« Pomegranate juice tastes like grape juice | Main | Obamanomics »

September 19, 2011

Comments

Obama's father went to Havard and his mother has a phd.

You keep repeating the Cum Lade thing. But the standards have changed since 1999.

http://isteve.blogspot.com/2011/04/obama-
at-harvard-law-school.html

“Only since 1999 has magna cum laude at HLS been restricted to the top 10 percent. “….more likely, Obama finished in, say, the top 30% or 40% at HLS in grades“

Top 30%-40% is hardly 145 IQ.

You based your estimate on Obama being top 10%, but now we know he was probably top 30-40%. You should redo it.

“Obama was a big nobody when he wrote the memoir;”

Nonsense, why would publishers pay a 32 year old with no accomplishments hundreds of thousands of dollars to write an autobiography? It was clear already then that Obama, as a gifted African American with a strong life story, would go far politically.

Anyway writing a book is not as hard as you claim. Obama is probably 130-135, higher verbal than math.

Debating where he falls between IQ 125-145 seems unimportant, considering any score in that range is good enough to be president. The main thrust of Steve's article seems to be that Obama just isn't a very good intellectual or leader with little experience or results to justify his being elected president. That seems about right.

"Obama’s pet issues are healthcare reform, raising taxes for the rich, diversity, and anti-neo-colonialism."

I agree, but he definitely seems to have failed in his agenda. He passed Obamacare, but it was a pretty shitty bill when it finally got passed. He hasn't and probably won't raise taxes on the rich to any substantial degree, especially if we define rich as the "capital" class rather then some doctor making $300k/year.

Diversity and anti-neo-colonialism certainly were secondary objectives.

The big elephant in the room is the economy and finance, which Obama was clearly blindsided by and had no clue what to do. He panicked and turned over his economic decision making to a few powerful wall street cronies with ties to Clinton because he figured the economy was good under Clinton and he wanted to focus on health reform. That backfired. What is disappointing is that he's had three years to catch up on the economy and I see no progress at all.

You seem to think there's a perfect positive correlation between GPA and IQ in college. In reality, it's more like .4 or lower. It's quite possible for someone with a 120s IQ to be above the 80th percentile on GPA in a place like Harvard Law.

"George Bush is another guy who I would describe as not being intellectually curious."

Refuted here:

http://theamericanscholar.org/dubya-and-me/

Bush has been an avid reader of history for many years. This is not a man who is not intellectually curious. But lots of people underestimate his intellectual curiosity in addition to his intelligence.

"unless you buy into the idea that there has been a decades-long conspiracy to make Obama the President"

There IS something to this.

http://www.claremont.org/publications/crb/id.1852/article_detail.asp

"In sum, though the only evidence available is circumstantial, Barack Obama, Jr.'s mother, father, stepfather, grandmother, and grandfather seem to have been well connected, body and soul, with the U.S. government's then extensive and well-financed trans-public-private influence operations."

[HS: Just because Bush has read some books doesn't mean he's intellectually curious. People with an IQ of 125 often like to read books for pleasure. That Bush likes to read is consistent with him not being as stupid as liberals like to believe. But he's not a man of original ideas like Newt Gingrich.]

But how do you explain the relative dearth of Obama writings outside of his memoir(s)?

If he's such a great writer, wouldn't he be more prodigious? The "ghost writer" theory makes sense in light of his low volume of production.

[HS: I've already explained that he's not interested in doing legal scholarship.]

Half Sigma has swallowed the whole naive modern notion of “university-as-proxy-for-IQ”* hook, line, & sinker. His naivety even has him applyng it to such obviously affirmative action babies as Obama.

* “[I’m] smart enough to graduate top 10% from Arizona State University College of Law”!

[HS: People who actually read my blog know that my view is a lot more nuanced that that. It's a fact that college gpa is moderately correlated with SAT scores, and SAT scores are very highly correlated with intelligence, and the same applies to graduate school and law school. Graduating magna gives Obama at least the presumption of being smarter than the average HLS student, and the average HLS student has an IQ of 140-145 based on their LSAT scores. People who have actually attended law school know that there is blind grading and that they take the policy seriously.]

