Obama and The Bell Curve

Steve Sailer, Takimag, October 1, 2014

October 2014 marks the 20th anniversary of the publication of the most hated book in the history of the social sciences, the 845-page The Bell Curve: Intelligence and Class Structure in American Life by Charles Murray and the late Richard J. Herrnstein.

{snip}

One of the less vituperative denunciations by the many reviewers who likely hadn’t actually read the book was by “civil rights lawyer, Barack Obama.” The future president intoned on NPR in 1994:

The idea that inferior genes account for the problems of the poor in general, and blacks in particular, isn’t new, of course. Racial supremacists have been using IQ tests to support their theories since the turn of the century. … With one finger out to the political wind, Mr. Murray has apparently decided that white America is ready for a return to good old-fashioned racism so long as it’s artfully packaged and can admit for exceptions like Colin Powell.

Of course, the irony is that Obama’s fabulous career epitomizes the prime subject of The Bell Curve: the rise of a “cognitive elite” facilitated by standardized testing.

{snip}

The [racial IQ] gap that The Bell Curve documented nearly a generation ago is still the subject of Establishment obsession. In 2002, Ted Kennedy and George W. Bush got together to solve the gap by passing the No Child Left Behind law, which legally mandated that by the spring of this year every public school student in America would be above average.

Not surprisingly, NCLB instead brought about massive test fraud. So now American elites have pinned their hopes on the Common Core, which will close the gap by making coreness common. Or something. Nobody seems to agree on how it’s supposed to work, but it has to work, right? Otherwise The Bell Curve will be right, and that’s just wrong.

{snip}

Both Herrnstein and Murray–the pride of Newton, Iowa–made it to Harvard in part because of standardized exams.

And much the same is true for our current president.

Indeed, until he was rescued by the Law School Admission Test, Obama had been floundering–encouraging recycling, copyediting a business newsletter he despised, failing to organize a public housing project community. Then, around 1987, he apparently scored high on the heavily g-loaded LSAT.

According to a clever 2012 analysis by Alan R. Lockwood, Obama likely scored in the 94th to 98th percentile range. This, combined with Obama’s black privilege and Harvard legacy status (Barack Obama Sr., M.A. ’65), allowed him the luxury of applying to only the top three law schools, Harvard, Yale, and Stanford, with no need for a safety school.

Once at Harvard, Obama was instantly recognized as one of the few black students who were on the same cognitive level as the students who got in without affirmative action. (Nationally, the average black who takes the LSAT scores at only the 12th percentile compared to whites.) Obama’s ego blossomed as he became talked about as the First Black President. {snip}

But when Obama went back to Chicago’s South Side, his career got sidetracked once again. Even while he was being lionized by Chicago’s Jewish and WASP elites as a potential president, his political bandwagon was spinning its wheels because black folks didn’t much like him relative to other, more authentically black politicians. After a depressing defeat in 2000 at the hands of former Black Panther Bobby Rush, Obama realized that while black voters in his Congressional district considered him an overeducated Urkel, white voters in the larger world thought he was the one they’d been waiting for.

When Obama gave the keynote address at the 2004 Democratic Convention, the white public nationwide finally discovered a black state legislator with a high LSAT score. This was such an edifying find that within a half decade, they’d made him President.

In the White House, however, Obama has once again proven less than galvanizing. Why? As Herrnstein and Murray repeatedly cautioned 20 years ago, IQ isn’t everything.

Topics: , ,

Share This

We welcome comments that add information or perspective, and we encourage polite debate. If you log in with a social media account, your comment should appear immediately. If you prefer to remain anonymous, you may comment as a guest, using a name and an e-mail address of convenience. Your comment will be moderated.
  • In the White House, however, Obama has once again proven less than galvanizing. Why? As Herrnstein and Murray repeatedly cautioned 20 years ago, IQ isn’t everything.

    I think high IQ is a hindrance to those in the elected political class. I think high-average IQ is the sweet spot for those who are elected politicians. Lower IQed people wouldn’t be able to grok the job, higher IQed people would display a natural arrogance that would be off putting to voters.

    • Ed

      That’s the problem with Obama. Since he is one of the few Blacks with a high IQ he’s been told he’s so smart all his life. He’s so special etc. So he doesn’t feel the need to listen to others who may not be as smart as him but are subject matter experts. So he ignores military advice because he knows better. He skips security briefings because he know better. He ignores his own party because he knows better.

      • Or he doesn’t really care, or he knows that with the help of the personality cult media, if anything goes wrong he’ll most likely to be able to pawn the blame off on someone else.

      • MekongDelta69

        Since he is one of the few Blacks with a high IQ…

        One minor correction, if I might:
        “Since he is one of the few Blacks with a highER IQ (than most other blacks)…”
        [Which still leaves him somewhere in the middle of the Bell Curve.]

        • a multiracial individual

          Your statement is flagrantly inaccurate given the data.

          [Obama likely scored in the 94th to 98th percentile range]

          This is an LSAT score. The people that take the LSAT have a median IQ above 100. So yes, high IQ.

          • proud white

            why wont Obama release his sat’s? must be protecting those great numbers (sarc)

          • IBWHITE

            Right you are. I suspect Obama’s score was not that impressive or the media would have had a non-stop news blitz about it. I wouldn’t be the least bit surprised if he had been coached through it for a passing score or someone behind the scenes had adjusted it. Obama doesn’t strike me as an intellectual and certainly doesn’t run this country like one.

          • MekongDelta69

            Are you feeling ok?

            “Obama likely scored…”
            “Likely”? I didn’t realize YOU were the ONLY person to whom he released his records.

            “The people that take the LSAT have a median IQ above 100.”
            NO – The people that PASS the LSAT [PROBABLY] have a median IQ above 100. (Unless their grades were artificially inflated because they were non-white – aka – affirmative action.)

            Now go take two “flagrantly inaccurate” pills and DON’T call me in the morning…

          • Classic! Great rebuttal!

          • Max

            I too am suspicious of this “likely” score. I know plenty of people with genuinely and demonstrated high IQ and he does not sound like any of them.

            Higher than the average black; yes, higher than the average human; probably, 95 th percentile of ANY standardized national test; I really don’t believe it.

          • George Clark

            100 is not a very high IQ. Neither is 101. I would assume that the LSAT tests analytical ability, and Obama has virtually no analytical skills. Telling someone that his statement is flagrantly inaccurate given the data is flagrantly stupid. There is no data, buckwheat. His score on the LSAT is postulated by the author. There is no data to base it on, Obama’s handlers won’t release the data. Show me the data–Obama’s LSAT scores–and I’ll boil my words and eat them.

          • Raymond Kidwell

            I believe the article to be BS. I’m likely to beat arnold scchwarzenegger in arm wrestling (the young arnold). I can say anything but where’s the data? Obama doesn’t have high SAT scores they just guestimate that they must be high. At the same time there are going to be at least a few geniuses from any race. If you have enough monkeys hitting a typewriter long enough they’ll write something intelligent. Flip the coins enough time and just by chance at least a few people will have a given trait.

            Thomas Sowell is a great black conservative author that is brilliant and made it into the Ivy league.

          • Jimmy Joseph

            No he didn’t.

            Obama’s SAT scores were around 1100 or so.

            He was a total affirmative action (like his wife). She showed an SAT of 1080 in her autobiography and still go into Princeton.

            Why won’t he release his SAT or LSAT scores?

            Because they were terrible.

        • proud white

          exactly, no affirmative action for black inventions thus hardly any black inventions

          • MekongDelta69
          • proud white

            exactly the few black inventions out there are improvements on already existing white inventions. sort of like adding glitter to a phone to make a colorful phone, the amazing black mind at work. I am still waiting for them to have an entirely black build rocket, but im guessing it might take another couple thousand years

          • Raydonn

            Yeah well, sure, but where would humanity be sans the SuperSoaker™ and the sharpened stick????

