of bordering countries) under Another Republican, who had assembled what many considered a brain trust that rivaled JFK's.

[peacegurl48]

I don't think we'll have any of the Orwellian aspects of the Bush Regime with this team; I'll take the best and brightest over the worst and the dumbest any time. Give them a chance Frank!

[Rule Of Law]

3--This argument just proves the opposite of his contention--that too smart equals not smart enough, and is just more neo-con-apologist-revisionist-history for "Billy-Bob" Bush and his band of war mongering neanderthals.

Because even with maniacs, psychopaths, and mentally deficient troglodytes in the White House, you can still screw up even worse than guys who actually graduated at the top of their class!

[Nonamnesiac]

The problem is group think. Once uncritical "group think" infects people, even the "brightest", if aspects of that group think are inaccurate, people who point out those inaccuracies get vehemently attacked by the "group think" people. Also, "brightest" doesn't necessarily mean "less corrupt". So even if there are bright people moving ideas that are not necessarily "wrong group think", if they're corrupt you still don't get good government or good policy.

Obama's choices of front line personnel show both "wrong group think" AND corruption (whether it's conscious or subconscious it's still corruption). His economic team to a person believe in unbridled free trade, privatization, the market inevitably controls everything and deregulation. And all of them have personally profited immensely from this Reaganomics/voodoo economics/Rubinomics principles, so they REALLY believe in it, despite the crash. After all, it's middle class people who get hurt by this most severely, not them and those whom they believe. And they've created fictitious economic models (kind of like Enron's 3rd set of books) to show they're right.

So despite the academic and business kudos behind his team, they suffer wrong group think and at least subsconscious corruption. And that doesn't even deal with the appointment of warmongerers Clinton and Gates to head State and Defense.

[Rule Of Law]

4--And lastly, let's not forget that one of the reasons JFK was assassinated was his repeated vow to end our involvement in Viet Nam, along with dismantling the Federal Reserve. Had he lived, he would have been in the same role that Obama has cast himself---The One Person who makes sure that His vision is implemented, no matter who it is he has working for him! And he had that same personal power. That's why he died. I hope that Obama is able to Fulfill his Vision!

[AlaskanWannaB]

Yet, we pay our those who lack brains the most amount of money. Um..mmm...football players. And, we pay those that we should put on a pedestal....teachers....the least amount of money. Now, I'm speaking of excellent teachers...not mediocre teachers who got in the field because they were not smart enough to do anything else. One reason I knew Obama was the right person for me to support is his stance on education and the fact that GOOD teachers should be paid more money. It sickens me that we treasure football players more than we treasure great teachers. What does that say about our country. We support mediocracy.

[suan]

The cost-benefit analysis suggests: weighing the total expected cost against total expected benefit. Just for argument's sake, let's say that thousands of people sit in a class. The teacher would probably be paid accordingly, just as Bill Clinton for his speeches (450 000$ per speech, I read). Football players are paid millions because they bring thousands of people in to watch their games and therefore the benefits far outweigh the cost. Money talks...In pro sport, for many are called, few chosen. In education, for many are called, many chosen....

[KQuarksSuperKollider]

The best and the brightest may not be the best but we know for sure that the dumbest and the ideologues are always the worst.

It's ironic that Frank Rich who I really like is picking on Geither for not working on Wall Street when Wall Street greed had much more to get us into the mess then him working in the Fed or Clinton's treasury.

Personally I would be much more disturbed if Obama chose another Wall Street crony for the biggest job to take care of the economy.

[BigBagel]

Like Rubin of Citi.

[LaFilleEnRose]

The brightest may not always be the best, but if faithful, they can serve the best brilliantly. I'm thinking of Kennedy and Johnson relative to the Viet Nam War. If you have a CIC who is pushing war -- no holds barred -- then you get the computerized mind of McNamarra working on that. But if, like in the Cuban Missile Crisis, you have brilliance serving intelligence and wisdom, then maybe they are of good use. Just a thought.

[JamesA1102]

Great analogy, unfortunatly Mr. Rich has to re-write history to make it work. The policy of sending military advisors to Viet Nam began under Eisenhower. This policy was continued and only slightly increased under Kennedy. The commitment of combat troops began under Johnson and many of the people Kennedy had recruited either advised against it or left the administration.

Maybe Mr. Rich's time would be better spent examining the role his editors and colleagues, like Tom Friedman, in pimping the war to the American people and why they are still employed by the supposed 'newspaper of record'.

[infinity]

Actually, there were approx. 800 American military advisors in Vietnam at the time of Kennedy's election. This number grew more than "slightly" to at least 12,000 (other citations go as high as 17K) just before the President's assassination. Robert MacNamara, appointed by Kennedy, was the prime architect responsible for the enormous build up of American troops during the Vietnam War. Frank Rich hasn't re-written history; it's you that has done so.

[JamesA1102]

I haven't rewritten anything. There may have only been 800 at the time of Kennedy's election but the number was increased before his inauguration and then throughout his administration as part of a policy of support that was crafted in the Eisenhower administration. Kennedy is guilty of not changing the policy and even of accelerating it, but nothing more. And as you state is was only Military advisors not combat troops. It was Johnson who started sending combat troops and is responsible for the enormous, not Kennedy. Robert MacNamara may have been appointed by Kennedy but he was implementing a policy set by Johnson. And as Bobby Kennedy found out, if you didn't cowtow to Johnson's policies you were quickly out of in the cold.

[loki]

The problem is many of what some people consider the brightest, are just people who were able to get through the Ivy greed schools and become part of their "club:. doesnt matter if they actually graduated based on their earned grades, cheated, or their parents paid for the degree. If you have an Ivy Greed Parchment, your in the elitists club because you have been taught a lesson many of them value more than life itself, Greed. That is why we need to put the Ivy Greed schools where they belong, and that is lower than a diploma mill when it comes to doing better for the country, the world, and man kind.

[alexis d]

More to the point, the best and brightest cannot always be counted on to have everyone's best interests in mind. The illegitimate Bush Administration has had quite a few very bright people working very hard to rob the country blind, and they've been quite effective at it. This was no accident.

[bigmadd]

8 years of W, I think it is time for the best and the brightest working with Obama
it's not the time to dumb down thats how we got in this mess!

[Oxonian2001]

I think the lesson to take from this is to learn to truly examine, think for oneself, and inquire: which is obviously something that a good majority of Americans have not been doing over the last 8 years. One of the reasons why Ivy grads--especially those in the GOP--have done enormously well for THEMSELVES is because they are very articulate, and more importantly, extremely confident: whatever we think of Ann Coulter (Cornell), Bill O'Reilly (Yale), and Pat Robertson (Yale), they have that Ivy attitude that says "everything I say is right and don't you dare question it"--even when, yes, they are mocking "elitists." As such, few ever have dared to call them up on their rubbish and their numerous self-contradictions. Ann, why aren't you shopping at Walmart? Bill, why aren't you living in a trailer? But hey, it's so much easier when someone can think for you, right? No wonder the GOP could give a rat's a$$ about public education. The more who are ill educated and less likely to question them, the better. This is why we have a vast serf-like poorly schooled populace and on the other, a tiny aristocratic elite that has learned to hoodwink and bamboozle (to quote Malcolm X) the vast majority of the nation.