"Obama’s lack of legal scholarship is better explained by his lack of intellectual curiosity than by his lack of intelligence."

The way I read the article, that was Sailer's conclusion as well.

"It could be that Obama has been covering up his Deep Thoughts for all these years to maintain his political viability. But the more likely explanation is that while Obama enjoys writing (although not quite as much as he enjoys talking), he just can’t think of much of interest to write about.

Obama appears to be smart enough to be President, but not smart enough to be terribly interesting. But it’s okay for Presidents to be boring."

"Anyway writing a book is not as hard as you claim."

"Why is it every half-wit and sitcom star has his own book out now?" - Mr. Littman, character in the Seinfeld episode "The Muffin Tops"

For crying out loud, Nicole "Snooki" Polizzi has a 3-star rated book on Amazon.com titled "A Shore Thing".

She was even paid $32,000 to speak at Rutgers University!

How much does Half Sigma earn from his speaking engagements again? HAHAHAHAHAHA!!!!!

"Just because Bush has read some books doesn't mean he's intellectually curious. People with an IQ of 125 often like to read books for pleasure."

He's not reading Danielle Steele, he's reading serious books on a consistent subject that indicate he is curious about that subject. Moreover, he likes to talk about that subject, which means he has given it a lot of thought.

Over a book a week for three years is a LOT of books for a busy man to read. If you read that much, you do it for more than just "pleasure".

In any event, if Obama is a smarter version of Bush, that extra delta of smartness is not resulting in better policy, which calls into question the liberal idea that we need the smartest possible President to solve our problems.

Obama is definitely smarter than Bush, but I don't think his mathematical intelligence is at 145 or anywhere near.

"No one really wants a politician to have new ideas..."

It's not that. It's that Gingrich is too disorganized to implement and execute.

HS,
If Obama had an IQ of 140-145, I am dead certain that an SAT or LSAT score of his would have leaked somehow and been trumpeted in the press. For that matter, if he had an IQ of 140-145, the probability that he would NOT be a National Merit Scholar at some level is really low.

As to blind grading, have you ever graded papers HS? I've graded engineering exams, and frankly, even in such a relatively quantitative field, I could still recognize individual styles without names attached to the top of the paper. Even in such a limited arena, you come into contact with the mind and style of the student. Claiming that one couldn't recognize the writing and argumentative style in a law school course seems pretty far fetched.

Instead of asking who's 'smart,' why not ask 'how do smart people govern?'

Then answer it: smart people with false theories of economics, politics, and humanity have caused these problems. Solution: never let smart people govern again.

"[HS: I've already explained that he's not interested in doing legal scholarship.]"

You didn't answer the question that was asked, but I will.

The reason why Obama hasn't written more isn't his disinterest in legal scholarship--there is more to write about than that--it's because his only interest is himself. He is shallow and unable to find math, science, history, biography (note this is not 'autobiography'), etc. interesting, because he is not in them.

Bush probably experienced some brain damage from Lyme disease.

Check out this interview with Bush from 1988 where Bush is razor sharp in the mind and very articulate:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dLrvy9sNP-A

Also check out this video that compares Bush talking in 1994 with Bush fumbling and stuttering in 2004.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JvknGT8W5jA&feature=related

I have little doubt that Bush's IQ WAS ~125 in the past, but it seems somewhere around the late 90s, his IQ started to drop, which is evident in his fumbled speech patterns from then on.

Half Sigma needs to take some time off. The posts from the past couple of months seem weak and rushed and tossed out without the same care as before. To state that Steve Sailor (of all people) panders to ANY audience is just silly. He may be wrong, but he does not pander.

Sailer offers an explanation for Obama's good grades: he took "Race and the Law" fluff courses that emphasized his particular interest in that area of the law.

The reason I question a 140 IQ is his performance prior to HLS. He is, let's face it, an admissions wet dream: mixed race, lived abroad, and went to a good prep school. Yet he went to a good but not elite liberal arts school. I think there's no way he scored above 1300 on the SATs (post-1995 scale), otherwise he would have had easy access to an Ivy or comparable school.

