September 15, 2008

Palin

Here's the full length version of the Sarah Palin article I wrote for The American Conservative a week and a half ago.

My published articles are archived at iSteve.com -- Steve Sailer

43 comments:

teacher.paris said...

"In viewing both conventions one can’t help but feel he is getting a glimpse of what hell must be like. We see a bunch of little devils running around celebrating pandemonium." http://cambriawillnotyield.blogspot.com/

bubba said...

Tim Wise believes (or claims to) that the treatment meted out to Palin by the media demonstrates nothing but 'white privilege'.

That's apparently why she's been given an easy ride, while Obama has been given a brutal one.

Y'all missed that one didn't ya...

article

Zen Redneck said...

I'm doing my best to add to the Palin legend here:

http://baloocartoons.wordpress.com/

Blode said...

Why did you have to mention Thatcher? Now I'm again drowning in envy over the Britons having anyone of that caliber in their national legislature, let alone having had the sense to have made her a party leader (in 1975 no less).

Of course, her brother Billy Thatcher almost destroyed her candidacy in 1976, with his beer-drinking good ol' boy antics and ties to the Libyans. Or something like that. Seventies're all a blur to me.

Anonymous said...

And still no discussion of concerns over how her academic record suggests she might not have an IQ sufficient for the job? Does Steve Sailer still run this blog?

William1066 said...

I wonder what McCain's current IQ happens to be. And while we know that Obama can write real purdy, we don't really know much about his quant skills. He probably had a pretty lop-sided SAT score. My guess: 650V 500Q

James Kabala said...

I still find the idea that Sarah Palin is "hormonally exuberant," a "frontier folk hero," "merrily comic," or the posessor of an "overstuffed live story" to be sorely lacking in evidence. The fact that one guy has created a moderately (at best) popular website ripping off an idea originally applied to someone else is not enough evidence in my book. She seems like a nice enough lady with an admirable number of kids and an accent that veers back and forth between grating and endearing, but I can't get worked up over her one way or the other and am mystified by why so many other people have. (P.S. I'm glad to see you've downgraded Bristol's paramour from "handsome" to "strapping.")

Nancy Pelosi also has five kids, by the way. If McCain wins, we will have quite a fecund State of the Union dais, as McCain himself has four natural and three adopted. Joe Biden has four, although only three are still alive; only Obama has a small number.

Historically, though, four or five are not a lot. Ethel Kennedy had eleven, and no one ever compared her to Venus of Willendorf or said that only a roughneck fisherman (the last job one could imagine Bobby Kennedy having) could handle her.

Anonymous said...

The average SAT score of 2007 freshmen at the University of Idaho is 1100, slightly below the 65th percentile for those who take the SAT:s (I don’t know what is was when she was accepted). She was an out-of state student with a good subsequent carrier, so putting her at or above the average does not seem overly generous.

The year Obama was accepted into Harvard the average African American LSAT score was at the 85th percentile for all LSAT takers (the average white LSAT that year was close to the 99th percentile).

Even though Senator Obama presumably knows his own LSAT and GPA scores he claims he does not know if he was accepted because of affirmative action. Only 1 out of 7 African Americans that are accepted into top law schools get in without affirmative action.

It’s hard to translate these figures to IQ, but 115 for Palin and 130 for Obama seems reasonable. McCain was 133 (when young).

Is 115 sufficient for a VP, with a 5-10% probability to serve as President? I personally think it is, given the fact that Palin has a record of success in government. IQ is a proxy, not an end into itself. I would prefer someone smarter and with a record of accomplishments like Romney or Gingrich. Certainly someone with zero actual accomplishments except self-promotion is automatically disqualified, as I am sure we all agree. But hey, live by celebrity identity politics die by celebrity identity politics!

Anonymous said...

Catholic Marylander Nancy Pelosi’s children were born almost 2 generations ago, between 1963-1969, the youngest the year she moved to San Francisco. Pelosi would not take office until 1987, when her oldest would be 24 and her youngest 18.

I hardly think this invalidates the social pattern Sailor writes about, rather than emphasize it.

TCO said...

fyi

http://theamericanscene.com/2008/09/15/do-more-unequal-places-tend-to-vote-for-democrats?commented=1#c007230

Scales Fall said...

Steve wrote:
"And now she has a 17-year-old pregnant daughter engaged to a strapping 18-year-old hockey player in one of the few places left in America where a young man with a strong back can support a family."