      • Yancy Derringer

        Yes. Click on the link “ego blossomed” in the above story. Love the “Obamanometer” his classmates invented to measure pomposity!

      • MikeofAges

        As a phyletic issue, how non-black is he? Some say his father came from a population with a good percentage of Arab, in other words, Semetic, ancestry.

        As an issue of fact, there are people who know much more about this. I imagine there has to be at least some Arab ancestry there, but how much? Could be a tiny amount. Could be more.

        In the system of our society, he is black and his daughter are African American. But that is a cultural designation as well as a phyletic one. So what is he, really?

      • Chris Granzow XI

        That’s one thing I’ve realized about blacks. I went to an IB magnet school in a majority-black city. We supposedly had the ‘smartest’ blacks from around the city. In reality, they were middle or lower-middle class students and had a vastly lower IQ than all of the white students. In the black world, simply showing up to class everyday and not fighting or assaulting the teacher calls for a round of applause. These kids think they are highly intelligent because they are the top of the food chain when it comes to blacks. After all, they truly are smarter than the majority of other blacks in their community. But they fail to realize that compared to everyone else, their IQ is still very low.

        There was that study a while back which showed that the richest blacks have the same and/or lower IQ than the poorest whites. Look at people like Dr. Ben Carson (that candidate the Republicans keep trying to push on us). Every time he talks, you can instinctively tell that he’s more intelligent than other blacks. But at the same time, he comes off as daft when compared to white doctors (and other whites in general, to be honest).

      • ElComadreja

        He’s maybe a little over or a little under 120. About as good as it gets for blacks.

      • Raymond Kidwell

        Actually Obama has not governed this way. He had other people write up his Obama care. When people ask him to make a decision, he usually won’t. He hands off most of his decision making to others, then gives good speeches. Even liberals have gotten frustrated with him because of his lack of leading in most places and also because he’s not liberal enough for them. There are a few places where he has made a stand like with Obama care, but even here he just handed it off to other people to hammer out the details. Like the website he just had someone else do it.

        • “ObamaCare” was little more than a cobbling together of health care related bills that had been dwelling in drawers of Senate Democrats for a long time, mostly actually written by Senate staffers that are also lawyers. With a few later additions and deletions for political purposes.

          That’s the way most legislation is born.

    • proud white

      Excellent QD keep up the good work.. I just want to say I don’t care how people want to categorize blacks and Hispanics but they are not as good pure and simple. I said this before and I will say it again. This world needs to be based on merit. It is easier for an average black and Hispanic to be successful than an average white. kids are dying, born messed up, tragedies through life and all anyone can think of is affirmative action for blacks and Hispanics. Why? because blacks ancestors had it rough and Hispanics have dark skin? This country is ridiculous.

      • Well it wasn’t so much good work that led me to conclude this as it was just the power of observation and noticing things. Though I have had several day jobs in my life, including my current one, that has me doing some work around or with or for current or aspirational politicians. One thing that struck me right away and has not changed to this day is that the class of people in elected office or seriously wants to be elected seems to have an intelligence floor or ceiling; My personal educated observation is that it’s in the one to two standard deviation above the median range. Very very few outliers. So I inferred that there must be some sort of societal-evolutionary reason for that, which didn’t take me long to figure out.

        The real high IQ people in politics are the permanent staffer class. But I stop there because it only gets me to thinking about what should have been.

        As far as your other point, all you need to do to prove that is correct is imagine two people: Everything about them is the same: IQ of 90, ambitious in as much as a 90 IQ person can be, no criminal record, no legacy or family connections to grease the skids. Except for one variable: Race. One is white, one is black. Guess who is going to have more opportunities.

        • proud white

          Good point all around. I want to make a point about when people try to justify affirmative action by comparing legacies. They say well we have legacies so why not affirmative action? I tell them that they are essentially saying two wrongs make a right, which they don’t. I am for getting rid of everything. Although racial discrimination is much more potent than legacy and athletic discrimination which can be had by any race

          • M&S

            Will you breed with them or allow your children to without disownership if they prove meritocratically competent?
            If not, then your entire argument is bunk.
            Racism works because racism is an evolutionary tool by which those whose have the gift of beauty, IQ, drive or ability reach down within their own, usually through the legacy of more kids and the need to find mates for them, to raise up -everyone-.
            Who is Kindred.
            Now throw in a mixed race individual who, by some chance of fortune gets the ‘good half’ of the genetic donais that makes success possible in the modern white world. But he only get’s half. The other half, recessive or no, is alien and not sourced to the same environmental constraints as genetic algorithm (survival method, codified within the genes) in negotiating it.
            If that person is smart, the chances of their kids being so is still 1/4 less than the initial hybrid vigor generation. And yet all the markers for rejecting them: ugly skin, ugly hair, dead eyes, ugly facial features remain.
            If you marry a retard among your own, the chances that your kids will grow up closer to the mean than their dumb father/mother is high. And their looks remain the same so they are not handicapped.
            If you marry a high IQ black, the chances of her or him giving you kids that regress to the mean of a much lower, less competitive intellect. Plus they bring the physical markers as phenotypes which underline their historical failure as known shortcomings in intelligence.
            That’s a double whammy which will effect your genes in your grandchild’s generation to the extent that they will lose status among whites and be forced to continue the downwards plunge into genetic non-viability with a black identity they are more comfortable with.
            Such is what makes meritocratic societies as insanely stupid as socialist biased quota driven ones.
            Because the ‘disparate impact’ is that of a minority failed population spoiling a much larger, successful one, through forced interfbreeding whether earned or otherwise, which destroys the potential of the group as a whole in 2nd, 3rd, 4th generations out.
            By all means, give me a bigoted world in which blacks, Jews, Hispanics, Asians and the like scream about how ‘unfair’ we are for not giving them superior chances. Because the louder they wail, the more it becomes clear that they simply want a permanent genetic in. To lower us and raise themselves.
            That is not merit, that is envy. And in strictly evolutionary terms it is the bleat of the sheep as the wolf’s teeth bite down hard. Because this isn’t a world meant for equal access. Evolution doesn’t work that way.

          • Kenneth Arrow

            Great summation. You should write an article to exonerate racism once and for all.

            The biggest grudge I have against PC is that I wasn’t taught to be racist. And I wasn’t. Consequently, I’ve almost made a big and unredeemable mistake.

          • Usually Much Calmer

            It is never to late to get clever.

          • MikeofAges

            Legacy and affirmative action do not compare. Who gets left out in that triangulation? Unless you are intent in creating parallel elites, not a shred of sense in that idea.

            Judge the cause by the effect. Or is that reverse disparate impact?

          • proud white

            I have no idea what you’re saying

          • MikeofAges

            The point of my argument is that affirmative action as we know it is inherently fascistic. There could have been minority outreach without the other features of the affirmative action or disparate impact system, as we have known it historically over almost five decades.

            Slavery existed under the U.S. Constitution for something like 80 years. Affirmative action has existed for more than half that amount of time, with socioeconomically disadvantaged whites paying most of the freight. If there is accountability to blacks in the Americas for the depredations they have suffered, we should keep in mind, and always remind, Black African chattel slavery in the Americas was the product of British, Spanish, Portuguese, French and Dutch imperialism. Maybe they should be paying some of the bills, in that case.

      • Uncle_Dan

        “because blacks ancestors had it rough and Hispanics have dark skin? ”
        No. It’s because we’re afraid they’ll burn down the city. They’ve done it before.

