"The shallowness of Barack Obama’s intellect"

I put quotes around the title phrase because it's not mine but from Thomas Lifson at The American Thinker (I'll break here for a hat tip to the tremendous Bookworm Blog, which led me to Lifson's post. Bookworm has become a part of my daily reading and it should become a part of your own - that is one smart lady over there and oh how I wish I had her blogging talent.  Just to get a idea of her abilities, read her entire post here. You'll go back for more, I promise.)

Back to the Lifson post.  Here's a snippet but you should read the whole thing:

The error perfectly encapsulates the shallowness of Barack Obama's intellect, and his lack of rigor. Obama is a man who accumulated academic credentials while giving no evidence whatsoever of achieving any depth. He was the only president of the Harvard Law Review to graduate without penning a signed article in that esteemed journal. His academic transcripts remain under lock and key, as do his academic papers.

For the sort of people like David Brooks of the New York Times, who are impressed by fancy degrees and a sharp crease in the trousers, Obama may appear to be the smartest ever occupant of the Oval Office. But, as the old joke goes, deep down, he is shallow. Underfoot, literally, there is woven into his background a prominent vein of phoniness.

For some reason or other, Obama has been able to skate through academia and politics without ever being seriously challenged to prove his depth. A simple veneer of glibness has been enough to win the accolades of the liberal intelligentsia. But now that he has actual responsibilities -- including relatively trivial ones like custodianship of the inner sanctum of the presidency -- his lack of substance keeps showing up in visible, embarrassing and troubling ways.

I agree with this entirely, as readers of my own own blog will know - I've been arguing something similar for over two years now, that Barack Obama was and remains totally unfit for the presidency. He has neither the experience, the temperament nor the intellect for the job. I've argued in the past that his intellect has never progressed beyond the arrogance of dorm-room bull sessions or the condescension of faculty lounge lizards. The left closed ranks around him early in order to shield the American public from the emptiness of Obama's experience (the mainstream media's collective and coordinated refusal to vet him during the campaign may be the most irresponsible moment in the history of journalism) but it has now become apparent to even the general Obama watcher how little there is to the man. The activity where his emptiness shows through most clearly is, perhaps, when he is speaking extemporaneously. Without a prepared speech and his trusty teleprompter he borders on the pathetic: he fumbles, he pauses, he searches, he breaks out into semi-embarrassed grins. The reason he does so is because he has no information, no knowledge, to fall back on other than invective against his opponents. Intellectually, he's an empty vessel. So, day by day and inevitably, we gather more evidence of Obama's (and his associates) unfitness for the job. The oval office carpet silliness is simply today's exhibit.