Obama = McClellan?

In the book Team of Rivals (a book I highly recommend), I learned about Abraham Lincoln's interactions with the Union Army during the Civil War. One of the most famous or infamous generals of the early part of the war was General George B. McClellan. He is known for accomplishing almost nothing. General Lee and the Army of Northern Virginia defeated McClellan's far larger army several times during in the Peninsula Campaign of 1862. He would be replaced in the Fall of 1862.

During President Obama's speech I began to see some similarities between the two men. First, a little more about McClellan:

George B. McClellan was well-known prior to the beginning of the war. He was a popular commander and known as a sort of non-controversial pick to head the new Army of the Potomac. He had never led an army or unit of that size, but to be fair no one had. The Army of the Potomac around late 1861, was probably around 100,000 to 150,000 troops. The Rebel Forces were probably no more than 60,000 or 70,000. The Union Army was better-armed and probably better-trained. And yet, McClellan remained in Maryland and Washington DC for months.

McClellan refused to move because he believed the army was not ready and that the enemy was far more potent than everyone else believed. He became angry at Lincoln, his secretary of war, and demanded they stop meddling in military affairs. He became irritated that he was not getting the supplies or the troops he wanted. Until he was "ready" he was not going to move. Lincoln, remained patient and withstood the disrespectful and clearly insubordinate attitude of his new general. McClellan would often ignore letters from Lincoln and show up late for meetings with the President. In one instance, he did not come down from his chamber at all with Lincoln, the secretary of war, and others waiting for him downstairs at his headquarters. Many screamed for Lincoln to fire him for insubordination but Lincoln refused, seeing no benefit in replacing his top general so quickly. Lincoln was a truly patient man, his humility far beyond the egos of those around him. Again, read the book, I recommend it to all!

Lincoln learned as much as he could about military affairs and continued to pressure McClellan. McClellan became more shrill in his insults, believing that Lincoln was an idiot and that his whole cabinet had no idea what they were doing, he complained many of the other Union generals and leaders were also reckless and stupid. He believed he was not being given what he needed to defeat the Rebels in Virginia. Finally, in the Spring of 1862, McClellan finally decided to put a plan together to invade Virginia and take Richmond via the sea. It failed miserably with thousands dead. McClellan advanced so slowly that the Rebels were able to prepare for the attack and even counterattack in several instances, which froze McClellan. Within a couple months McClellan was chased out of Virginia despite outnumbering Lee and the Rebels more than 2:1.

Fast forward to the State of the Union Address of 2010. President Obama lectures Congress on failing to move past politics to pass Healthcare for him, he lectures them on how to properly pass it along with his Cap and Trade, and other initiatives. How can he do his job and be great if they don't get it together? He argues he has saved or created 2 million jobs. He complains that this horrible economy was given to him and that without him, we would be a third world country. He argues the problems with the budget are all Bush's fault for handing him such deficits (a blatant lie). He even lectures the Supreme Court for giving a bad decision on campaign ads and funding(another blatant lie).

Obama-McClellan are confident in their own abilities, their intellect, and their destiny of becoming great leaders. Obama-McClellan faced problems early on and quickly blamed those around them for the problems, even their predecessor-superior. Every defeat and humiliation was met with outrage and disdain for those who actually failed, which was never Obama-McClellan. Obama-McClellan never took risks, moved so slowly and deliberately that all could see what they were doing and it surprised no one. And both had SUBSTANTIAL resources to accomplish their mission. One has a dominant majority in Congress, the other had a massive and well-armed and trained army.

Now this is just an observation and Obama may turn out to be more adaptable than McClellan. I have my doubts. The first year of Obama is looking a lot like the first period of McClellan's command of the Army of the Potomac. A leader, with vast resources, superiority in power and influence, managed to accomplish nothing, waste a lot of time, while the opponent gathered strength and pushed back.

Remember what Obama said about 1994 and Clinton's loss of the Congress. In 1994, Clinton lost his Democratic Congress because Republicans won 70 seats in the House and 6-7 seats in the Senate. Obama claims that the difference now is that the Democrats "didn't have me in 1994". Another glimpse into his arrogance. Yet another, at a prayer breakfast he speaks about himself and I believe mentions a person who decides to be buried in an Obama T-shirt. Nice prayer. He says "I" and "me" more than any President in recent memory. And yet he defers to his Congress, his Attorney General, and others so that it is not his fault for these failures. Some leader...

He could turn it around. Clinton's first two years did not go well but he managed to turn it around with a Republican Congress no less. Will Obama do the same? I see some similarities in the personalities of Clinton and Obama but not in their political skill. Clinton was far more experienced (oddly enough) and skilled in triangulating between the Congress and the people. He could alter course when polls weren't going his way.

If things go on as they did in 2009, there is a chance Republicans retake the House and gain significant ground in the Senate. Either way, Obama's powerful edge will be gone and his agenda shattered.