This is a key point and one of the under the radar things driving emotions on both sides. See, part of the allure of living in small-town, traditional America is that, if your teen daughter does get knocked up, at least it's going to be by a 17 year old version of you...and not Snoop Dog.

When the news broke that Bristol was pregnant, believe me the left was hoping the boyfriend would be black, or Mexican, or Native/Eskimo - and not a guy who's 1/8 Native/Eskimo and completely identifies with and acts like a regular white guy, but a real Person of Color!! That'll show those traditional white trash folk!

But no...the boyfriend turned out to be a strapping, roughneck, white guy. The kind who knows how to kick someones ass, shoot a gun and doesn't put up with any guff. Eventually, the boyfriend will mature, become a successful guy earning a good living with his
strong back, like Todd. With the family and community support found in small towns, with no need for community organizers / agitators / shakedown artists / Marxists, Bristol will marry her boyfriend, make a successful life, and have lots of babies who will grow up learning to hunt and fish and be independent, self-sufficient individuals, who would laugh at the notion that government, that pencil-neck beauracrats need to order their lives for them.

The kids Bristol and her husband have will grow up much the same way. Rinse and repeat. That's how America starts to change. The firm of Soros, Sulzberger, Dowd and Moyers see this as a mortal threat to their liberal/leftist project. And they are right.

James Kabala said...

Anonymous on Pelosi: Oh, I know, I was just commenting. Shd does have seven grandchildren, which also seems impressive at first, but with her youngest child 38, that generation is unlikely to make replacement level. So that also reinforces Steve's thesis.

Anonymous on Obama: One thing in favor of the idea that Obama is genuinely smart is the fact that he was the first black President of the Harvard Law Review. Obviously it's possible that affirmative action played a role, but if it were the sole factor, they would have a black president every year, or at least several times before 1989. Merit must have played some role in his selection.

Scales: I certainly hope so, but it's too early to say. First, they have to actually get married (yet to happen); second, they have to be basically decent people, something currently impossible to judge from a distance. Does any know the divorce statistics for rural whites who marry after the bride is pregnant? I would be far from shocked if it is rather high. I hope it turns out otherwise, of course.

fact-slap said...

"The average SAT score of 2007 freshmen at the University of Idaho is 1100..."

She transferred to University of Idaho from a junior college. People often attend a junior college first when they can't make the grades or test scores to get into a university, but it's possible her issues were financial and not about eligibility. What would be really worth knowing, is what the SAT average was at Pacific Hawaii University in the early 80s, the first university she attended. Also worth knowing would be why she left.

"She was an out-of state student with a good subsequent carrier"

Well, the career she ended up preparing for, after forgoing her initial business major, broadcast journalism, didn't last too long. She did reasonably well as a mayor of a small town hut her tenure as governor is so short it's hard to judge. She generated high approval ratings by doing some reforms and seeming to go after the entrenched corruption, but now there are articles about her engaging in her own cronyism, appointing very under-qualified friends to powerful positions. If she had another term or two as governor, I think the questions of IQ and competency would be much less relevant.

"It’s hard to translate these figures to IQ, but 115 for Palin and 130 for Obama seems reasonable. McCain was 133 (when young)."

If all we knew about Obama was the distribution of LSAT scores for blacks admitted to Harvard Law, I woudln't have any trouble assuming 130 or considerably below. But we do know more, Razib and Half Sigma have the made the point that his magna cum laude status implies it's unlikely his IQ is far from the HLS average IQ (likely 3 deviations above the mean,145), he also has parents who are academics with advanced degrees, the father with his from Harvard. He is also an atypical member of the category "black," having a white mother and father who is an african elite. These prior assumptions make it much more reasonable that he falls at the far right end of curve of blacks admitted to HLS. I, like everyone else, would prefer to go by test scores, but as it stands the inference from his magna status to the HLS IQ average, along with the other assumptions I mentioned, seems a considerably more reasoned approach than the more general claims about AA that have people putting him at 130, or more spuriously, 120.

"Is 115 sufficient for a VP, with a 5-10% probability to serve as President? I personally think it is, given the fact that Palin has a record of success in government."

As I said before, if her record in government were longer and there was more consensus that it was truly successful, I would agree. But that's just not how things stand. A 1 in 10 or 1 in 20 chance of having someone just too incompetent as head of state, I have to say that is a really unreasonable and unnecessary risk.

But I would like to say I appreciate you being reasonable in discussing this and pointing to facts to make your case.

rosh said...