    • M&S

      Politicians are communicators, not leaders. They can translate from cave grok to high grok with enough brains to conceptually ‘get’ the variance between the two as a smoothable selling point, even if they lack the absolute faculties to proof or refute the concepts which those much higher up the cognitive food chain give to them as policies they -will- endorse.
      It has likely been 50 years or more since we had a president who had ideas of their own. Obama is not smart, one need only listen to his nearly incoherent, wandering, speech patterns to hear it. Anytime he improvises (death camp liberators, onshelf oil drilling) he comes off a total git.
      But then he jerks upright and injects ‘And I believe we need an internal security force just as strong, just as capable…’ and the puppet master’s steel fingers jammed in the dummy’s back become all too clear.
      Ask yourself what Obama’s vision of foreign policy is. Ask about Korus. Ask about Israel/American affairs. Ask why he bows to Saudis and then comes home and bows to Jews. Ask why he showed up at an AIPAC (WJC for all intents and purposes), kippah in hand, and six months later was a seated President.
      Anyplace where Obama has to show on the fly initiative as the ability to innovate, negotiate and implement policy requiring him to lead others, he is either kept well away or shows massive avoidance psychologies. ‘I have a phone and a pen!’ are not the words of an in-the-trenches negotiator they are absolutist terms which only breed standoff responses.
      The reality is that if Obama is proof of the rise of a cognitive elite, it is solely because he is a nobody being paraded around like a poster child for incompetence rising through the cream, abrogating multiple levels of Constitutional Law and -getting away with it- because nobody wants to be the first racist to tell the black that he’s being stupid and criminal, like so many of his people.
      Quite a clever Emperor’s New Skin tactic, by someone else. Hidden from view with an agenda they dare not expose or back themselves because they are not the showmen to pull it off. And/or because they have a known predilection for big-nosing their way into control of societies through universalist, socialist, restrictions and rules.

    • propagandaoftruth

      Whatever W’s IQ was, he was great at projecting that Homer Simpson/Al Bundy ideal of a phenomenon I noticed for years in education and general culture I call…

      The Cult of Stupidity

      Mike Judge has been watching this dangerous development for years now. Seriously though, I’m not saying Americans ever wanted a stilted, pompous, boring “genius”, but…

      There was a time when smarts were admired and the average schmuck with an 8th grade education could listen to an hour stump speech and respond with reasonable commentary. Like my grampa.

      I guess it’s the necessity of capable folk who wish to advance in politics to adopt a sort of “Brutus” strategy for survival that sticks in the craw. Act like a tard in order to avoid censorship by the idiocracy – the electorate and commentariat.

    • JohnEngelman

      Ronald Reagan is estimated to have had an IQ of 105. He did not have to simplify his concepts for the voters, because they were simple minded to begin with.

      • MikeofAges

        In question, John. Reagan, for example, wrote his own radio commentaries. My take on him is that he would rather have had people thunk he was dumb than know he was lazy. Other have said the same. I was a Reagan supporter, but I never made excuses for his inadvertentcies.

        • JohnEngelman

          I could not stand the guy, but never mind that.

          I am not, and I repeat not, claiming moral equivalence between Ronald Reagan and Adolf Hitler. Nevertheless, in Mein Kampf, Chapter VI, of Mein Kampf Hitler wrote, “All propaganda has to be popular and has to adapt its spiritual level to the perception of the least intelligent of those towards whom it intends to direct itself. Therefore its spiritual level has to be screwed the lower, the greater the mass of people which one wants to attract…

          “The more modest, then, its scientific ballast is, and the more it exclusively considers the feelings of the masses, the more striking will be its success.”

          This explains the success of Reagan’s appeal, and also of the appeal of right wing talk show hosts like Rush Limbaugh.

          Although Reagan advanced the economic interests of the well to do, he articulated the feelings of poorly educated lower middle class whites, and particularly their angers, their dislikes, and their fears.

          Adolf Hitler was a brilliant man who planned his appeal. Ronald Reagan’s appeal came naturally to him because he was already at the intellectual level of his audience.

          • Not just Reagan and Hitler, but this is also true for lots of politicians. George Wallace always said, “you have to put the crumbs down to where the ducks can get to them.”

            And then there’s one of your favorites, FDR.

          • MikeofAges

            Reagan’s appeal, but not Clinton’s or Obama’s?

          • JohnEngelman

            I have always liked Bill Clinton. In addition to approving of his policies, it was visceral. I liked what I saw on television. He gave us twelve years of peace and prosperity.

            I like Barack Obama too, but I do not respect his leadership ability. He had the opportunity to demonstrate that the government can benefit ordinary Americans. He did not do it.

          • Corporal Hitler was certainly a very brave man during WW-1, but he was a one-trick pony. Declaring war on the US after Pearl Harbor was abysmally stupid. If Mr. Reagan wasn’t the sharpest tool in the shed, he at least accomplished his objective, and that was winning the Cold War. Not every man gets do that during his own lifetime.

          • Franklin_Ryckaert

            Reagan did not “win the Cold War”, the SU imploded of its own due the unwinnable Afghan war and Gorbachov’s attempt at reform.

        • Average IQ people not being lazy is sort of what makes the world go around.

        • HE2

          It was once said of Reagan, “he was the type of guy you would choose to sit next to a dinner party,” meaning Reagan was witty, accessible, spontaneous, and verbally communicative.
          As a president, thank goodness for his willingness to select a talented team of advisers.

          • MikeofAges

            That’s a good take on him. And in line with mine at that. I think he was smarter and more knowledgeable than people give him credit for, but it was his own fault too that he did not get credit. It was more important to him that he been seen as you describe him than that he been seen as mentally able. Also, by the time he became president, his store of knowledge already had grown out of date and so intellectual faculties already were in decline. His skills as an actor and presenter carried him far and he did have a firm agenda. Regardless of his limitations, he was a giant in a time of giants. Think Wojtyla (John Paul II). Think Thatcher.

          • HE2

            I liked the guy, Mike, but then I am large part Irish and a sucker for our charming men with the gift of gab. My family is full of guys like Reagan.
            Re his presidency, yes, he made some mistakes, but based on his ability to recognize the enemy, make decisions and act on them, Reagan’s testosterone blood level as he lies dead in his grave probably measures several orders of magnitude higher than what we have now.

          • MikeofAges

            I have no Irish in me, but I grew up in Chicago and I do contain multitudes. So no Irish in me, but Irish within me nevertheless. Never had a sister, but I can brag about some of the women I have known or been around like only an Irishman can brag about a special sister. And hearing a “C” pronounced as a Gaelic “G” sounds utterly natural to me. Until I left Chicago, I thought the James Fenimore Cooper novel was “The Last of the Mohegans”. Really. If this gets back you, of course.

          • HE2

            I thought the James Fenimore Cooper novel was “The Last of the Mohegans”.

            You mean it is not? ;]
            I sensed an Irish introject in ya, Mikeof.

          • MikeofAges

            I contain multitudes. No ancestry in the British Isles whatsoever. All Central European, with one Scandinavian grandfather, maternal. But the Irish were very important in Chicago. Everybody was important in Chicago, except the Anglo-Saxon. Who are they anyway? I’ve heard of them, but I don’t even know what they look like.

          • HE2

            Mikeof, Anglo-Saxons are an admix of Germanic and Nordic. Angles and Saxons arise from Germanic tribes; Jutes from Jutland area, Nordic.

            There is considerable hypothesizing on the subject of these ancient tribes. Historians too often fill in the blanks with mythology.

            A mythology vs history case in point, the Picts, a mysterious N. Scot tribe from whom my father’s family descended.

            They were described by both Romans and Vikings as short of stature with a tendency to hide at night in their brochs. From that, evolved Celtic faerie mythology. But, they were real, the stone brochs, other artifacts survive.

            How do A/Ss look? All over the place. I do not think there is a stereotypical Anglo-Saxon, if my birth family is any example, with no racial out-breeding, at least in my antecedent lineage.