The guy is lazy--he farmed every piece of legislation out to Pelosi/Reid. If indeed he thought that massive mess called a health care bill was good, he's even lazier than I thought.

His history is that of a guy who hasn't wanted to work hard at anything. No legislative accomplishments at either the state or Congressional level...just a talent for sounding good when delivering a speech from a teleprompter.

That he has innate intelligence, particularly verbal acuity, is clear, but I have to agree with Steve and with davver above.

One thing is very clear--a leader he ain't. Had he been white, he'd never have gotten anywhere politically. Had Bush been someone else's son, he'd have never been President either.

So, you're conceding that Obama is both intellectually lazy and uncurious.

Hence, is it that much of a stretch to think that he'd enlist a ghost writer to help craft and romanticize his memoirs? If he couldn't even trouble himself enough to string together two sentences at HLS why wouldn't he just delegate writing duties to Ayers or someone else?

He clearly loves himself more than he loves to work. A ghost writer makes sense in light of his narcissism.

Some of Sailer's arguments in the article, if read carefully, are more criticisms of Obama's lack of creativity than his intelligence. I think this squares with what you are saying about neither Bush nor Obama being all that intellectually curious, especially for their level of intelligence.

Obama can't have an IQ of 145 because a person that smart cannot stick to intellectually dull things such as going to law school. It would have been too painful for him. Men that smart always become engineers or craftsmen, women that smart become librarians and such.

No one other than a lawyer is going to believe that law school is a sign up of very high intelligence, rather it is a ceiling on how intelligent you can be. You can't be 145+ without intellectual curiosity and curiosity is fatal to most successful careers. The very fact that Obama is president is proof that his IQ can't be 145. No one that smart can ever be president.

Writing is *not* a highly g-loaded task. Verbal ability is, however, but that is not the same thing as writing ability. Writing tasks, in fact, have low g-loading as shown by analyses done on the GRE and new SAT. The writing sections were added to soften the discrepancies in scores between races and ethnic groups.

If one has high verbal intelligence, then one has potentially good writing ability. The converse, nonetheless, isn't true.

I agree that Obama is more intelligent than Bush II (or Kerry), but I'm not sure how much. The HLS-magna cum laude thing would be more impressive if we knew AA wasn't involved. Also, as a previous commenter pointed out, magna cum laude was awarded more generously when Obama graduated than it is now. Also, his record as a Columbia undergraduate wasn't particularly distinguished. Obama is smart, I don't deny it, but I'd feel a lot better about claims of super IQ if he would release his grades, SAT and LSAT scores, which he never will.

Anyway, I'm not sure that being super-smart is an essential quality for being a good president. Some claim that Jimmy Carter was our smartest president, and maybe so. He was once a nuclear engineer, and he's written more books that any other president. Yet most people would say he was a terrible president. If IQ alone made a good president, Albert Einstein would not have turned down the presidency of Israel when it was offered to him. He was one of the most intelligent people who ever lived, but he knew he did not possess the right toolkit for political leadership.

How's Obama doing with his campaign promises? Like every other politician, he's kept some and broken others. Track it here:

http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/promises/

George W. Bush never had a father who was a well-known Senator...but other than that...

“Steve Sailer is a better blogger than me because he’s a lot more diplomatic and aware of his audience.”

Steve Sailer is a better blogger than you because Steve Sailer is a genius. Who is more creative or interesting, Steve Sailer or Tom Friedman? It is not a poor reflection on you.

I would really like Half Sigma to give us the three most important novel ideas produced by Obama during his lifetime of being in the world of crafting ideas (author, Harvard student, professor, politician). After all, having an I.Q of 145, that should be easy. I personally cannot think of even one.

There is a big difference between 130 where I think Obama is (higher verbal, lower math) and 145 which Half Sigma claims.

"and the average HLS student has an IQ of 140-145 based on their LSAT scores"

But HLS students are selected based on LSAT scores so the LSAT will overestimate their mean IQ. The student body at Harvard law consists of people who are both highly intelligent AND got really lucky on the LSAT. If you were to test the students at Harvard law on any other g loaded test they would revert back to their true intellectual level: IQ 135.

That GWB video is a revelation. He's like a different man. Now his 125 IQ makes sense.

