VirusHead

IQ is not without its biases, but it’s terrific for a broad-strokes comparison. I want smart competent people in leadership positions. It’s a complex world.

There’s a lot of discussion about the candidates’ IQ scores, but I’ve only found good evidence for McCain and Palin (see links). The other scores are unverified and from multiple sources – please send any better figures/links in the comments and I will gladly update this. I’m throwing in some others for fun.

• >200 – “Unmeasurable genius”
• 180-200 – Highest genius
• 165-179 – High genius
• 155-164 – Genius (e.g., Nobel Prize winners)
• 145-154 – Genius (e.g., professors)
• 135-144 – Highly gifted (e.g., intellectuals)
• 125-134 – Gifted (e.g., post-graduate students)
• 115-124 – Above average (e.g., university students)

• Over 140 – Genius or near genius
• Garry Kasparov – IQ 190
• Ludwig Wittgenstein – IQ 190
• Voltaire – IQ 190
• Leonardo da Vinci – IQ 180
• Lord Byron – IQ 180
• Michelangelo – IQ 180
• James Woods – IQ 180
• George Friedrich Handel – IQ 170
• Stephen W. Hawking – IQ >160
• Bill Clinton – IQ 159-182
• Barack Obama – IQ 148-172
• Plato – IQ 170
• Galileo – IQ 165
• Ludwig van Beethoven – IQ 165
• Charles Darwin – IQ 165
• Charlotte Bronte – IQ 165
• Jonathan Swift – IQ 155
• Sharon Stone – IQ 154
• Abraham Lincoln – IQ 150
• Franklin D. Roosevelt – IQ 147
• Joe Biden – IQ 146
• Richard Nixon – IQ 143
• 120 – 140 – Very superior intelligence
• Hillary Clinton – IQ 140
• Madonna – IQ 140
• Harry Truman – IQ 132
• George W – IQ 91-134
• John McCain – IQ 133
• Jodie Foster – IQ 132
• Nicole Kidman – IQ 132
• Dwight D. Eisenhower – IQ 122
• 110 – 119 – Superior intelligence
• 90 – 109 – Normal or average intelligence
• Ronald Reagan – IQ 105
• 80 – 89 – Dullness
• Sarah Palin – IQ 82
• 70 – 79 – Borderline deficiency
• 50-70 – Mild mental retardation
• 35-50 – Moderate mental retardation
• 20-35 – Severe mental retardation
• IQ < 20 - Profound mental retardation

• A score of 132 equals the top 2%
• A score of 134 equals the top 1%
• 50% of IQ scores fall between 90 and 110
• 70% of IQ scores fall between 85 and 115
• 95% of IQ scores fall between 70 and 130
• 99.5% of IQ scores fall between 60 and 140
• A score of 68 equals the bottom 2%
• A score of 66 equals the bottom 1%

There is much to say, but I’m not in the mood.

• Barack Obama – Has my vote. He’ll be terrific, and we need him – and a Democratic Congress, too.
• Teddy Kennedy – Captain, my captain, my forever Senator.
• Hillary Clinton – Strong, inspiring, gracious.
• Bill Clinton – Love that man. ‘Nuff said.
• Joe Biden – Trustworthy. Talk to the people, Joe. And relax.
• John McCain – Has turned his back on what made him worthy of respect.
• Sarah Palin – Bad choice for women and everyone else. Much to say, but the word is oil.
• See Bush bail, See Cheney bail (from the Republican Convention)
• Pseudo-Christians, quit praying for God to hate the people that you hate.
• Susan Eisenhower – Expressed my own view more clearly than anyone else, so here are her words:

REMARKS BY SUSAN EISENHOWER AT THE 2008 DEMOCRATIC NATIONAL CONVENTION – INVESCO FIELD AT MILE HIGH, DENVER, COLORADO AUGUST 28, 2008

I stand before you tonight not as a Republican or a Democrat, but as an American. The Eisenhowers came to this great country in the 18th century, settling first amid the hills of Pennsylvania and later on the plains of Kansas. Like many of your ancestors, they built our nation and served it in times of national crisis and war.

I grew up in Gettysburg, Pennsylvania where my parents and grandparents, Dwight and Mamie Eisenhower, chose to live after Ike’s retirement as Supreme Commander, Europe, and as President of the United States. It was also in Gettysburg where Abraham Lincoln gave his historic address.

On the killing fields of Pickett’s Charge our country came of age and assured our nation would survive as one.

Yet today the divisions in our country are deep and wide. Our cohesiveness as a nation is strained by multiple crises in finance and credit; energy and health care.

At the same time, we have knowingly saddled our children and grandchildren with a staggering debt. This is a moral failing – not just a financial one.