            We have tall, short, [my youngest sis at just 5′, my youngest son at 6’5 from pure Germanic husband].

            We range from black hair to flaxen, curly and straight. Eyes, blue, black, brown and green.

            Some slight, some Viking muscular.
            You get my point.

            My mum is the one who brings Saxon to the table. She is Vivien Lee beautiful with black hair and black eyes, almost southern Mediterranean looking, but not, pure N. Euro.

            Hopefully, those highly knowledgeable in matters ethnological will give you a better answer.

          • MikeofAges

            I’m sure you’re correct. I was just making note that the type was not prevalent in Chicago, though growing up, I did know some people who apparently were of Anglo-Saxon descent. Just making a little broad humor.

          • HE2

            Whoosh!

            Mikeof, your subtle jest went right over my head.
            Guess I need more irony lessons.

  • John

    “a black state legislator with a high LSAT score”. They don’t know this,it was just an assumption. All his academic records, test scores etc. are under lock and key and no doubt will remain that way. If his IQ is over 100, I’d be stunned. The only talent he has is to be able to read a teleprompter effectively. Without it, he comes unglued.

    • Dave West

      As much as I hate Obama and what he stands for, I highly doubt he has an iq below 100. That being said, he is defiantly far to the right on the bell curve compared to the general Mulatto population.

      • DaveMed

        Defiantly?

      • proud white

        Social skills and intelligence are different. intelligence runs the world Obama IS NOT intelligent he is average. Average isn’t very good when you are running a country

      • John

        I think he’s more likely to be an “idiot savant” than highly intelligent as he’s been described. “idiot savant
        n. pl. idiot savants
        An intellectually disabled person who exhibits extraordinary ability in a highly specialized area, such as mathematics or music.”
        His area of specialization is sounding like a white intellectual. For blacks, the act of “sounding white” is a highly specialized area.

      • Uncle_Dan

        He was the (liberal) Great White Hope. It took an old style liberal (Geraldine Ferraro) to sum him up:

        “But since he is black, and as Senator Biden put it, he is ‘clean and speaks
        well’ he is taken seriously. The true irony of all of this is that even though
        his wife, supporters and himself speak of all this equality and living the dream of MLK…the Obama frenzy is the exact opposite of…MLK’s dream. Obama supporters are not judging Obama by the content of his soul or character, they are judging him solely on the color of his skin!”

      • MikeofAges

        I’m good at estimating IQs. I at first thought he might have an extremely high IQ, but that estimate has moved down as time has gone on. I say, 128 tops, and I doubt that. 123-124 might be more like it. But keep in mind, an IQ score itself is a composite. His verbal reasoning is the better half of his aptitude, no doubt, and the part that bears on the career he has followed.

        Interestingly, someone here claimed that Bill Clinton scored a composite on his SATs of 1032. He might have had a bad day, I’ll give that, but in our era, the selective universities require a V/Q composite of 1050 for minorities and athletes, 1100 for everyone else. Interesting, if true. It perhaps explains why Clinton went to Georgtown, the school the William Fulbright machine could get him into, rather than an Ivy.

        It also goes far in explaining his character. Having a performance level above the IQ level is one of the testable marks of a sociopathic personality. Clinton’s lack of originality and his lack of conscience as to consequences of the policy paths he followed, let alone his personal failings, both are signs of the same.

        The median IQ for a 1032 SAT composite is 110, according to the template I have available. I don’t quite believe that, but Clinton’s intellectual profile may not be as a high as people think. Nor do we know much about the content of the education of any major politician. We don’t know their test scores. How far they got in mathematics. What languages they studied or what their reading and speaking facility or fluency is. How well they understand general science concepts. Their undergraduate and postgraduate grades. We don’t know a lot of things about any of them.

        • proud white

          you think Obama has a 128 IQ? you just lost all credibility. Clinton was a Rhodes scholar. I don’t agree with Clinton but he was more intelligent than jackwad

          • MikeofAges

            Read what I said, please. About Obama and Clinton both. I said, Obama 128 tops. That’s tops, and I doubt that. The case of Clinton is more complex, but what I am postulating is that the Sen. Fulbright political machine played a considerable role in the era identifying and developing talented young people in Arkansas. You have to realize, in the 1960s, the population of Arkansas was less than 2,000,000. Many of those people were utterly uneducated, with only rare hopes of ever becoming educated.

            With a population that small, it would well have been possible on an ongoing basis to identify every promising prep student and track each one’s career.

            I am postulating that Clinton did not “just get” a Rhodes scholarship, but that there was a hand behind it. As it happens, I knew someone personally, the older brother of an eighth grade classmate, who was awarded a Rhodes Scholarship and was at Oxford the same two years as Clinton. I, in fact, talked to him on the street in my neighborhood after he came back from Oxford.

            I know what this guy was awarded a Rhodes for. I do not know what Bill Clinton was awarded a Rhodes for, other than for being Bill Clinton. The guy I knew had to meet an athletic participation requirement, which in his case he met by being second or third string on the swim team. What was Clinton’s athletic record? We were never told.

            Psychologically, I identified Clinton as being a particular psychological type, one characterized by a performance level exceeding the actual measurable intellectual level. We do not know a lot about any of these people. Not their intellectual profile. Not their psychological profile. Not their level of academic performance. Not what they did in any of the situations they were in early in their career. That includes Obama’s early career as a community organizer. Do you know that he was director of two small Roman Catholic-sponsored organizations? He did pretty well in his first job, but was not doing what he would have you believe. He left the second early to go to law school. Beyond that, those who have attended elite universities take the position, as their first reach, that no one allowed to question or scrutinize them, and that anyone who does suffers from a serious personality imbalance at a minimum.

            Again, read what I said. I might be right, I might be wrong. But the theory holds together. What is your evidence, especially as regards Clinton? What evidence is there that Clinton ever showed any of the intellectual originality characteristic of someone with a very high IQ? I don’t think there is any.

        • Usually Much Calmer

          “I at first thought he might have an extremely high IQ, but that estimate has moved down as time has gone on.”

          You may be interested to know that in the book Game Change, Christie Roemer describes her experiences with him.

          In her first in depth conversation with Obama she was impressed that he seemed incredibly well versed in the application of economic theory to practice. She was actually quite shocked, it was the first time a politician had exhibited fluency in her field and she found it extraordinarily encouraging. After she went to work for him she found her hopes dashed and the work frustrating, but that is par for the course. She then had one conversation with him which she left profoundly confused as he seemed not to even grok basic econ 101 concepts. It was like an Oz moment for her.

          She and Larry Summers also picked up on a crude pattern of Obama’s where he would listen implacably to everyone during a meeting and then resolve to do the exact opposite of whatever Roemer suggested. So she and Summers just kibbutzed before meetings (as they often did anyway) about what they wanted Obama to do, and then during the meeting, she would suggest the diametric approach and in that way the two of them played him like a cheap fiddle.

      • LHathaway

        “being generally smart.. and black make him an infallible god-like figure who can do no wrong”.

        You’re actually discussing the 70 to 100 IQ range. When it gets above 110 they are ‘magic’. We read these studies all the time. . how about one where students/citizens guess the IQ of different folks being observed without their awareness? This would raise the largest gap between reality and appearance (and don’t they love to find the ‘gotcha’ moment). Black males would likely be overestimated by a range of about 20 IQ points, white males would likely be underestimated.

      • proud white

        and why do you think that because he gives a good speech? I bet he can get everything on his shopping list too so maybe we should estimate his IQ at 160 sarc

    • proud white

      It doesn’t take brains to give speeces, have sex, go shopping etc. it takes social skills, blacks are okay at these things. math and science take brains that is why you wont find many blacks in the field. furthermore the intelligent ones that you do find in the field have lower scores than their competition and receive acceptance due to affirmative action

      • Zimriel

        It actually does take brains to give speeches that sound more like Obama’s speeches than like, say, Mrs Obama’s speeches.