HF, good for you to speak your mind. Steve Sailer is more politic. Politicians are welling to do any thing to be popular.

"Obama’s lack of legal scholarship is better explained by his lack of intellectual curiosity than by his lack of intelligence."

This statement is akin to saying, 'Barry Bonds's failure to bunt is better explained by his disinclination for sprinting than by his lack of bunting skills." Sailer's whole point about Obama is that he's model AA - and just as Bonds didn't bunt because there was no reason to, Obama didn't publish because UChi told him he could receive tenure without doing so. It's just so obvious with this guy; he learned early on that what Shelby Steele calls "white guilt" allowed him to maneuver univ. types any way he wanted. And how in the world did you decide that Vdare readers care about Sarah Palin? Vdare is anti-immigration and attracts old Joe Sobran readers. Since Palin has never ridden the immigration like Sobran or Peter Brimelow, why would anyone at Vdare care about her? Jeez.

Just because you are interested in history does not mean you are any good at it, there's plenty of high IQ people who don't have anything original to say and just regurgitate tired ideas. Bush is one of those people. I would be more impressed by these people's IQ if they actually wrote stuff on the topic of which they are interested in.

Highly intelligent people who have intellectual curiosity usually produce a cubic fuck-tonne of writing in their wake.

The quality of ones thoughts matters more then just having a high IQ. Conceptual quality and thought quality matter. The over-extending of IQ leads people to blind themselves to the deeper reality around them. The quality of what a person thinks about is more important then an IQ measure when you want to find out if someone is really 'intellectually curious' or just another high IQ has-been.

***Obama was a big nobody when he wrote the memoir;”***

Wasn't he good friends with the suspected co-author William Ayers at the time?* It doesn't seem that implausible that Obama would have discussed the idea of a book with his friend and Ayers might have offered to help out.

* http://www.wnd.com/index.php?fa=PAGE.view&pageId=110784

***Like Obama, George Bush’s political opponents severely underestimate his intelligence. ***

They severely misunderestimated his intelligence :)

[HS: As far as I know, the people who used to think he's stupid still think he's stupid.]

For me, law school wasn't that difficult; it's just a tediously huge amount of reading and a bit of writing. In my opinion IQ is more relevant to admission (LSAT score) than to graduation ranking. Once admitted, I daresay anyone with a verbal IQ of 120 can work his way into the top 40%. A super-bright student can slack off and still make it; a less bright fellow would have to work harder or be very selective about which courses he took. (I killed my GPA one semester by taking a class from a teacher I liked even though I knew her tests were 100% issue spotting, which I'm bad at.)

Like you HS I was totally disappointed by the VDARE article. Obama's math major father with a PhD in Economics from Harvard, his mother who was accepted at the University of Chicago at age 16 and has a PhD, his half-brother who has degrees from Brown and Stanford in Math and Physics and has an MBA from Emory, and his grandmother who was a VP of a bank -- all of this is genetic proof of intelligence....but here's the kicker, you just can't get to be magna cum laude, top 15%, at one of the most cut throat law schools and be elected President of Law Review, without some serious intellectual chops. These are not affirmative action gimmes, as much as the right would like to think so.

HS,

I've always been under the impression that Vdare is pretty light with editorial control, and allows a wide range of opinion. (I recall Brimelow pointing this out himself a few years ago when he was frequently criticized for publishing Paul Craig Roberts' columns.) Also, I've never noticed Steve Sailer changing his tone on Vdare versus his own blog. "Diplomatic" is not a word I'd use to describe him, except maybe on the radio.

I enjoy both of your blogs, and you definitely have the edge on insights related to the law school hoax, value transference, and Palin family gossip. That being said, Steve is not just a full-time journalist, but also has a background in market research, and it's his data-driven analyses (dirt gap, Hispanic vote turnout, presidential ASVAB scores, etc.) that set him apart from the other bloggers in the HBD-sphere. Unless you quit your day job, you probably won't be able to match that level of research, although your blog is still one of the most readable among the amateur blogs. Thank you for your insights!

I agree. I think Sailors donate button sabotages him from being anything more than a niche commentator that will be quickly forgotten.