"And still no discussion of concerns over how her academic record suggests she might not have an IQ sufficient for the job? Does Steve Sailer still run this blog?"

This is a key point that has quickly left me disillusioned with this blog. I would like to think this blog is a serious and disspassionate exploration of human biodiversity instead of an outlet for reflexive white chauvinism. Since the beginning of the Palin phenomenon, the hypocrisy and contradictions have been glaring. The giddiness with which Michelle Obama's academic record (intelligence) was scrutinize on this blog compared to the defeaning silence on Sarah Palin is telling.

Truth said...

"Eventually, the boyfriend will mature, become a successful guy earning a good living with his
strong back, like Todd. With the family and community support found in small towns, with no need for community organizers / agitators / shakedown artists / Marxists, Bristol will marry her boyfriend, make a successful life, and have lots of babies who will grow up learning to hunt and fish and be independent, self-sufficient individuals,...


And after reading little Levi Jr. to sleep to 'my little pony', Levi Sr. Will gently carry him to bed wearing his silk smoking jacket. The impossibly blonde toweheaded boy will go to bed with visions of sugar plums dancing in his head, and wake up miraculously to discover that the tooth fairy has left a shiny new dime under the goose-down pillow big Levi, and sewed lovingly by Bristol following step by step instructions by the now president of the United states herself...

Michael said...

Steve - A nicely-done piece, thanks.

Truth said...

"McCain was 133 (when young)."

Wow, the guy who graduated 894th in that class had a 133 IQ? What was the valedictorian's IQ; 1000?

Truth said...

That's is really amazing if you think about it;

The 894 rated graduate of the 1958 Naval Academy class had an IQ of 133 considering that there were only 897 graduates of the class, and taking into account the Flynn Effect, the Average American white 50 years ago had an IQ of 85.

That would mean, assuming a reasonalbe IQ drop of 3 points between #894 and #897 every single graduate of this class had an IQ of 130+, or three standard deviations above the white norm.

There are two ways one can go with this:

1) extrapolate these findings to Naval Academy classes all the way to today, at which case the lowest rated midshipmen in the 2008 class have an IQ of 150.

3) Assume that that class was simply a numerical fluke, from which one could only assume that the the 1958 Naval Academy graduating class was the greatest collection of brainpower ever assembled at one place on the planet earth!

TCO said...

Interesting interview of First Dude by Greta Van Susteren. He seems like an intereting guy, but Greta is a very akward interviewer. I thought 10 years ago that she would get it down, but she still seems a little "off" often.

rightsaidfred said...

>>>>Rosh said... "The giddiness with which Michelle Obama's academic record (intelligence) was scrutinize on this blog compared to the defeaning silence on Sarah Palin is telling."

Not totally fair. Barack and Michelle's entry to public life was as elite academics (sort of), while Palin came as a practical, hands-on politician. Different areas with different measures.

Anonymous said...

1. McCain did bad because of disciplinary problems, not stupidity.

2. Obama IQ “145”
There are, statistically speaking, about 600 African American males in the US with IQ:s at or above 145, or 10 per cohort. It is possible Obama is one of them, but extremely improbable.

3. Harvard was the first top school to have African Americans in their law review board, which they are proud of. They were among the first to have an African American president (Obama). At the time it was a big deal, they wrote article about it etc, that I looked up at one point. Obama *campaigned* and was *elected*to that position, and his race and charisma was clearly part of him. He admitted as much himself.
His grades (in the top quarter, but not top 5%) are obviously also partially a function of his verbal skills, discipline, and ability to express himself. Law School is not abstract physics.

A black guy from an upper middle class family, going to a prep school and having a 145 IQ would not go to Occidental college. He would directly have gone to Harvard/Yale/Princeton, after a bidding war.

Note also, from a Bayesian perspective, that Obama has chosen not to release his college grades, SAT and LSAT scores.

4. Comparing Michele with Palin is absurd. Michele Obama has a horrible character: she thinks her mediocrity is our fault. When has Palin done anything like that?
For the record Sailor has written plenty about how IQ is NOT the most important trait in a President.

5. If we accept this election is about experience and “record in government”, how can anyone justify voting for Barack? He has almost zero record in government. At least Palin did something in her 20 months.

professor said...

Watch this interview of Todd Palin, and you will see why the Left fears and loathes the Palins. Todd Palin embodies everything the Left hates.

http://blogsforjohnmccain.com/todd-palin-goes-record-greta-van-susteren-video-91508

Anonymous said...