        • proud white

          good one, yea Obama has good social skills, he would make a good therapist, I wouldn’t want him to take an iq test for me if my life depended on it, I would chose Dr. Lee instead

      • The All Seeing Bry

        Obama also admitted that he has trouble doing his daughters 9th grade math homework. Proves he can’t follow logic.

        • WR_the_realist

          Maybe his daughters are being taught the Common Core curriculum, which makes addition look like a problem in quantum mechanics.

    • WR_the_realist

      I feel confident that Obama has above average IQ. He’s what I’d call “average smart” — that is, about normal for a person you’d consider smart. He’s certainly no towering intellect. The real problem with Obama is not his IQ, which is adequate to the task, but his horrendous politics. He has spent his whole life imbedded in the left half of the left wing, and it shows.

      • GeneticsareDestiny

        Yes, I don’t dislike Obama because I feel he’s unintelligent. I dislike him for the political beliefs he holds. He’s been so thoroughly inculcated in cultural Marxist doctrine and “Critical Theory” that he’s patently incapable of thinking rationally about any issue with even the slightest racial aspect. Everything is “Who, whom?” to him.

        He also strikes me as quite arrogant. He probably became this way as a result of being very intelligent, especially compared to other blacks, but it does not serve him well in his job, which requires him to listen to and seriously consider the advice of other people who know more than he does in a certain subject area.

        • bilderbuster

          Obama’s not as smart as he thinks he is and deep down he knows it too.

          • GeneticsareDestiny

            I agree. I think he’s quite smart, but he’s not nearly as smart as he perceives himself to be.

          • Garrett Brown

            This. You cannot deny his intelligence, what we deny is his cabinet’s/close friends or spokes people’s opinion on his intelligence. Obama knows his limits and he knows he is a puppet. His constituents do not. They worship him foolishly.

          • I can deny the Kenyan’s intelligence. He’s a very mediocre President who was elected solely because he was black.

          • Garrett Brown

            You can ATTEMPT to deny his intelligence and act like he doesn’t know what he’s doing, but that just means you aren’t paying attention. He is more Arab/Caucasoid than African.

          • The feds tested my IQ in prison, which worked out at 152. I am not really an orc.

          • Garrett Brown

            I have an IQ of 65, my mom said I was special.

  • 1stworlder

    OMG are they actually saying O-Hole would have made it in without affirmative action?

    • Larry Klein

      Not quite, considering the high admission requirements for non-victim group applicants. Intellectually, however, he’s not completely out of his weight class compared to other charity cases.

  • Adolf Verloc

    Nice to see “The Bell Curve” back in the news. I re-read it a few months ago, and realized that only a small part of it is specifically about race. The implications of a “cognitive elite” that pulls further and further away from other Americans are many, some of them troubling.

    • M&S

      Of course it is about race. If they fixate us upon race while they pull farther ahead, then we don’t identify the mayor of the castle until it’s too late.
      If this cognitive elite are white and they are FORCED to acknowledge a kinship with us, as a function of common nation and common serviced needs, then the potential remains for them to lose everything if they do not elevate us with them because whites marrying whites remains a much higher percentage likelihood than whites marrying blacks and their children will always be vulnerable to the twinned threats of denial of services by a white service population acting as effectors of the society they dream up. As well as fall back when their sons and daughters go slumming and find they actually like the sense of real people rather than class conscious racial assassins.
      With so many of society in permanent EBT/HUD/SSI dependent status, working whites hold all the power. And will continue to do so, for another 10-20 years until our average 40 something age today becomes average 60 something and the fall back position are those who have absolutely no intent or ability to sustain a 20th century living condition.
      By then it will be too late and the elites will have their return to feudalism. But for now…
      We have a chance.
      Provided we stop looking in the mirror, seeing racists and cringing from the reality of what is a self-preservatory behavior with evolutionary roots that serve to maintain the power base of the population, both against outside threats and ladder climbers who want to leave us behind.

    • Usually Much Calmer

      It is a colossal work about many things, all timely.

      I’ve said it here before but I’ll say it again: after reading the Bell Curve, I have avoided white people of my class and education level who are clumsy, accident prone, or who lack physical grace because these things are correlated with g and thus with other things and this has changed my life dramatically for the better! It was like revealed truth; I have seen the light, and now I am blessed.

      The no-klutz life hack has nothing to do with race. It’s a great book and if it was the only one either Herrnstein or Murray ever wrote, they would have much to be proud of and we much to be grateful for.

  • MekongDelta69

    NoBama isn’t qualified to be head shoe shine boy outside of Grand Central Station, much less anything more taxing than that.

    • bilderbuster

      Like Bill Clinton told Ted Kennedy “Five years ago this guy would have been getting us coffee”.

  • JohnEngelman

    The basic arguments of The Bell Curve are three: intelligence is the single most important factor in determining academic and economic success, as well as other desirable outcomes in life; it is primarily determined by genes; individuals in some races tend to have more of it than individuals in other races for reasons that are also genetic.

    Nothing since the 1994 publication of The Bell Curve has discredited those assertions. The failure of No Child Left Behind lends credibility to them.

    • M&S

      What undermines _The Bell Curve_ is simply the nature of man in refusing to accept that those genes are valuable and must be conserved through the acknowledgment of race as class groups whose concentrations of their abilities is differentiated and can go up or down, if they are not held exclusively.
      It is the ultimate acceptance of hierarchialism in ability as access to the good life and so long as whites cling to this evangelical ‘underdog does good’ Christian ideal as an absolute rather than an exception that proves the rule, we are finished as a people.
      You can ignore reality but not the consequences of reality.
      Unfortunately, our racial enemies are quite skilled at making it seem like whites are the font of all evil in terms of consumption, population size and relative dependence on the ‘good, dumb, people of the earth’.
      In truth, the savages of The Horde breed like rats, they have ingrained barbarisms of behavior which have been genetically selected for with the same gene-fixing proclivity as the pursuit of knowledge and wisdom has driven whites. And in their current 84% of population status, they both generate 100% of the population growth (towards 14-17 billion by 2100) and VASTLY exceed our resource consumption potential as a result.
      The one thing which is most irritating to me is the instilled assumption that we can have a global population of 250 million cars (estimated to quadruple as China becomes a driving culture) whose use comes down to sitting a garage or work/school/shopping mall parking lot for 90% of the day (unused) but, ‘to do the jobs Americans won’t do’ we must destroy our own homeostatic population stability, accept displacement by low IQ, high criminality, high violence locust populations. And _do so_ because the world is running out of resources and whites must provide room at the bottom for other populations or be counted ‘racists’.
      Well guess what? Racism is as evolutionarily essential to survival in a Darwinist world as intelligence. And if we would accept carpooling we could afford the robotic population to do these unhealthy, moronically repetitive, soul killing, jobs.
      And force the non-effective R-Breeder populations to compete for resources or lose out on everything. In their own homelands.
      This failure to extrapolate consequences to assigning a lack of value to known truth is what makes the Bell Curve unenforceable as a minimum standards precondition of advantage as much as any relative performance it indicates via G.
      We live in a Lysenkoist hell.

      • Uncle_Dan

        Driverless “taxis” will cruise the city with very small proportion of idle time. People will not own cars. For a long trip, the traveler will smart-phone a driverless car which will take him to his destination. This technology will replace both private ownership of cars and public transportation (buses, trains).