How Sailor routinely ducks such issues as Asians and Ashkenazi Jews having higher IQs than Gentiles is not really a mystery when you consider how Sailor pays his bills.

"For me, law school wasn't that difficult; it's just a tediously huge amount of reading and a bit of writing. In my opinion IQ is more relevant to admission (LSAT score) than to graduation ranking. Once admitted, I daresay anyone with a verbal IQ of 120 can work his way into the top 40%."

I've never been to law school but law strikes me as very g loaded. It's full of subtle nuanced arguments and abstractions and processing the complexity of legal documents seems to require high verbal comprehension. And the fact that they require high LSAT scores in spite of the fact that the LSAT "discriminates" against minorities, tells me that the LSAT is measuring skills that are actually essential to succeed in law school. I agree that someone with an IQ of 120 could work their way into the top 40%, but it would be long shot considering all the competition from hard working people with IQ's of 140-160.

I think Steve is a better blogger because he does more research and actually edits his writing.

"Steve Sailer is a better blogger than you because Steve Sailer is a genius."

LOL. HS, you are absolutely right when you state that Steve Sailer's readers are stupid.

Vdare and Sailer's blog are light years ahead of this pointless blog. Note the sycophantic followers saying "yeah HS, you are right and those Vdare readers are weally weally stupid."

Two points - Palin is an idiot. I am a Vdare reader and I firmly believe that

Second point - Half Sigma is a quasi "birther"/9/11 "Truther" as evidenced by his belief that Trigg Palin's biological mother is not Sarah Palin. His credibility is lacking.

"Obama's math major father with a PhD in Economics from Harvard, his mother who was accepted at the University of Chicago at age 16 and has a PhD, his half-brother who has degrees from Brown and Stanford in Math and Physics and has an MBA from Emory, and his grandmother who was a VP of a bank -- all of this is genetic proof of intelligence..."

What about all his stupid relatives? A half-brother who lives in a hut in a ramshackle town of Huruma on the outskirts of Nairobi:

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/barackobama/2590614/Barack-Obamas-lost-brother-found-in-Kenya.html

A half-aunt living in public housing in Boston:

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/27481680/ns/politics-decision_08/t/obama-says-he-didnt-know-aunts-illegal-status/

An uncle arrested on suspicion of drunk driving:

http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/nationnow/2011/08/president-obamas-uncle-arrested-for-dui-white-house-not-commenting.html

Obama has their genes too, and they would drag down his IQ.

***How Sailor routinely ducks such issues as Asians and Ashkenazi Jews having higher IQs than Gentiles is not really a mystery when you consider how Sailor pays his bills.

Posted by: Jeffv | September 19, 2011 at 09:35 PM ***

@ Jeffv,

Except that Sailer doesn't duck those issues.

I agree with H.S (haven't done that in a while!). Sailer made the case that Obama can be erratic due to lack of motivation or depression, but less so the claim that he's "not that bright".

Wade Nichols, those other people who "wrote" books did so after they became known to the public. Obama just decided to write a book even though there was no reason for anyone else to give a damn about him.

"Bush probably experienced some brain damage from Lyme disease.

Check out this interview with Bush from 1988 where Bush is razor sharp in the mind and very articulate:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dLrvy9sNP-A

Also check out this video that compares Bush talking in 1994 with Bush fumbling and stuttering in 2004.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JvknGT8W5jA&feature=related

I have little doubt that Bush's IQ WAS ~125 in the past, but it seems somewhere around the late 90s, his IQ started to drop, which is evident in his fumbled speech patterns from then on.

Posted by: Drole Prole | September 19, 2011 at 12:44 PM"

I agree the contrast between the old Bush and the new one in those videos indicates cognitive decline.

But Lyme disease? Please. It's well known Bush snorted cocaine for years. Glorious, glorious cocaine is where the cognitive decline came from.

"Evidence of Obama having an IQ of around 145"

If Obama has an IQ of 145 then I'm the Empress of China.

""Obama’s lack of legal scholarship is better explained by his lack of intellectual curiosity than by his lack of intelligence."

The way I read the article, that was Sailer's conclusion as well."

Both Sailer and Sigma are wrong.