The giddiness with which Michelle Obama's academic record (intelligence) was scrutinize on this blog

Of course, Michelle Obama was completely unqualified for the two universities (Princeton and HLS) which she attended. She's spent her life as an affirmative action beneficiary and enforcer who hates whites. Michelle Obama *thinks* she's smart -- anyone who applies to HLS must -- when she's actually a moron.

By contrast, Sarah P never presented herself as being ultra intelligent. Yet read Sarah Palin's official correspondence and compare to Michelle Obama's thesis. No contest, though that's a low bar to clear.

Sarah P is probably 110 or 115. Above average but not at Harvard magna cum laude level. Then again, Obama of course is no match for Romney, who matches him on verbal and has quant and business skills that are far beyond BHO. One guy founded Bain, the other guy worked as a racial agitator.

The thing about IQ is that it only really sticks in your craw when your desired policies are not being moved forward. If Bush was as dumb as he is now, but his instincts were better, I wouldn't care.

Palin's instincts are good. She will be moving in the right direction as much as possible, though if she had the IQ of Romney that would be even more helpful.

By contrast, Obama's PC instincts are horrific. His IQ is actually worse as it allows him to trick people into thinking "he understands them" and that he will be anything other than the high priest of PC upon gaining office.

Anonymous said...

By the way, anytime someone brings up Palin's experience, you should link this:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PzFOOcEQtP0

A room full of New Yorkers and no one is able to name a single accomplishment by Barack Obama. The only ones I can think of are graduating from HLS (dime a dozen at this level), winning an uncontested Senate race, and barely beating Hillary in a Democratic primary.

This qualifies him to be president? By contrast I don't think anyone can dispute that McCain has a presidential biography, even if they disagree with his policies, demeanor, and so on.

I mean, can you imagine a bizarro universe where Obama was actually grilled by a competent interviewer in the manner of the Charlie Gibson interview?

1) "Have you ever held a rifle in defense of your country"?
2) "Ever founded a profitable business"?

(these are good "setup questions" like the "have you ever met a foreign leader" question, where the interviewer already knows the answer is no and is trying to humiliate the interviewee)

3) "Why did you sit on a board with William Ayers, an unrepentant domestic terrorist?"

4) "How did Tony Rezko help you purchase your first home?"

5) "Have you ever taken a bribe and would you willing to take a polygraph to that effect?"

6) "In your memoirs, you broke up with your first girlfriend because she was white. Is that something you're still proud of today"?

And so on. Instead we get pseudoright-winger O'Reilly grilling him on his fidelity to the neocon line. Ok, great, Obama is kosher by AIPAC's worldview.

fact-slap said...


2. Obama IQ “145”
There are, statistically speaking, about 600 African American males in the US with IQ:s at or above 145, or 10 per cohort. It is possible Obama is one of them, but extremely improbable.


First, as Razib is found of pointing out, IQ tails are fat. Second he is biracial, so you would start at the mean IQ of the two races. Then there is all the prior assumptions I mentioned before about the academic distinctions about his parents. I agree it's rare level of distinction, but his background seems to make the possibility plausible.


A black guy from an upper middle class family, going to a prep school and having a 145 IQ would not go to Occidental college. He would directly have gone to Harvard/Yale/Princeton, after a bidding war.


This is a good point and one worth keeping in mind in making the assessment. It seems like his grades in highschool would have to have been exceeding low to have hurt him.

Law School is not abstract physics.

Well, he did help a professor write a paper on law and physics.
http://www.nytimes.com/2007/01/28/us/politics/28obama.html?pagewanted=2&sq=barack%20obama%20law%20school&st=cse&scp=1

And people make too much light of Verbal IQ, it's not merely having a large vocabulary, it relates to analogies, short term memory capcity, manipulation within working memory. Verbal IQ is by no means peripheral to issues of logic and abstract reasoning.

Note also, from a Bayesian perspective, that Obama has chosen not to release his college grades, SAT and LSAT scores.

I'm curious if the reason he doesn't want to release his grades is not because they are low, but because they show classes with left-leaning professors, giving ammunition to the movement to brand him as ultra-left. I think the grades and test scores would likely have to come as a package, no?

5. If we accept this election is about experience and “record in government”, how can anyone justify voting for Barack? He has almost zero record in government. At least Palin did something in her 20 months.