    • guest

      Perhaps the importance of general mental ability is increased by the withering of common standards of civility? Before the civil rights revolution, Blacks often emphasized to their children the importance of White manners, White standards of dress, etc. Those able to adapt–at least externally–melded in much more to their advantage. Perhaps our greatest psychologist, Edward Thorndike, hypothesized a “social intelligence” This concept did not arise with what’s-his-name who for more than two decades has made the term his own but has produced scant experimental data to ground it. Stick with Thorndike. In the behavior modification of mildly mentally retarded children, during the 1960’s and beyond, great efforts were made to inculcate standards of good dress, good eye contact, good facial expression, etc. But as common civility erodes and erodes–yes, IQ becomes the high road.

    • I don’t recall any place in the book talking about intelligence as the most important predictor in academic or economic success. There was a recent AmRen mention of a long term 1938 Harvard study that discussed factors in success and one of them was coming from a good childhood.

      The Bell Curve does discuss how lower IQ populations have a higher disposition towards violence. Also it mentions that there is a wide spectrum of opinion on intelligence being due to genetics. Some say that intelligence is 80% genetic & the rest environmental effects, some say it’s only 20 or 30%. It takes a middle ground at 50% of intelligence being due to genetics.

      One of it’s main points is that current US actions are causing low IQ populations to increase and high IQ populations to decrease.

      I agree with you that The Bell Curve does not seem to have ever been effectively refuted. Of course many very publically have trashed the book and it’s usually dismissed as racist white supremacy but that’s not quite the same thing.

      • JohnEngelman

        The Bell Curve says that a child’s IQ tested at the age of seven is a better predictor of adult earnings than the incomes of the parents.

  • dd121

    I doubt if the vast majority of liberals who violently opposed it have ever seen a copy.

    • Fighting_Northern_Spirit

      Before I was a race realist, I accepted the view that TBC was “unproven” and “racist,” without reading it. I had no particular interest in race at the time, and accepted the judgments of others.

      • LHathaway

        I was already a ‘racist’ when TBC came out. When the subject came up, as it did 2 or 3 times on campus, I would always say (with as much genuine indignance as I could must), ‘what a racist, how can he say Asian’s are smarter than whites’? Oh my how This was a no no comment! They are familiar with, almost an old habit, of how to make fun of conservatives or silencing them while putting them in their place. What I said was something different, apparently. This was in the realm of Nazi like. My guess is that this statement, of making whites out to be victims of something, anything, took away from all the seriousness of all the ‘oppression’ they just new blacks face every day (in a world where blacks are beneficiaries of craddle to the grave affirmative actions and a one-way racial advocacy and perhaps ‘caring’ system). I made my statement, and suffered no repercussions (at least for this statement) but it was definitely disapproved of and reacted to. In some cases, it’s a good Idea, I think, to force them to react. Then normally never need to justify anything, no matter what it is.

    • JohnEngelman

      I doubt that most of the liberals who condemn the book genuinely disagree with it. They wish very much that it was not true, and they wish that Charles Murray would shut up.

      • dd121

        Maybe secretly but there was sure a lot of condemnation from the left when it came out.

        • JohnEngelman

          It was a matter of kill the messenger.

  • Tarczan

    “Once at Harvard, Obama was instantly recognized as one of the few black students who were on the same cognitive level as the students who got in without affirmative action.”

    What a total sham and lie. There has been nothing in his record or deeds to indicate anything other than a typical affirmative action darkie. I think most harvard grads are pretty good at 7th grade math.

    http://nation.foxnews.com/president-obama/2012/10/25/leno-obama-admits-he-cant-do-math-above-7th-grade-level-yeah-we-know

    Not surprisingly, the video is gone, but the transcript remains.

    • Larry Klein

      You might not like him, but there is enough objective evidence out there that the guy is not an idiot.

      • Zimriel

        The evidence all clusters around Obama being smart on the verbal section and a dummy in the math section. I’ll add more: Obama didn’t get into Harvard on his SAT scores. That’s because the admissions-officials looked at math too and found better candidates, even from the black population.

        With the LSAT, they didn’t look at math so much, so Obama did better.

        • Larry Klein

          You are missing the big picture. No matter how you slice it, the guy is likely not a genius but is smarter than a vast majority of Americans. That doesn’t mean he is competent at his job.

        • Dr. X

          He got in by lying about his place of birth and telling Harvard he was born in Africa. That’s why all his personal information remains hidden. He probably got a decent, although not spectacular, SAT score that would have disqualified a white, American applicant.

    • bilderbuster

      Barry could have done better if he had the Secret Service doing his homework like they do for Malia.
      He does just fine reading what others write for him from his prompter.

  • Oratory does not equal IQ. Obama talks a good game, but does not live it. Much to the world’s detriment.

    • Tarczan

      He doesn’t write his own speeches, he reads them. From what I’ve seen, sometimes he doesn’t even pre-read them before reading them off the teleprompter. Oratory at some point indicates the ability to put together a few good sentences.

      • WR_the_realist

        I think it’s been a very long time since we’ve had a president who wrote his own speeches. Rule by teleprompter didn’t start with Obama.

        • Tarczan

          I agree, but he seems to have no ability to think on his feet. The gafes come when he goes off the prompter, and they’re pretty bad.

          • Ike Eichenberg

            youtube dot com/watch?v=nUC2dBaM6nI

        • Yancy Derringer

          Clinton communicated very effectively speaking extemporaneously. I think that’s a big reason Obama hates him — he runs circles around Obama intellectually.

          Nixon was highly intelligent too, although he was often stiff and uncomfortable at the podium. Obama will never be able to even touch Nixon’s overall knowledge, his capacity to reason, and his facility as a writer. Nixon was a prolific writer. You can bet Obama will never even try, but even if he does he’ll struggle and then give up. His memoirs will surely be ghost-written, as was “Dreams…”

    • Ultimate187

      You don’t need a lot of intelligence to be President. Case in point, G. W. Bush. They have advisers and other staff to do everything for them. No US President today writes their own speeches either.

      • bilderbuster

        They don’t make policy either.

    • dd121

      He’s not an orator, he’s a reader.

  • Ike Eichenberg

    I am highly suspicious that dingleBarry scored in the 94% range or better on the LSAT.

    • Fighting_Northern_Spirit

      I’d say his IQ is about 100, which is pretty smart for a black. Given that he’s a figurehead and travels with a pack of babysitters, it doesn’t matter much. He can read the TOTUS, which is all he needs to do.

      • Ike Eichenberg

        Yeah I would agree he’s in the 95-100 range.

        • HE2

          Agree, Ike. Lack of spontaneous verbal skills. Has he ever spoken off the cuff and sounded articulate, verbally and perceptively skilled?]

          Not that I have seen. When the teleprompter fails, so does he.

          Apparently not too good at reading either, witness the teleprompter reading gaffes, “navy corpse-man,” and others equally as inept.

          Admits he is poor at math. Books, ghost written. No published Law Review articles. Academic scores unknown.
          Based on what we have seen and what is hidden, plus the bad judgement calls he makes as our “leader, I too would place his IQ at 95-100. An AA pres. all the way.
          At least not too bright W.’s embarrassed demeanor and body language telegraphed loudly that he knew he was in over his head.

  • Look_A_Squirrel

    I have seen no evidence of Obama’s “high IQ”.

    • TruthBeTold

      As far as I know, his college records have never been release. We don’t even know how he did in school.

    • libertarian1234

      Nor have I.

      But I have noticed he draws illogical parallels to situations that have no similarities, and he offers analogies that are well off the mark logically.

  • fuzzypook

    I’m not buying that he is exceptional. I read that his IQ is 129. I remember because that is exactly what mine is. That is high but certainly not exceptional. Clinton probably had the highest IQ of any of our more recent presidents.