Obama is an idiot, period. Zero may not even have a 105 IQ.

Since the great genius has not released his allegedly sky high SAT scores, and since Sigma is basing his estimation of Zero's IQ entirely on his college admissions, I'd like to turn Sigma's own argument against him.

If being admitted to HLS is evidence of a 145 IQ then doesn't the fact Obama only got admitted to Occidental after high school, and despite the fact he was an admissions committee's ideal AA applicant, indicate Obama has a sub 100 IQ?

Speaking of VDare, their website is a masterpiece of web graphic design and good taste.

"I've always been under the impression that Vdare is pretty light with editorial control, and allows a wide range of opinion. (I recall Brimelow pointing this out himself a few years ago when he was frequently criticized for publishing Paul Craig Roberts' columns.) Also, I've never noticed Steve Sailer changing his tone on Vdare versus his own blog."

Sailer's VDare articles are much more poorly written than his own blog entries for some reason. I don't know why this is so, maybe brimelow is dumbing down Sailer's VDare essays to a more readable level for VDare's trailer park readership.

Btw, according to Pew research and other polls, it appears prole and trailer trash whites (those earning less than $30,000 a year) voted a plurality in favor of Obama in 2008.

So if you're all wondering why VDare's "Middle American Radicals" bucahanan and Sam Francis are always praising haven't managed to shut down the border and exterminate the Jews, it's because the VDare target audience of prole and low IQ whites, voted 47% FOR Obama in 2008.

Sailer has suggested, though I don't know how seriously, that possibly Obama ghost-wrote Bill Ayers' book, rather than the reverse.

(No, I'm not going to look it up. You try to searching iSteve for (Obama & Ayers).

''Obama's father went to Havard and his mother has a phd''

Yeah a Phd in peasant blacksmithing....As for Harvard you really think Obama Sr got in because he was smart ?

Asians don't have higher IQs. Jews do, but Steve has always acknowledged that.

Steve's one weakness is his refusal to comment on Palin. She's clealy unqualified to be president or be a leader within the Republican party.

Obama's illegal aunt has a college degree. The Obama family is smart, but lacks self control.

Can somebody produce a reference for the statement

"Obama's math major father with a PhD in Economics from Harvard" ?

My reading of Wikipedia does not confirm any of two components of that statement.

Respectfully, Florida resident.

Obama Sr. graduated Phi Beta Kappa in 3 years from Univ of Hawaii with a BA in Math and Economics. He went to Harvard for 3 years and got his Master's in Economics before being forced out before he could get his PhD. I am sure being black helped him get into Harvard. Obama Sr. was definitely a smart guy, and could get white chicks as an alpha male. Definitely some alcohol issues in the family though.

I love mah dah afarmatiff akshemz!

--Barry 'Zippy' Obama
(I gotz mah a perfet 1000 on the SAT)

'Claiming that one couldn't recognize the writing and argumentative style in a law school course seems pretty far fetched.'

Every time HS posts this, someone always attempts to rebut with this point. Law Professors tend to have a lot of students. The semester is not one where the Professor gives a student a lot of feedback. The first time the Professor sees the student's handwriting/thoughts at any length is in the final exam.

So first, how would the Professor become acquainted with the handwriting/mind of his students in the first place? That alone is pretty unlikely.

Then, we must make the next leap that the Professor will -remember- whatever details about this singular student's handwriting/mind. (The fact that a Professor -would- remember would probably be more indicative of a -good- student and mind than a bad one).

Last, we must assume that the Professor will violate the grading policy to give a student a better grade. A move that offers ZERO benefit to the Professor but carries with it considerable risk.

This just is not going to happen.

would anyone bet money that obama ever even took calculus?

"Just because you are interested in history does not mean you are any good at it, there's plenty of high IQ people who don't have anything original to say and just regurgitate tired ideas."

The issue was whether Bush was intellectually curious, not whether he desired to be, or was suited to be, a professional historian (let alone a "highly original" historian). The evidence is clear that he is intellectually curious about history.

"Bush is one of those people. I would be more impressed by these people's IQ if they actually wrote stuff on the topic of which they are interested in. Highly intelligent people who have intellectual curiosity usually produce a cubic fuck-tonne of writing in their wake."

