He’s at least tied with Teddy Roosevelt, since they both had Nobel Peace Prizes before they did anything as president.

And BO qualified for a Nobel Prize 12 days into his first term. These liberal accolades mean nothing.

@gg,
You just keep on pluckin’ that chicken, mister.

I suspect there’s a “recent history” bump, way up or way down, in such ratings polls.

At a remove of 100 years, the differences between (Teddy) Roosevelt and Taft get underplayed in such polls. The differences between recent presidents get accentuated attention.

Way accentuated in this case, though. Ask any of these guys to name a real difference between W and O and I doubt they could come up with anything more substantial than that O has a better tan.

All of BHO’s tongue bathers keep harping on the hero’s supposedly stratosphere-level “intelligence,” but I’ll be damned if any of them can point to something concrete to back that up. He wrote a couple of memoirs? So what. He ran Harvard’s “Law Review”? Again, so what; he didn’t actually contribute anything during his tenure there; in fact, he may be the most un-published “academic” I’ve ever encountered.

The one group of things that could possibly bolster the claim, his college papers and transcripts, are under embargo. What’s up with that if he’s such a damn smartypants?

This just in: A poll of 238 of the country’s top scholars living in an academic echo chamber can’t tell their ass from a hole in the ground.

Maybe they ranked Obama so high because Obama has employed- appointed so many from academia SEE CZARS…..just saying he doesn’t have people in positions that know much more than “theoretically” how things are supposed to work.

So why wouldn’t the so called scholar class give him high marks…he is one of their biggest employers.

It’s not like they are going to bite the hand that feeds them.

Now this list is just so much better and I direct it to these scholars.

Oh, and gg, your message is at 4:05.

Hey scholars, why is Obama making the gulf clean up so slow?

Yes, gg, the blog works. We’re just not paying attention to you.

But for your sanity’s sake, may hope triumph over experience.

@gg,
Yeah, we’re rather liberal with the markup, as you can tell.

Hey look! Scholars!

More scholars!

Out here, I hear a murmuring of innumerable November bees and the silken sad uncertain rustling of each purple curtain turning bluer with each passing day. Is that the blood-gush blade-gash you republicans hear?

Again, when I use empirical evidence (e.g. campaigns and their results, as well as Obama’s approval rating) to demonstrate that The One will be a one-term President, I’m a cocksure moron.

But when gg just masturbates in front the keyboard, well, those carbon emissions are intellectual gold!

“He was given the Nobel based on his influence and achievements in the following months” [emph. added]

Because when you’re teh mostest awesomest evah!, you don’t actually have to earn your accolades. There just given to you as a matter of due course.

Gee. That kind of somes up Obama’s whole career.

I got an idea. Let’s poll the scholars of the Heritage Foundation and the American Enterprise Institute and see how they rank the presidents! It ought to be instructive.

There! They’re theirs, see. Got it.

“He was given the Nobel based on his influence and achievements in the following months”

If my boss thinks that, I’m so asking for a bonus right now, based on my awesomeness to come in 2011.

I think you need to demand that your anticipated cumulative bonus for the remainder of your career be preearned now. Strictly for the tax benefits.

“He was given the Nobel based on his influence and achievements in the following months”

No, he was given the Nobel in a nakedly pathetic effort to try to shame him into losing in Afghanistan. Because, as you well know, empty gestures and petty posturing are what count, not effort and results.