How important is it to you to be perceived as intellectually superior to others? Not very? Most people who are comfortable in their own skin recognize that if you are smart most people perceive it. It’s seldom what you know but rather how willing you are to learn and more importantly how you apply what you know that determines how smart you are. But there are those who are so insecure that they are insistent on people believing they are intellectually superior. They most often appear in the ranks of academia and Democrats in high office.
You can remember those college professors who took great delight in embarrassing students with their “superior” knowledge, usually by withholding an important but pointless fact to thus render the victim a “dunderhead” for not knowing minutiae. Having sprung the trap, they dismiss the victim and assume that the rest of the students recognize their intellectual superiority. Later in life most people learn that these academic wunderkind are so mono dimensional that the simplest of life’s task allude them and they can only survive in the cloistered atmosphere of academia where they can continue their pretense of superiority. (It is one of the reasons that socialism is so popular in academia because these intellectuals need not defend its universal failures or its gruesome history of carnage (Soviet Russia, China, Viet Nam, Venezuela, Nazi Germany, Cuba, etc.) but rather they can preach about “equality”, “income inequality,” “redistribution of wealth” and “pay equity.” Emotions are harder to debate than facts and logic.
For whatever reason that mania is persistent in the governing elites in the Democrat Party. I’m not sure when this fixation of being perceived as intellectually superior began amongst the Democrats but it goes back to at least former President Jimmy Carter’s successful run against President Gerald Ford, who with the help of Hollywood comedian Chevy Chase’s portrayal of Mr. Ford was portrayed as a stumblebum which was then repeated ad nauseum by the mainstream media. Mr. Ford was contrasted with Mr. Carter who was described as a “nuclear engineer” – he was not although he worked with nuclear submarines in the Navy and was released from duty as a lieutenant. The Democrats tried the same tack when Mr. Carter ran against President Ronald Reagan but voters saw weakness and incompetence in Mr. Carter and handily elected Mr. Reagan. Mr. Reagan won again in 1984 with a landslide victory (forty-nine of fifty states) over former Vice-President Walter Mondale who was fond of lecturing the American people in his best nasal Brahman voice. It was tried again during former Vice-president Al Gore’s unsuccessful campaign against President George W. Bush. It took two forms: first that Mr. Gore was intellectually superior based on his supporters consistent insistence but not on any data; and second a constant pitch by the mainstream media that Mr. Bush was a Texas rube who couldn’t walk and chew gum at the same time. (Later it would be shown that Mr. Bush and Mr. Gore were both “legacy” students at Yale where Mr. Bush’s academic record was slightly better than Mr. Gore’s but neither was superior.) Mr. Gore lost the race because he failed to note that it was the electoral college and not the popular vote that determined the winner – a mistake made again by the alleged “smartest woman” in politics Hillary Clinton in her second unsuccessful bid – this time against President Donald Trump.
But it was during the campaign and administration of President Barack Obama that Democrats went into hyperdrive to establish Mr. Obama as the smartest man to ever hold the presidency. But what is the basis of this claim of superior intelligence.
Mr. Obama has refused to allow the release of his undergraduate records from either Occidental College where he began or Columbia University where he finished. Despite claims by the media, Mr. Obama did not graduate with honors from Columbia, which means that his academic achievement was a GPA of less than 3.3. And despite that was admitted to Harvard Law School.
Mr. Obama was the head of Harvard Law Review. The titles of president, leader or editor-in-chief are used interchangeably. Traditionally, the position has been in recognition of academic achievement – the top student at the end of the junior year becomes the editor-in-chief for the senior year. Since 1887 until 1970, inclusion on Harvard Law Review was based purely on academic achievement. After 1970 half of the members were chosen for academic performance and half were chosen by the students. Mr. Obama was part of the latter category – chosen for popularity rather than achievement. The position of editor-in-chief is chosen by the faculty.
The editor-in-chief of Harvard Law Review has two main responsibilities. The first is to “manage” the monthly production of the Review (assisted ably by a professional staff) and to publish the premier scholarly law review article for the academic year. No such article was published by Mr. Obama.
Mr. Obama graduated magnum cum laud from Harvard Law School and that by itself would suggest significant academic achievement. However, the faculty manipulation resulting in his selection for and leadership of the Harvard Law Review on other than academic merit calls into question whether his graduate honors were based on real academic achievement or were simply a part of a continuing promotion by the faculty.