I disagree. I know quite a few highly intelligent, intellectually curious people with PhDs who have done little or no writing. Needless to say, they are not in academia, where writing is the coin of the realm.

In a sane country (i.e., the U.S. of forty years ago) the best that Obama could have ever hoped to achieve would have been an Adam Clayton Powell type congressman in a predominately black distract.

"This just is not going to happen.

Posted by: Insider | September 20, 2011 at 05:37 PM"

Surely, the professor would have found a way to give Obama a little extra credit if asked to do so by the Harvard administration to make their little pet look smarter than he actually is.

And there's no question Harvard cheated to get Obama so highly ranked in his class.

There's no way Obama was in the top of his class without a little AA boost. Obama is too stupid to beat out so many of the highest IQ white gentile and Jewish law students at HLS.

Linda: the practice of law is highly g-loaded, but law school grades arise from a fairly inaccurate and pedagogically invalid assessment procedure. The entire semester in most classes comes down to one three hour, three question essay exam. Teachers write their own questions with few or no standards to go by. Two teachers of the same course, in the same school, will have radically different tests--so much so that the students can't fairly be compared by their class grades.

So, I'm sure "g" has its place but is not the overwhelming determinant of law school class standing.

'Surely, the professor would have found a way to give Obama a little extra credit if asked to do so by the Harvard administration to make their little pet look smarter than he actually is.

And there's no question Harvard cheated to get Obama so highly ranked in his class.

There's no way Obama was in the top of his class without a little AA boost. Obama is too stupid to beat out so many of the highest IQ white gentile and Jewish law students at HLS.'

Why is there 'no question?' What evidence do you have, at all, for those assertions?

I just presented the reasons why what you're saying is doubtful. Is there anything you have to offer, beyond conclusory statements, to suggest the contrary?

'So, I'm sure "g" has its place but is not the overwhelming determinant of law school class standing.'

While you're correct that exams vary from Professor to Professor, someone consistently receiving high grades on exams is indicative of high intelligence. The tests will cover roughly the same substantive material, and usually the situations, while factually different, tend to highlight similar tensions in the body of law. Knowing how to navigate the murky areas is where students earn points, and 'applying' law is a highly g-loaded activity.

Even assuming what you say is totally true, then either the students who receive stellar transcripts happen to think like all of their Professors, or they are good at figuring out, during the semester, what their Professors want to see on an exam.

The latter is more likely and in and of itself an indicator of high IQ.

145? rofl. Then it would have no need at all to hide ALL his academic records by full force of law/regulations as he pays his millionaire lawers to do over the years, eh?

Law schools have many high IQ people, no doubt, yet not anyone in a law school has a high IQ;

The same applies to Cum Laude, particularly in today's AA world, particularly in politically -ultra correct institutions such as Harvard.

A title means NOTHING, justifies NOTHING, particularly an AA title!

A simple number however, such as SAT score, tells ALL!

(For that matter Law Schools and Economics Schools are really for relatively LOW IQs in my book contrary to what most of people think - the answers in such professions are mostly soft, very relative, very arguable, and therefore VERY manipulative -- NO SINGLE STANDARD! And manipulation of facts is not high IQ per se. Want to see real hard IQs? Go check engineering schools for HARD SCIENCES AND MATHS! )

Yet we don't have ANY number of this guy on even some softy softy subjects such as Law, let alone SAT score or perhaps even date and place of birth... his own law prohibites such a release for the free-minded puclic to see, for it would violate the "Sacred Cow".


Obama's IQ falls in between 100 to 120 at best in my view, because

1) high IQ ( e.g. 145, or > 130 in general) people are almost always UNPOPULAR, contravertial in their ideas and thoughts. Popularity by default means relatively LOW IQ, since it caters for general public AVERAGE interest which, in case of USA, is less than IQ 100 and fastly falling. -- Obama is popular, and very popular, therefore his IQ shouldn't be too far away from 100, from left side or right.