  • Rusty Shackelford

    Obama’s issue is not lack of intelligence – I believe he’s an intelligent man. He’s intellectually lazy, and lazy in general. His brains combined with his skin color allowed him to coast while others had to work hard to get where they were, and I don’t think he ever developed much of a work ethic or desire to truly learn and understand. A guy in his shoes could have very easily been some token diversity hire at a large law firm with a fast track to a lucrative partnership, or hired into the corporate world with a fast track to upper management. I don’t think he chose not to do those things out of a desire to help others, but it probably all seemed like so much work. That’s why he was so drawn to community organizing and eventually politics. It was much less taxing to be a left wing agitator. He’s had the skids greased for him almost everywhere he went (except, as the article points out, among other blacks who didn’t like him because he was too “white”).

    • dd121

      I don’t have proof, but I suspect he’s not as intelligent as the libs would like you to believe.

      • libertarian1234

        My impression of him is the same.

        He’s made many statements and analogies that are not very bright.

    • Uncle_Dan

      He preferred community organizing to the law because he has a giant chip on his shoulder regarding white/European civilization. This is what attracts upper class whites to him, as they also detest it.

  • President Oogabooga was president of the Harvard Law Review, during which time he published absolutely nothing.

  • phillyguy

    today a college in Vermont has a asked Mumia Abu Jamal to be their guest speaker via teleconference from prison where he is on death row for fatally shooting police office Daniel Faulkner over 35 years ago,, the black Musallam should have been executed over 30 years ago but all of the leftest Zionist Hollywood made a martyr of him,, the college said we picked the brother because he represents righteousness in our society.

  • Fighting_Northern_Spirit

    Someone with an IQ of 100 would have a VERY difficult time getting through law school.
    .
    A white person, yeah, but not a black AA student.

  • A bit of a mismatch of an article. The Bell Curve, which I’ve read, goes into statistics for populations and in the beginning makes the disclaimer that it can do little about predicting the performance of a single person.

    Years ago I read about the eugenics of the early 20th century US, about how they sterilized idiot class women so they couldn’t reproduce. Those topics were always brought up with shame and likened to the later eugenics as espoused by Adolf Hitler. However, I sensed something was wrong and it’s so obvious that US entitlement culture coupled with modern medicine allowing even the grossly imbecillic to produce many children, all of whom survive to reach reproductive age, is disgenic [i.e. “double plus ungood” in 1984 speak]. Thus when I saw the title appear fleetingly on a B&N bookshelf I knew I had to have that book.

    I do numerics for a living, thus I was able to get thru the book in an enjoyable fashion. The book is very dry and all statistics. For this reason, I think very few reviewers have actually read the book. I believe the book is very predictive of the US future and can find no fault with it, not already mentioned by the authors. They admit that IQ tests are an imperfect measure of intelligence but are useful as data from standardized IQ tests are available going back to the 1920’s [I think] for large segments of the US population from US Army recruitment tests. Thus while some may have developed better tests, there simply is not enough info from those tests.

    H&M also edge around the issue of politics and I sensed they could’ve said more on this topic: such extremely non-PC comments are typical of AmRen. The book itself says it concerns itself only with White America in an effort to avoid any political repercussions. However the statistical trends it displays leads thinking readers into making “guesses” about blacks in America which are negative. This is the only issue the PC culture can take issue with.

    For me reading “The Bell Curve” lead me to awareness of racial differences, & problems and this led me to AmRen. Eventually I think if not fixed there can be only 2 outcomes. Either white lie down and be slaughtered like they are in South Africa, they were in Haiti in 1804 or they are in practically all African countries or there will be war. Even if the whites are removed from all power, you’ll then have a group of black ruled countries, many with atomic weapons, all competing in a world of diminishing resources which they know not how to extend.

    Another interesting book, which is much more readable, is “Dying of Money”. This examines the hyperinflation in Germany in 1923 with comparisons to the US. It was largely written in 1974 although has a more recent publishing date.

    Interesting about the 94%. When I was a child I really wanted to be a Dr. By the time I entered college I already owned 3 microscopes and was an amateur protozoologist. I did volunteer work in hospital ER’s. I took the medical college admissions test, (MCAT) without studying for it (no test prep) and scored better than 94% of those taking the test. I never got into medical school and after 15 years of failing to get admitted went on to become an engineer. Of course I am white (Polish/ Italian), went to public high schools, and could never claim any preferences for anything.

    • Dagworthy

      The topic of whites not getting into medical school is an interesting one, since they have higher scores than blacks on the national boards at the end of medical school. However, admission to medical school is also based on GPA, letters of recommendation, and the personal interview. Be very careful what you say in the interview.

  • dd121

    Almost everything about his past is kept under lock and key.

  • DaveMed

    It’s likely that Obama is pretty intelligent – I’d guess 120+ (which isn’t necessarily spectacular, but it is significantly higher than the average).

    He did pretty well in the debates with Romney, for example, and I’m almost certain that Romney is 140+.

    • proud white

      you think 120 plus because he did nothing in math/science, most likely received affirmative action and wont release any grades? the guy is average and a GOD DAMN WHITE HATER. I only hate blacks so I don’t get killed or they don’t screw something up. jackwad hates whites because he can

    • journey

      Very suspicious what happened to Romney after the first debate. Did someone get to him?

  • bilderbuster

    Half the time when I see a Black person attempting to sound important I think about how they resemble parrots.
    They can say all kinds of big words and snappy phrases but they have no idea what they’re actually saying.

  • Alex Dihes

    I DO NOT BUY THIS NONSENSE! The genius failed EVERY THING BEFORE and AFTER the test. All of a sudden? Without anybody’s help? He passed the test???

    • journey

      Exactly. Even failed as community organizer.

  • Dagworthy

    If he’s an intellectual titan, why not release his transcripts so we are dazzled by his high academic achievement? If he was such a stellar law student — he was a law review editor!– why didn’t he write any law review articles?

  • crockadoodle6

    What were the security elements to take the LSAT in 1987? Just a photo ID?

  • superlloyd

    ‘The idea that inferior genes account for the problems of the poor in general, and blacks in particular, isn’t new, of course.’ writes Barry Soetero.

    The fact that there are IQ average differences between races and that it’s largely genetic has been known by scientists in the field for decades. The Snyderman poll among scientists show the viewpoint that “racial IQ gaps have a genetic component” is the majority viewpoint among those in the field. Although these facts aren’t allowed to be discussed in mainstream media today. “Truth we all know but that no one wants to talk about”

    IQ testing continues apace because of its reliability and predictive power. Thus it or surrogates like SAT are scientifically robust and used extensively in job recruitment, university acceptance and even by hypocritical libtards in deciding whether criminal negroes should be executed or not.

  • Chris Granzow XI

    The fact that high-IQ isn’t a panacea is also evidence by that fact that all of these supposedly ‘educated’ high-IQ white liberals voted for him headfirst without considering his history and his relatively obvious racial biases (teaching “critical race theory” in his classes). Real-life experience coupled with high-IQ, common sense, critical thinking skills, emotional-IQ, interpersonal skills, empathy and other virtues (bravery, heart, wit, tact, prudence etc.) are where it’s at. That’s why many white nations were saved by random men from the provinces, like Napoleon from Corsica, as opposed to men that were purposefully bred to be elites from a young age.

  • mobilebay

    Proud White -The one on the right is Professor Marc Lamont Hill. Teaches at Morehouse in Atlanta. Talks like a machine gun. Often on O’Reilly’s program.

    • HE2

      Hill is a motor mouth black Affirmative Action dope who does not debate. He out-talks, over-talks, lectures, spew victimology rhetoric.
      Wiki describes him as a “distinguished professor of African American Studies,” whatever that entails, other than propagating the grievance agenda.
      This modest self-description from his website: Dr. Marc Lamont Hill is one of the leading intellectual voices in the country.
      I disagree. He is NOT an intellectual. He is a con man and non-stop blathering robot.