It is a reasonable to have someone with a small amount of experience if they show clear signs of intelligence and ability, or at the other end, someone whose intelligence is less discernible but has a long effective record in government. With Palin and her almost too short to be meaningful tenure as governor, it seems we could well have be that we have the worst of both worlds.

Anonymous said...

Academics don't necessarily indicate IQ. Mine was tested at 138, tops. While I got a lot of applause from professors in certain subjects, my overall performance was not what would be expected. That is true of many,many high IQ people.
You need high IQ to excell in areas requiring abstract thinking, etc. etc. But high IQ does not necessarily make one excell. So McCain 133? Sure. I make $50,000 working in a library, and I'm not even one of the best employees.

Stopped Clock said...

Those of you talking about Obama's IQ remember, Obama's not African-American at all; he's half white and half East African, and the data we have on East African IQ is extremely vague.

As for McCain: IQ isn't necessarily a good predictor of how high you'll finish in a class.

Anonymous said...

I agree with Rosh, that this Palin hypocrisy on IQ is a 'jump the shark' moment for this blog. I am a racial realist myself, but the commentary on here has gotten absurd.

This reactionary desire to overlook Palin's cognitive shortcomings, and find justifications for why a Harvard magna [whom was able to teach con law at U of Chicago] must be an 'affirmative action' token, kind of betrays one's true motives [which is a shame, since I thought Steve and others here were a bit more intellectually honest].

I hate to use the term, since it's usually PC bullshit, but I'm coming to believe many of you are actually just racists who hide behind the idea of racial realism.

This mush about how Palin has the 'right instincts' is incredibly naive. What is hideous about this all, is that Obama's father was a Harvard man himself, white mother a PHD, and yet many find it so difficult to believe a 'dark man' could actually have elite intelligence.

birch barlow said...

Fertility is the paradox of libertarianism. Usually more children=more fascism. Unfortunately having no children or only one child ultimately
means giving in to fertile fascists, whether they be Islamic,
fundamentalist Christian, Orthodox Jewish, some form of national socialist(Nazism, Soviet Communism, and Japanese imperialism were all both highly
nationalistic and highly socialistic, and certainly ultra-collectivist).

Almost every bad law one can think of was/is passed "for the children." Countless trillions of dollars are thrown at the schools to no effect...for the children. Illegals are legalized...for the children. People growing marijuana are put away for long periods of time...for the children. DUI laws are toughened to ridiculous extents...for the children. Bicycling under the influence of OTC and Rx drugs can be
charged as a felony...for the children.

One solution to this paradox is to import a bougeois-bohemian upper middle class from overseas. Unfortunately East & South Asians, who would form the bulk of such an imported middle class, as well as a smaller group of Central-South Americans, Africans, and Eastern Europeans who would come
along under a merit-based immigration policy, tend to bring with them Old World values. Yes, Asian-Americans tend to be quite socially tolerant, but that is very often not the case for their immigrant parents
and grandparents. For example, I would bet that U.S. born Asians are at least as likely to use recreational drugs as American whites, especially because they tend to adopt West Coast upper-middle class American values,
which are quite different from Midwestern working class American values(i.e., very socially right-wing & intolerant).

Also, there is the issue of brain draining the world, especially w.r.t. Latin America and Africa, where natives with say, 115+ IQs are quite a precious commodity.

Ultimately I think the solution lies in transhumanism, as ultra-long lives would essentially abolish the need for children. But this is a long way off.

In addition to trying to grow the upper middle class and stop the underclass from growing too quickly (by changing immigration policy), I think it is also important to make parents realize that their children can never be 100% safe. Also, as Ben Franklin said, anyone who would trade freedom for security deserves neither. This goes doubly when children are involved. I mean it's not the end of the world if your 7-year old sees an episode of "South Park" or sees a guy looking at swimsuit pics in the public library, or someone on the corner smoking weed and washing down Vicodin with Robitussin and cheap booze. Probably the 7-year old would have no idea what's going on anyway.

If I were to illustrate the bastardized version of "family values conservatism" that is popular in America, it would be a mother bear thinking "That *evil* hiker just walked within 500 feet of my *precious* children. I'm going to maul him!" Cut to a picture of a hiker being ripped to pieces by the mother bear.

My point is that what is often called "family values conservatism" is no more than an expression of paleomammalian and reptilian (i.e. animalistic) impulses. There is nothing "higher" or godly about dogmatism or fascism.

birch barlow said...