2) High IQ people, wether they happens to be engineers, or doctors, or 5 star hotel cooks in their professions, have almsot always extreme interllectual curiosity across a wide array of areas OUTSIDE his/her core profession. This curiosity, which is supported usually by his/her extraodinary level of energy and dedication, more oftern than not makes him/her poliferate and have numerous achivements across many totally unrelated fields. Obama has shpws no such a trait AT ALL, except his zeals on basketball and ESPN progammes. In fact, turely high IQ people would deem politics (or being a politician) dull, cheating, and personaly insulting - both intellectually and morally.


145? BTW, I have IQ of about 145, in fact a slightly more than that. For that matter, and yes, I have an engineering PhD, a MBA, and am an amatuer on Astrology.

//////////

'yet not anyone in a law school has a high IQ'

I'd say that even accounting for AA at HLS in the early 90's, it's safe to say that probably the entire student body had IQ's of 120+.

'The same applies to Cum Laude, particularly in today's AA world, particularly in politically -ultra correct institutions such as Harvard.'

Do you know how law school grading differs from undergraduate grading?

'For that matter Law Schools and Economics Schools are really for relatively LOW IQs'

This is just false. While the answers in law are subjective, that doesn't mean they aren't based on logic, or that logic isn't involved in applying law. The same, to a higher degree, is true of economics.

'1) high IQ ( e.g. 145, or > 130 in general) people are almost always UNPOPULAR'

Data to back up such an assertion?

'2) High IQ people, wether they happens to be engineers, or doctors, or 5 star hotel cooks in their professions, have almsot always extreme interllectual curiosity across a wide array of areas OUTSIDE his/her core profession'

I agree with this. However, I'm not sure why you don't think Obama isn't, at the very least, well-read. When he was asked by the NYT in 2008 about his favorite books, he rattled off several. None of them were pulp. Granted, it's possible he could have just memorized a list of obscure books. Or he could have just read a few pages into each of them. I don't have much evidence either way.

'and am an amatuer on Astrology'

Like...horoscopes?

'I'd say that even accounting for AA at HLS in the early 90's, it's safe to say that probably the entire student body had IQ's of 120+.'

-- Well, it depends. Accounting is a super easy (and super boring) subject, at least for me and most of ppl I know.

"Do you know how law school grading differs from undergraduate grading?"

--no, I don't know. But does that matter? The point is whenever AA is involved, no gradings of any kind make sense anymore.


"This is just false. While the answers in law are subjective, that doesn't mean they aren't based on logic, or that logic isn't involved in applying law. The same, to a higher degree, is true of economics. "

-- Not so. ALL subjects under the sun are based on logic. To be extremely well on ANY subject, including Law, economics... Maths, Gymnatics, the King of street-sweeping or the Champ of massage salon for that matter, require high IQ and LOGIC. However, it doesn't nessarily justify that law and economics require more. In fact, as I said, they are (relatively to hard sciences and maths) softy softy subjects in general, as every argumentive low IQ Indians (with avg IQ score of 81) in India could make a heck of career out of law if given some related education/knowledge under Harvard or Yale AA policy.

Economics is a superfical subject that requires even less than law. ALL rule/"law"/ "ism" / formula of modern economincs are based on the laws of either Maths or Physics.

"Data to back up such an assertion?"

--- Sorry, no data, since it's not neccesary. It's backed by simple logic of inference, intuition and common sense. (OK, again, low iq ppl have different standards on all of above from those of high iq ppl, hence more often nthan not it's not that straightforward as it should be)

"I agree with this. However, I'm not sure why you don't think Obama isn't, at the very least, well-read. When he was asked by the NYT in 2008 about his favorite books, he rattled off several. None of them were pulp. Granted, it's possible he could have just memorized a list of obscure books. Or he could have just read a few pages into each of them. I don't have much evidence either way."

-- well, without a hard number coming from Obama from a reliable source, each side of the argument is just a matter of opinion, which can be "proved" or "disaproved" with ease. The question that can not be "disaproved" however always is : Why he would pay millions to lawyers to cover ALL of his scores and numbers, if some, or IMO none, of them are pretty much decent?!

If that is not obvious, then nothing in our world is obvious.


"Like...horoscopes?"

-- errr...nah, it's about Cystalballism.

The comments to this entry are closed.