    • He talks like a machine gun because he thinks that by talking fast he can further B.S. people and get them to think that what he says is substantive.

  • propagandaoftruth

    Well it’s the internet so I’ll couch everything within that…

    MRI is a sociology student at a prestigious school on the west coast. He is 1/2 White, 1/4 east Asian – Chinese I think, 1/4 Black.

    He is a frequent commenter and is of libertarian bent ideologically, race realist.

    He almost always offers solid commentary even if I sometimes disagree.

    As I said, he’s a race realist, but being a quarter black, I don’t expect him to join in on hardcore black razzing.

    I kind of suspect he is what he says for many reasons and he’s always been restrained and thoughtful whatever the reality behind the handle.

    Obama is obviously smarter than the average Negro. I think many Whites, even non negro worshiping Whites, sort of add about 15 points to a black’s perceived IQ without even realizing it.
    So a black with a, what, 125 IQ is a genius, or seems one compared to his fellows. Black worshipping libtards probably add more like 30 points at least to the perceived negro genius quotient, but even moderate or conservative Whites are sometimes confused by the nature of relativity and this combined with politeness results in vast overestimation of many a negro’s IQ.
    But I think Obama is pretty bright. Maybe Negro Genius – 120 to 125

    • Like I said elsewhere in this thread, almost all (white) elected politicians strike me as 1-2 SD above the white median, which means 115-130. I think Obama is in that range, meaning he’s in the Goldilocks zone.

    • proud white

      Most of you guys I always agree with on this site but my opinion is you have bought into the smokescreen of Obama as well. No one really knows what his IQ is but I don’t see why you guys are estimating it so high. He most likely benefited by affirmative action, the odds strongly say that. He doesn’t have any intelligence achievements and won’t release his SAT scores. The odds of a negro or mixed black of having an IQ of 120 is rare. It is rare for a reason, because having an IQ in that range is unlikely for anyone despite being a negro or mixed. Now by no means am I saying Obama has a low IQ. I just feel the smoke screen has been set and many of you have bought into it. Obama sounds very intelligent no doubt. In fact many average blacks sound very intelligent, blacks are known for this sort of thing. Obama gives a great speech but I don’t think all of this correlates to him having a high IQ. My brother (not me) is very intelligent. He went to the Bronx high school of science in NYC. They give IQ tests there to students if they want to take them and from what he told me everyone scored between 120-150. I cant imagine BOZO scoring in that number because these kids are smart

      • propagandaoftruth

        Maybe you’re right ,but I base my guess more on his ability to speak off the cuff, lot’s of things that are hard to pin down, but having evaluated many people’s capacities over a long time, I think he’s in the presidential goldilocks zone IQ-wise.

        Hey, I know – if you worship them enough you’ll think this negro is a genius, but believe me…

        “Worship” is not my verb of choice regarding how I feel about them.

        • propagandaoftruth

          Negro lyrical genius…

          • propagandaoftruth

            Boy, disqus is really determined to ruin a fairly solid post, I see…

        • IBWHITE

          “but I base my guess more on his ability to speak off the cuff,”
          Every time I’ve watched film of Obama speaking off the cuff he frequently stammers and stumbles between sentences. If they need a knee-grow who’s only talent is to speak they should have elected James Earl Jones.

      • Max

        I don’t even think he gives “great” speeches. Maybe after listening to “Dubya” everone thinks this guy is

  • Should me? Maybe. Real world? Doesn’t happen often.

  • Epiminondas

    The Ivy League schools are the poster boy for the inherent danger of high IQs. Absent wisdom and common sense, a high IQ can be positively dangerous.

    • journey

      little barry does not have a high IQ. He used his black skin to the fullest. Only whites tolerate such nonsense and have such generosity. Blacks in other racial societies would be reduced to staying at the bottom of the barrel where most belong.

  • proud white

    not true. many people get into law school and finish in bottom 10 percent. most blacks in fact

  • Luca

    His intelligence or lack thereof did not get him elected or re-elected. It was his handlers in the Liberal mafia/media who exploited his good speaking skills, his charisma, and the ability to hide or whitewash his past, while vilifying his opponents and removing obstacles in his way.

    • HE2

      Luca, disagree about O’s “speaking skills.”
      Were it not for paid writers, prepared speeches and TV monitors, the frequency of his uh, er, ums would be even higher than they already are.
      Did you catch the Romney vs Obama presidential debate when his ear piece failed?

      A disaster. His whole act fell, including a demeanor of “charisma” and the look of “cool.”
      He looked inarticulate, unprepared, and uninformed, which of course he is. In my view, that is.

      • Luca

        Oh, he’s propped up alright. He’s not a natural, but when his support team and gadgets are in place he delivers the goods.

        • HE2

          Luca, delivers what goods?

          You mean intelligent sounding monitor read ghost written speeches, or evidence of his natural dazzling leadership and oratorical skills? /sarc

          I cannot think of a single good this inept man has delivered.

  • J.D.

    “The idea that inferior genes account for the problems of the poor in general, and blacks in particular, isn’t new, of course. Racial supremacists have been using IQ tests to support their theories since the turn of the century. … ”

    Sooo, Mr. Obama, what’s your point?

  • proud white

    I agree with some of what you said abt the sat being dumbed down but your numbers are way off. An IQ test is not dumbed down and a score of 130 puts you in the 99 % of test takers. If you score 130 and you are black, well that is just extremely rare

  • Raymond Kidwell

    Murray constantly argues that we live in a very meritocratic system where whoever has high test scores or a high I.Q. will be swept up into the elite. This is the same kind of nonsense the guy who owns the business I work for tells me “if you work hard enough one day you’ll own a business yourself” the only problem is the people who own businesses don’t work. They cash checks earned by other people’s labor. I was never even given an SAT score and I actually went to college so this should begin saying something. Elite colleges may absorb a handful of high scoring people, less than a fraction of one percent. This “cognitive elite” that Murray obsesses on barely exists. You have mostly rich people who find a genius from the lower classes here and there to refresh their bloodlines and keep themselves from degrading too much. That basically represents your Ivy league. Meanwhile plenty of smart people being left behind, especially white males. Lots of people who work really hard and don’t get ahead and others who are lazy and earn millions.

    Besides that most politicians are a little above average in I.Q. but not geniuses. They usually have I.Q.s from 120-135 range (your congressmen, presidents etc>). My I.Q. is about as high as Bush’s or OBamas and I’m dirt poor. Obama, Bush and most presidents fall into this category. Bill and HIllary Clinton are a little higher than that. As Bill Clinton says politicians are elected based on their ability to represent the people, not based on who is smartest or most competent. Usually the really smart people are those behind the president- the economists, lawyers etc.

  • journey

    I find the content of this article regarding little barry’s IQ/high test scores highly questionable. The top schools were desperately looking for token blacks back then. It was the height of black madness especially when blacks were on a rampage with their demands. Little barry was installed as president of Harvard Law Review but where are the articles authored by him? Not a single one has surfaced. It is a requirement if one is a member. Also, he was known to be lazy and would delegate out duties.

    Just like now = golfing, vacationing, fund raising, etc.

  • Gary John 金白龍

    Liberal speak: He is smart for his ability.

  • gah

    I doubt that 0bama’s LSAT score was that high. Like most tests given to blacks, he probably had to have some “help” in getting a score high enough to admit. We sure haven’t seen any evidence of great intellect since he came into office.

  • Ed

    The LSAT score needed to get into Harvard even as a minority is in the >95th percentile. He’s a very smart man. IQ probably around 130.

  • IBWHITE

    Well show where Hill is a documented member of MENSA then. Hill is no different from the majority of these lefty’s’ he speaks over people and then throws out facts and figures that he cannot substantiate or comes from dubious sources.