2. Obama IQ “145”
There are, statistically speaking, about 600 African American males in the US with IQ:s at or above 145, or 10 per cohort. It is possible Obama is one of them, but extremely improbable.


The strict Gaussian is probably not accurate for predicting the number of individuals in a population four sigmas above the mean [(145-85)/15=4].

The Gaussian distribution essentially assumes an *infinite* number of degrees of freedom, or an infinite number of equally contributing factors (more precisely, the limit as n approaches infinity). Given assortive mating, gene-environment correlations (for ex. a higher-IQ person tends to have better health habits than a lower-IQ person, further increasing his IQ), and related phenomena, there are effectively a relatively limited number of degrees of freedom in the distribution of IQ or any other trait, or really almost any real-world variable.

For example, if you use a t-value (equivalent to a Z-score in a Gaussian) of 4 and a DoF (degrees of freedom) of 15, expected proportion of individuals above 4 SD ~ 1/1700, vs. ~1/31000 for the Guassian. In this example, the expected number of African American males w/IQ over 145 = 300,000,000*.13*.5/1700 = ~11,500.

Of course it is hard to know what the real effective degrees of freedom is for the distribution of a complex trait, but I think it is fair to say it is unlikely to be effectively infinite.

The bottom line is that the Gaussian is generally a poor predictor for outliers, or more than about 2 SD from the mean.

Josh said...

Note to james kabala re Bobby K.,"roughneck fisherman" the "last job one could imagine (him)having." Recall a story about Bobby joining the Navy at or near the end of the war,his job scraping barnacles off his ship.A guy who would have push up contests with Jimmy Hoffa could probably handle Alaska. As for Palin,her celebrity--just heard Limbaugh gushing about her today(Ok maybe the term "Limbaugh gushing" is not a desirable one,in light of his adventures in Costa Rica,where upon returning home was caught with Viagra...all together:Eeeeeww!!)--reminds me of the Iraq war girl,Jessica Lynch,who got the same Woman Warrior treatment from the republicans.Their efforts to get the (white) womans vote--and of course when they say "woman" they mean the white woman,cuz for political purposes only white women are classified as "women"--by promoting Palin suggests as one feminist writer belched,that women are,uhm,stupid. So far,its working like a charm! BTW,the phrase "like a charm" is NOT meant to be a slight on Obamas African baskground,mmmkay?

James Kabala said...

Josh: You're right; RFK could be a tough cookie.

Anonymous said...

In addition to trying to grow the upper middle class and stop the underclass from growing too quickly (by changing immigration policy), I think it is also important to make parents realize that their children can never be 100% safe.

A majority of our military personnel, especially in the combat units, were raised by "family values conservatives." That doesn't really jibe with your theory. No doubt, in your mind, smoking pot is more patriotic than military service. And who is it that doesn't deserve their freedom?

birch barlow said...

I hate to use the term, since it's usually PC bullshit, but I'm coming to believe many of you are actually just racists who hide behind the idea of racial realism.

This mush about how Palin has the 'right instincts' is incredibly naive. What is hideous about this all, is that Obama's father was a Harvard man himself, white mother a PHD, and yet many find it so difficult to believe a 'dark man' could actually have elite intelligence.


Well, I think one problem is that race realists fear that the intelligence they and others may see in duskier people is wishful thinking.

An immediate example I can think of is a very dark-skinned (South)East Asian female who scored very high (higher than me, I must admit) on two quizzes in my Organic Chemistry course. On the one hand, I think it would be wonderful for her to be super-smart, on the other, I fear that this is wishful thinking brought on by two decades of PC indoctrination.

Ultimately, however, I believe it is better to err on the side of favoring non-whites, as long as this err-ing isn't taken to ridiculous or dogmatic proportions, as it is amongst the far left, and unfortunately, since the late 1970s and 1980s, the neocon "right."

Better yet, one should suppress one's dearest wishes as well as his[1] worst fears in looking at the world. Yes, this is easier said than done, but it is a good ideal for anyone considering himself a realist.

[1]I use he/him in the gender-neutral sense, for the sake of simplicity. I would like to see this use of "he" come back into common use amongst academics (it fell out of favor, I think, ca. 1990), as it makes both writing and reading easier. There should be no problem with the use of "he" as a gender-neutral term, so long as one realizes it does not somehow indicate male superiority or supremacy (if anything, I consider females to be the superior sex, but that is a different topic altogether).

Svigor said...

Not totally fair.

