I have expressed my opinion of America’s worst ex-peanut farmer in neo-neocon comments for years. I have called him a menace to liberty. I have said he should be bitch slapped. I even explained how the destruction in his wake epitomizes two thousand years of the mistaken morality of altruism.

Not that I would ever encounter the man, but I am on firm enough ground that I would happily heckle him in the same fashion — that is, say it to his face.

I liken IQ to height in basketball. It’s nice to have, everyone would like a little more, a certain minimum is pretty much necessary. But after that, other factors take over as to who is the better player. Your co-worker was attempting to say “I’m 6’5″, I should be on the HS team.” You correctly divined that “You’re 6’5″, but dude, you suck anyway. Learn some skills.”

The point of the personal story was not so much how supposedly *intelligent* people conducted themselves on a personal level, or even how common or rare a high IQ may be, as it was to show that simply being deemed *intelligent* by some standard or other was not sufficient reason to believe someone is suitable for high public office.

God help us if we are ever to be ruled by overlords who attain their position based strictly upon IQ levels!

We were informed by the MSM constantly as to how *intelligent* Obama was during the last election.

This was in contrast to the image of a supposedly *slow* President Bush (my God, he even pronounced nuclear wrong the same way Eisenhower did!), and the intent was clearly to boost Obama’s election chances by constantly spouting this alleged intelligence.

Never mind he didn’t really have a lot of other traits to go along with this *intelligence* he was supposed to have.

I guess the point I’m attempting to make is that supposedly *intelligent* people can often attain high IQ ratings without really being that….ah….smart?

A little research into the history of IQ tests is quite interesting, actually – but I digress.

The thing about this briefly former coworker was, he actually listed his mensa membership on his resume as a qualification, promoted himself as being extremely intelligent, yet proved completely incapable of functioning at any level in the organization.

He may have known a lot of information, but getting it out of his head and putting it to actual use was almost impossible.

Regarding the example of Thomas Jefferson being intelligent….

He obviously had an inquisitive mind, was extremely creative, had a wide range of interests from which to draw information from, could probably cross-reference information from disparate fields of knowledge to come to original conclusions that worked, had the financial means to pursue questions that tickled his imagination, had the shear determination to see his endeavors through to a conclusion for the most part, and had natural leadership abilities.

That’s a formidable combination that I think combines a natural intelligence with many other traits that were just as important as simple intelligence, and it’s no wonder he ranks so high among the intellectual giants that era produced.

He may have been “full of himself”, but it ain’t bragging if you can do it.

I don’t think he got everything right, of course, but he did a heck of a lot better than I think anyone today would have managed if limited to no more foreknowledge of events than he had at the time.

While he really was a smart cookie – he was bringing other characteristics to the table than simply having a high IQ.

Compare Jefferson with Obama – and I’ll grant it’s not a fair comparison to make for any current President as those were some really big shoes to fill – and it’s clear that even IF Obama is extremely intelligent (and I’m not actually convinced of that), Obama STILL is lacking other traits that would allow him to effectively lead.

Terman thought that some social dysfunction appeared starting at about 140 (1 in a 100) – not for everyone, but with greater frequency. My experience in the Prometheus Society reinforces the notion that while most Hi-Q people are socially quite normal, there is a greater frequency of odd folks.

Jefferson was probably as smart as advertised, though he was a bit full of himself on the matter. He read half-a-dozen languages and dabbled in a dozen others. His vocabulary was immense and he was a talented architect, facts which are still objectively observable today. He published papers in at least three scientific fields.

The lists of IQ’s of famous people on the web are a mixed lot. Some look at least plausible, and there are at least some verified IQ’s on the lists. The one from the Lovenstein Institute is fictitious – there is no Lovenstein Institute.

Isnt this the same guy who ran that racist campaign for governor of Georgia in 1970?

Carter’s Presidency was by many measures a failed one. Some successes: Camp David, deregulation of the airlines. Failures: abysmal misjudgement on Iran, across the board. IMHO, he has spent the 28 years since he left office in an attempt to redeem himself. We would have all been a lot better off if he had said, “the hell with it,” and retired to his peanut farm, emerging every year to auction off his hand-crafted furniture to support the Carter Center. Disclaimner: I voted for him in 1976, but went third-party in 1980.

Yes, I would vote for Jimmah as the worst ex-President we have had. Maybe that makes me prejudiced against peanut farmers. That is Plains to see.

http://iowntheworld.com/blog/?p=6513

Heh.