Overseas, our credibility is at an all time low. We must restore our international leadership position and the leverage that goes with it.

But rather than focus on the critical strategic issues, our national discourse has turned into a petty squabble.

Too many people in power have failed us. Belligerence has become a substitute for strength; stubbornness a substitute for leadership; and impulsive action has replaced measured and thoughtful response.

Once during the Eisenhower administration, Ike was under fire from his critics for moving too slowly in responding to political pressure. After a visit to the Oval Office by Robert Frost, the famous American poet sent the president a note of support. “The strong,” he wrote, “are saying nothing until they see.”

I believe that Barack Obama has the energy, but more importantly, the temperament, to run this country and provide the leadership we need. He knows that we can either advance on the distant hills of hope– or retreat to the garrisons of fear. He can mobilize and inspire all of us to show up for duty. Discipline will be required; as will compromise, flexibility and quiet strength.

The task before our next President will be overwhelming. But no undertaking can be more critical than bringing about a sense of national unity and purpose, built on mutual respect and bi-partisanship.

Unless we squarely face our challenges, as Americans—together– we risk losing the priceless heritage bestowed on us by the sweat and the sacrifice of our forbearers. If we do not pull together, we could lose the America that has been an inspiration to the world.

On December 1, 1862, in his Annual Message to Congress, Abraham Lincoln immortalized this thought when he said: “We shall nobly save, or meanly lose, the last best hope of earth.”

Let us respond this November to President Lincoln’s challenge. Let us restore the hope, and bring the change, that our nation so desperately needs.

Yes we can!

I wonder if there might have been any behind-the-scenes action to push Edwards out. I can’t believe he didn’t stick in the race – at least until after Super Tuesday! ARGGHHHH.

So, what happens to us John Edwards supporters? Who will get the votes?

John Edwards had the actual plans across the board. I hope the remaining candidates will make their own plans more progressive, but I doubt they will.

I can only speak for myself, and I haven’t completely decided – although at this point, I have to lean toward Hillary Clinton.

My reservations about Barack Obama are mostly about foreign policy. I didn’t like what he said about Iran, and I fear that he may be more conservative than people think. There are too many followers and not enough people asking informed questions. The other small thing that bothers me is that calling him black seems a little racist, like the infamous “one drop” rule. The fact that he’s multi-racial should be a good thing, taking some of the either/or quality off the race debate. Somehow it’s not working that way.

Hillary Clinton is strong, and caring, and flexible, and shrewd enough to do the job well. The main problem is that so many people really hate her. And why? Because she shows all the qualities of a good leader, but happens to be female? So “assertive” becomes “bitchy”? And at the same time, she has one second of choking up during a luncheon (if you blinked, you would have missed it) and that becomes a media circus in which she is portrayed over and over as “weepy”? It seems very misogynistic to me. Still, I would love to get Ted Kennedy alone in a room and get him to tell me why he has rejected Clinton for Obama. That really surprised me.

It’s not enough just to be non-white, or non-male. Those things really don’t matter so much at this point in our history, and I’m over my idealism (thank you Condi Rice).

We have big, big problems in this country, and a huge mess – involving a number of crucial issues – to be addressed.

Who is going to be able to come through most successfully for all Americans, for the country as a whole, and for this country’s relationships with other countries and the world?

That’s my question, and it hasn’t been answered yet.

Happy Memorial MLK Birthday Day. Have you wondered what Dr. King would think of the presidential candidates if he were alive?

Barack Obama gave a speech took the pulpit at Ebenezer Baptist Church in Atlanta – the same church where the Rev. Martin Luther King Jr. helped rev up the civil rights movement.

“If we’re honest with ourselves, we’ll acknowledge that our own community has not always been true to King’s vision of a beloved community. “The divisions, the stereotypes, the scapegoating, the ease with which we blame the plight of ourselves on others, all of that distracts us from the common challenges we face: war and poverty; inequality and injustice,” Obama said.

But he added that “we must admit that none of our hands are entirely clean,” citing homophobia, anti-Semitism and anti-immigrant bias in the black community

“I wasn’t born into money or great wealth, but I had hope!” he declared, bringing the congregation to its feet, cheering and clapping. “I needed some hope to get here. My daddy left me when I was little, but I had hope! I was raised by a single mother, but I had hope! I was given love, an education, and some hope!”