Not fair at all, since it's apples and oranges. As you point out, no one has any illusions about Palin or her man and she's not eligible for racial preferences.

birch barlow said...

A majority of our military personnel, especially in the combat units, were raised by "family values conservatives." That doesn't really jibe with your theory. No doubt, in your mind, smoking pot is more patriotic than military service. And who is it that doesn't deserve their freedom?

Well, assuming your premise is correct, I guess this is one advantage of federalism, and another reason to heap praise on our Founding Fathers (even though America isn't what it's cracked up to be, it is hard to deny the genious of our Founders). Thanks to federalism Bible Belters can have "fascism in one county" while free thinkers and innovators can be free from dogmatic nonsense being imposed on them by the authorities.

On a slightly different topic, it is unfortunate that there is not a party that represents the upper middle class. Republican and Democratic Party higher-ups are essentially aristocrats trying to appeal to both other aristocrats and the ignorant masses. Any professional or aspiring professional must realize that his class interests are neither those of the aristocracy nor those of the ignorant masses. Any upper-middle class person who tries to ally with one or the other, or somehow tries to ally with a little of both, is shooting himself in the foot.

What is really needed is an upper-middle class conciousness. To help clear up the left/right confusion, there must be a clear distinction between empirical leftism/rightism and ethical leftism/rightism.

Empirical leftism/rightism is a matter of the way one sees human nature, and reality in general. An empirical rightest will tend to believe in human biodiversity, but this is only one particularly salient aspect of empirical conservatism. To paraphrase Orwell, empirical conservatism (skepticism) means seeing freedom as the freedom to say that two and two make four.

Then there is the issue of ethical beliefs, and I think this is the rub for many people. How does one reconcile the idea that racism, sexism, homophobia, and related biases are wrong, with the reality of human biodiversity? Well, the issue here is ethics. One must be able to see that the reality of human differences does not mean that discrimination is justified. Yes, incompetents should not be allowed anywhere near nuclear reactors, and those guilty of serious violent crimes should be put away. But that does not mean that groups that have traditionally been discriminated against should continue to face discrimination. The issue here, as was outlined by many before the modern debate of human biodiversity vs. human biouniformity, is the issue of political equality. Everyone deserves the same rights, and to the extent practical, one's genes should never result in the denial of rights.

Truth said...

"1. McCain did bad because of disciplinary problems, not stupidity."

A genius who graduated in the bottom .3% of his class because he was a free spirit? Sorry, not buying.

"Not totally fair. Barack and Michelle's entry to public life was as elite academics (sort of), while Palin came as a practical, hands-on politician. Different areas with different measures."

Wrong, they both went to school, this is a website devoted to the study of intelligence, and tests are the best way to measure intelligence.

I can only imagine the feeding frenzy here if Barack (or Michelle) graduated from a third-rate state school in 5 1/2 years, transfering 4 times, with bad grades and majored in journalism.

"5. If we accept this election is about experience and “record in government”, how can anyone justify voting for Barack?"

Conversely, what has McCain done, wait excuse me, what has he done well? I've already outlined how he has been a failure as a student, pilot, soldier and husband, and decidedly mediocre as a politician.

Palin on the other hand left a town of 8,000 people 20 million dollars in debt. This works out to a per-capita debt burden of $2,500 each, extrapolate that to a country with a a population of 300 million and you can see where the cheerleader is approaching George W. financial reputation. This in quite impressive when you consider that Wassalia, AK does not have an army that I am aware of.

"She's spent her life as an affirmative action beneficiary and enforcer who hates whites. Michelle Obama *thinks* she's smart -- anyone who applies to HLS must -- when she's actually a moron..."

Considering the 'regression to the mean, one can only look at M.O.'s family to determine her qualifications. Her brother is also an Ivy league graduate who has been extremely successful in two highly competitive fields; wall street financial services and college athletics, therefore your rant makes little quantifiable sense.

"By contrast, Sarah P never presented herself as being ultra intelligent."

When did Michelle Obama?

"Obama of course is no match for Romney,"

Is Romney running for president again? I must have spent too many hours at work today.

"The thing about IQ is that it only really sticks in your craw when your desired policies are not being moved forward."

Boy George's policies are forward quite well. He desired to corner middle eastern oil, destroy the US economy and make himself and his friends richer and he has been a smashing success.

"winning an uncontested Senate race, and barely beating Hillary in a Democratic primary."

The Senate race was not uncontested and winning an election by one electoral vote is winning.