Under normal circumstance, the editor-in-chief of Harvard Law Review is the most sought after graduate by America’s prestigious law firms. Again, there is no evidence that Mr. Obama was either courted or offered employment by any of these firms. That lack of “peer” recognition suggests that Obama’s academic achievements were moderate and his honors suspect.
After graduation, Mr. Obama did not practice law. Instead he returned to Chicago to become a community organizer – a position that requires neither a college degree nor a law degree. He won election to the Illinois legislature from a “safe seat” as part of the corrupt Chicago Democrat machine. He was elected to the United States Senate by default when Republican Jack Ryan – then leading by double digit margins – was accused by his ex-wife of demanding that she perform sexual acts with others for his amusement at Chicago sex clubs and had to drop out of the election.
From the date of his graduation from high school until his election as President of the United States, Mr. Obama accomplished – well nothing. Proving that education is not proof of accomplishment.
But it goes beyond all of that. There continues to be attempts by Mr. Obama’s sycophants to reinforce the baseless belief that he is the smartest person to ever hold the office. In doing so, the advocates not only often fail to provide bona fides for Mr. Obama, but demonstrate their own mediocrity. A case in point is a blog on the internet found at:
Nowhere on the Internet can anyone locate Obama’s IQ score. His college transcript from Harvard is not available and I cannot locate his GPA, his SAT score or his LSAT score or any other tangible proofs of his IQ score.However, after doing a lot of research, these are the facts concerning Obama’s LSAT score while attending Law School at Harvard University. We do not know his actual LSAT score; however, after much research, we found that the average LSAT score for all Harvard students is 171.The percentile rank for an LSAT score of 171 at Harvard is 98.8 %.MENSA will accept LSAT scores as a means of qualifying for MENSA membership. Please note that MENSA also accepts up to 200 various IQ tests and other tests of cognitive function as well.The LSAT score required for MENSA membership is equal to a percentile of 95% or higher. Thus, basing Obama’s estimated LSAT score of 171 ranks him in the top 98.8% (percent/percentile) range which is clearly above the lowest acceptable LSAT percentage rank of 95%, which clearly affirms that Obama has a qualifying intelligence quotient that would allow him acceptance into MENSA.Since MENSA accepts various IQ Tests as well as other cognitive tests to qualify for MENSA membership it is safe to estimate that Obama’s IQ Score could range anywhere from a low IQ score of 130 based on the Stanford Binet IQ Test, Revision 5, to a high IQ score of 148 based on the Cattell IQ Test. Note both of these tests are acceptable tests that MENSA will accept for membership.
Really? Mr. Obama is a Mensa candidate? Not based upon Mr. Obama’s actual LSAT scores but rather on other students’ average scores? It is this type of twisted logic that purports to serve as fact for Mr. Obama’s “intellectual superiority.” It is the same type of twisted logic that allows the author to conclude that former Vice-president Joe Biden’s IQ is 135 and that Ms. Clinton’s IQ is 140 – all without any of them actually producing the results of an IQ test.
This unflagging attempt to promote “superior intelligence” in Mr. Obama smacks of inherent racism. You may recall when Mr. Biden referred to Mr. Obama as the first “clean” and “articulate” African American candidate. And former Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-NV) stated the Mr. Obama was a “light-skinned black man with no Negro dialect, unless he wanted to have one.” It is as if normal persons of color are unfit to run for public office and only one who has been deemed to be “superior” is acceptable.
The sad reality of all of this, however, is that application and accomplishment really define how smart a person is and given those standards you are hard pressed to describe either Mr. Obama or Mr. Biden as “smart.” Mr. Obama’s intellectual superiority is no longer of any consequence – he has done as much damage to the American economy and international relations as he going to do. But Mr. Biden is running for president and there is significant damage that he can cause. You may remember that former Secretary of Defense under Mr. Obama Robert Gates once noted of Mr. Biden:
“Still I think he’s been wrong on nearly every major foreign policy and national security issue over the past four decades.”
Mr. Biden is not just a “gaffe machine. He is, in fact, not very bright – a fact that his habitual insistence on plagiarizing from others dating back to his days in law school demonstrates his lack of original thought.
But to what end is this insistence by Democrats to be recognized as intellectually superior. I suspect that, like the college professors, it is a cover for the lack of actual achievement. It carries on to their insistence that they know better than you how to live your life. And is best found in their fondness for spending your money on their great – but usually failing – ideas.
So, in the end, the next time you hear politicians being heralded as intellectually superior you might ask what they have accomplished in life beyond being elected to office. Popularity and competence seldom have a causal relationship.