President Barack Obama’s golf habits have garnered significant media attention recently. Politico ran a long story on the politics of presidential golf, and Chris Cillizza, in the Washington Post, argues that Obama’s disconnectedness, symbolized by his proclivities for short pants and long drivers, threatens the Democrats’ chances in the upcoming mid-term elections. Even Jimmy Fallon, the politically toothless late night talk show host, took aim at Obama’s hobby.

Obama loves golf. I am not sure I really care. Yes, golf takes a long time to play. Unlike taking a jog or hitting the tennis or basketball court, golf takes four or more hours, effectively cutting most workdays in half. Of course, work can be done at other times. And, like it or not, Obama plays much of his golf on vacation time. Yes, I understand that Obama takes lots of vacations and they tend to be quite expensive for taxpayers. And, yes, I understand that Obama’s vacations sometimes feel more like monarchical displays than anything else.

These things are not, in the end, the problem for Obama. These are all symptoms of something that is blindingly obvious, even to Democrats. Golf is simply a symptom for a more troubling disease. President Obama is not an effective president. He golfs, and vacations, I fear, because he has nothing better to do with his time. Golf does not prevent him from doing his job, but it has become his job.

As Maureen Dowd has pointed out, the promise of President Obama has evaporated into nothingness. He was elected, let us recall, on little more than promise. With a record as thin as his frame, Obama ascended to our highest office by virtue of his rhetoric.

Instead of growing into the job, and controlling his office, calendar, and subordinates, while at the same time building relationships with those he most needs to succeed, the Oval Office has diminished the President. Instead of striding across events like John Bunyan, wielding an axe that no other world leader possesses, President Obama swings a nine iron. He appears overwhelmed, disjointed, and disengaged.

Critics might argue that Obama has been countered by the U.S. House at every step. This may be true in a sense, but is Obama willing to admit defeat to John Boehner? Did the Tea Party really thwart his presidency? Better presidents have worked with combative Congresses to mutual benefit. Reagan and Clinton, for example, faced hostile Speakers. President Obama, in contrast, appears to disdain Republicans only slightly more than other politicians.

Democrats have begun to speak on the record about the President’s aloofness. While I don’t know President Obama, nor do I know people who work for him, from the outside it appears the President expected things to be easier. He expected his rhetoric to be sufficient, a stand-in for leadership. In a way, his expectations were rooted in reality. After all, he became President, primarily, because he appealed to people through his presence. Good presidents, however, understand that presence is simply a ticket through the door. Leadership requires more than simply appearing to be a leader. It requires ideas, dedication, flexibility, and humility. Good leaders, in my experience, are fully aware of what they don’t know. Therefore, they listen to others with more expertise in a given area and they look for ideas wherever they can find them. Poor leaders either are too arrogant to admit their ignorance or too stupid to realize it exists. History will tell us where President Obama falls on this spectrum, or if there are deeper and more mysterious reasons lurking behind his ineffectiveness. No matter what those reasons, it is unlikely golf will be very high on the list.