"While I got a lot of applause from professors in certain subjects, my overall performance was not what would be expected."

Were you in the bottom .3% of your class?

"By contrast I don't think anyone can dispute that McCain has a presidential biography..."

When one's biggest accomplishment in life is getting captured, yeah I think that's disputable.

"1) "Have you ever held a rifle in defense of your country"?
2) "Ever founded a profitable business"?"

Well, let's play with that:

1992, "Senator Clinton, have you ever held a rifle in defense of your country?"

BC: "No Charlie"

"Ever founded a profitable business."

"No Charlie"

2000, "Governor Bush, have you ever held a rifle in defense of your country?"

"Well Charlie, I defended the great state of Texas from an Arkansas Invasion!"

"Ever run a profitable business."

"No Charlie, actually I lost million of dollars of other people's money on all of them."

rast said...

As others have pointed out, there are more than 600 blacks with IQ > 145 in America. Furthermore, why shouldn't Obama be one of those 600+? Sure, if he was white and nerdy he would go make 5 figures writing software (until he was replaced by a H1-B serf). But since he's black and charismatic he's just going to have to settle for a good chance at the Presidency.

PS: Steve, take a break from the Obama stuff and give us a good analysis of McCain's IQ.

Anonymous said...

"Conversely, what has McCain done, wait excuse me, what has he done well? I've already outlined how he has been a failure as a student, pilot, soldier and husband, and decidedly mediocre as a politician."

And he can't send emails either!

Anonymous said...

wtWith the family and community support found in small towns, with no need for community organizers / agitators / shakedown artists / Marxists, Bristol will marry her boyfriend, make a successful life, and have lots of babies who will grow up learning to hunt and fish and be independent, self-sufficient individuals, who would laugh at the notion that government, that pencil-neck beauracrats need to order their lives for them.

And all the meth in all the small towns in Alaska and indeed, America, would disappear overnight. Have you ever actually lived in a small town, dude?

Anonymous said...

To the commenter named "Truth" --

You said "A genius who graduated in the bottom .3% of his class because he was a free spirit? Sorry, not buying."

Hey, it happens. I flunked out of college on my first try despite a 1380 SAT score (a 1380 before the post-1995 score inflation policy, mind you). Later the Army tested my IQ as 139 (as I child I tested even higher). I just had a lot of personal problems as a young adult -- nothing to do with any kind of substance abuse, nor am I male. I read _Faith of My Fathers_ (McCain's autobiography) a couple years ago and vaguely recall his colorful accounts of his Academy days. Maybe the book would give you some clues as to why he did so poorly.

I am pretty amazed that a few commenters here seem to think having a high IQ automatically leads to academic success. It does not, though no doubt statistically it makes success (much) more likely.

And by the way, my IQ does not make me a "genius," nor is McCain one (obviously).

Anonymous said...

"As for Palin,her celebrity--just heard Limbaugh gushing about her today... reminds me of the Iraq war girl,Jessica Lynch,who got the same Woman Warrior treatment from the"

Maybe you should go work for the Dems. You're just the man of the moment for them.
Seriously, I never thought I'd quote Newt Gingrich, but you should hear him on the subject of Palin's lack of experience. It's a rapid-fire comparison with Obama (who just talks and writes.) Of course he's just listing her titles and a few of her deeds, but still...
What a weird comparison, other than gender.
Jessica Lynch did not do much of anything special, except volunteer to serve in a criminal war, where even the non-combattant areas are probably more dangerous than where you're living right now -- unless you're in downtown Detroit, perhaps, or Baltimore. She did not volunteer for her stretcher incident. Sarah Palin willingly accepted the VP nomination, and as far as I know, has never been prone on the job since accepting.

Sarah Palin's fitness for duty--do you REALLY need to hear it again?
You obviously don't want to, but her check-offs on her "to do list" in the realm of achievement has been impressive, and she does not appear to be about to go away. She's young and strapping.
There's no telling how she'll do down the road, but she's already proven better than, oh, about 99% of the politicians I've ever studied. So that's something.
I'm afraid you'll just have to live with the fact there's a lady who's doing some Very Important Things and may even do more than you.
And I'm an independent who has never voted Republican in my life.

Anonymous said...

scales fall is right. Sarah Palin is stirring something up that the Left was sure they had killed and buried.

Steve, check out palinfacts.com. The fact that the meme is really, truly funny makes it all the more potent.

--Senor Doug