At TIME, Mark Halperin is “grading” the Obama administration . . . and he gives Obama an A-:
Instantly comfortable and highly skilled at the hardest job in the world — proving his supporters’ contention that all the traits that made him a great candidate would serve him well in the White House: even temper, cool demeanor, boldness under pressure, shrewd facility for managing personnel, unfailing instincts about when to delegate and when to engage.
Grumpy Old Professor Tom Maguire snarks:
Obama’s approval rating has sagged (which is not inevitable); he surrendered control of the stimulus debate to Pelosi and Reid; he lost control of the health care debate to Pelosi, Reid, and any private citizen with a Facebook account; he has let climate change drift to the back burner until next year, when an election oriented Congress is sure to do nothing; and despite lofty rhetoric there is no way he will deliver on his promise to close Gitmo by year end.
Internationally Obama ired our allies on Iran, left ’em laughing in Copenhagen, and seems to inspire a lot more curiosity than respect around the world.
And rather than bringing Washington together Obama and his team are adopting a bunker mentality faster, and with less reason, than any White House in memory.
I shudder to think what a B+ would have looked like.
And do keep clicking once you reach that TIME link — but do it before lunch, lest you lose it. I won’t even tell you Michelle Obama’s “grade.”
Halperin’s entire series of posts is inane cheerleading — a totally unprofessional act of journalistic fellatio disguised as objectivity. It’s an utter joke.
I give it an A-.
UPDATE: Halperin’s nonsense is from a while back, so I (and many other bloggers) are getting to it late. It’s still really dumb.