Very inspiring, but some are still wary of the rhetoric if it doesn’t deliver on substance.

blackagendareport.com – Give the Candidates the MLK Test

Dr. King said the “triple evils” of his day were militarism, racism, and economic exploitation. … In addition, Dr. King said he was “compelled to see the war as an enemy of the poor” in the U.S. … Senators Obama and Clinton fail the Martin Luther King Test, miserably. Obama wants to add 100,000 troops to the U.S. Armed Forces, at a cost of over $100 billion – even as he proposes partial withdrawals from Iraq. Clinton seeks 80,000 new soldiers and Marines. As sure as the sun rises, a bigger U.S. military means more wars, and no money for domestic “change.”

The only candidate who would pass the Martin Luther King Test is Ohio Congressman Dennis Kucinich, whose platform for peace, truly universal health care, a living wage, and an end to corporate domination of American life harkens back to that “shining moment” in the Sixties that King mentioned, when there were “hopes” and “new beginnings.”

While I agree that Obama and Clinton are not as good as Kucinich on some of the transcendent issues that concerned MLK, I see no mention here of John Edwards. Comments?

I haven’t been posting on the Presidential race, mostly because the discourse is depressing. The change/experience framing is trite, and I’m already more than sick of it. But here are some random thoughts about the presidential candidates across the board.

Democrats

I would support Dennis Kucinich, but I honestly don’t think he has a chance.

So far, I’ve been supporting John Edwards. I was disappointed to see John Kerry slap him in the face with his support of Barack Obama. I like his message a lot, and I think he would be a great president. He would do more for everyone from the middle class on down than any other candidate. Big interests dislike him – a very good sign.

My next choice is Hillary Clinton. I think she has the savvy that is required these days in politics, and I think that we might salvage our international reputation if she were president. My only real reservation about her is a big one, though. She is still very much tied up with some of the very corporate interests that have taken control of our government. Fundamentally, I have a trust issue with her.

Barack Obama is very moving, a charismatic and very smart kind of guy. But I think there isn’t enough substance there. I don’t like the fact that he misrepresents himself as a grass roots guy. He’s not, and all you have to do is look at his academic credentials. I am often blown away by this speeches, but I want to know what his foreign policies would be. I did not like what he has said about Iran. His race is not an issue for me one way or another – my idealism in that respect was – finally – destroyed by Condi Rice. It really doesn’t matter. Charisma is not enough, and in some ways it can be blinding. His followers are too… following, if you know what I mean.

I was sad to see Bill Richardson go. I thought that he had a lot to contribute to the debate, whether or not he was successful in his bid.

Republicans

Obviously, I don’t support any Republicans. I’m pretty liberal. I do have a couple of thoughts about them, however.

Ron Paul. I have a lot of respect for him, and I agree with some of his positions, especially on the war and on civil liberties. But like most libertarians, he won’t take a stand on people who do not have the bootstraps to pull upon. Help them? Kill them? Let natural selection take its course?

John McCain isn’t going to go for torture. That you can count on. He’s looking pretty old, so if he successful, you’ll want to look very very carefully at his choice for VP. It could be a setup. He has been successful in the past on getting some bipartisan initiatives passed. Of the candidates on the right, he would be the only one who might be able to revive the central Republican agendas. They don’t like it, though.

I have to say that although I think he would be a disaster as President, I like Mike Huckabee. I just like him. It would be funny to have a President named “Huckabee” – it might make us more humble. I’d like to have him over for dinner. He comes across as more authentic than the other candidates. He would look good in black and white, like the old news programs. Of course, there are obvious church-state and gender issues with Huckabee’s positions, and I don’t think we could afford for him to be directing foreign policies. Obviously he appeals to the pseudo-religious right, but he’s a bit more Christian (I think) than many of them are – maybe too much so for them to swallow. The neocons aren’t pleased, for sure.

Speaking of neo-cons, Fred Thompson, wow. I’m glad it looks like he can’t compete.

Giuliani – did you _hear_ him in that Republican debate? Can you say “fascist”? I give Giuliani credit for standing up and saying the right things when 9/11 happened. He was the leader there. On the other hand, he really should have known that the towers would be targeted again, and he turned around and cut support for the first responders that he had praised. I won’t go into the possible issues regarding his sex life, relationship with family. Nobody really remembers the Jimmy Hoffa thing either, and I think it’s funny that he likes to dress up as a woman. But I will say that his cleanup of New York City had a cost: when the psychiatric hospitals were emptied, and then the homeless shelters were closed in the middle of winter – that was the measure of his regard for human life.

Smooth salesman Mitt Romney… what can I say? He scares me, in a primal way that defies explanation, so I won’t go there. New England knows Mitt. Even among politicians, I believe that he’s a consummate liar. He hasn’t switched his positions so much as people think – he has only expressed positions as they will help him at the time. How did you _expect_ him to win the position of governor in Massachusetts?