janell forwarded me an awesome email detailing exactly why we are in such a sorry state urban legend that i wouldn't doubt has some truth ingrained in it; our president has roughly the same IQ as Koko the gorilla. Here is the breakdown from the very very wise, to the very very dim-witted (no surprises here)
In order of IQ rating:
182 - William Jefferson Clinton [D]
175 - James Earle Carter [D]
174 - John Fitzgerald Kennedy [D]
155 - Richard Milhous Nixon [R]
147 - Franklin Delano Roosevelt [D]
132 - Harry S Truman [D]
126 - Lyndon Baines Johnson [D]
122 - Dwight David Eisenhower [R]
121 - Gerald R. Ford [R]
105 - Ronald Wilson Reagan [R]
098 - George Herbert Walker Bush [R]
091 - George Walker Bush [R]
So, how did these magic men come up with this number?
"His low ratings are due to his apparently difficult command of the English language in public statements, his limited use of vocabulary [6,500 words for Bush versus an average of 11,000 words for other presidents], his lack of scholarly achievements other than a basic MBA, and an absence of any body of work which could be studied on an intellectual basis.
The complete report documents the methods and procedures used to arrive at these ratings, including depth of sentence structure and voice stress
confidence analysis. "All the Presidents prior to George W. Bush had a
least one book under their belt, and most had written several white papers
during their education or early careers. Not so with President Bush," Dr.
Lovenstein said. "He has no published works or writings, which made it more
difficult to arrive at an assessment. We relied more heavily on transcripts
of his unscripted public speaking."
even though the rebuttal "it's an urban legend" email came swiftly after the first, I still think the first one is more accurate. seriously. it explains SO much.
and obviously there is a "man behind the curtain" (the big head keeps mucking up his lines and gives the secret away).
"even though the rebuttal "it's an urban legend" email came swiftly after the first, I still think the first one is more accurate. seriously. it explains SO much. "
A hoax, an urban legend, is "more accurate"? It "explains so much"?
No. Hoaxes and urban legends dont do that. An urban legend is a lie. How do lies "explain so much"? What this lie did was simply confirm your pre-concieved biases. And when confronted with the evidence, rather than admit you're wrong, stick to the lie.
http://www.snopes.com/inboxer/hoaxes/presiq.htm
You are invited to visit the sites about phatmacy ... Thanks!!!