::::::::
1 January 2010: New Year ThoughtsIf we have indeed completed the first decade of the twenty-first century, then there is much symmetry to note: as the decade began with a terrorist explosion as a harbinger of a dominant focus of these years, so it ended with a failed attempt at more mass murder. Vigilance was severely lacking in 2001, but present on that flight from Amsterdam to Detroit--arguably that of one man who saved so many others.
I write "If we have indeed . . ." because some argue that the twentieth century ended with 2000, not 1999. So more retrospectives on the preceding decade may appear as 2010 closes.
Another point of symmetry is that Democrats were voted out in Election 2000 and, after eight years of hell, reelected in 2008. Both Democrats have been called our first black president--more literally true of Obama than Clinton.
It was a decade pulled out of the hands of the middle class by the upper class, as the national debt sank from a surplus to a huge deficit. At the same time, the two lower classes were forced to finance the economic miasma engendered by the rich and rescue them. Friedman defeated Keynes--Summers and Bernanke and Geithner over two Nobel laureates many of us would have preferred, Stiglitz and Krugman. I guess there's more Harvard among the first trio and absolutely none between the Nobel laureates.
I won't pursue the Ivy League issue any further, beyond my repetition of the fact that Abe Lincoln, to whom C-Span paid lengthy homage on New Year's Eve, lacked any Ivy League credentials at all, as did George Washington, whom no college can claim as its alumnus. As a matter of fact, he was a 16-year-old "dropout."
Out of the other two carved on Mount Rushmore, Thomas Jefferson attended William & Mary, and only Teddy Roosevelt was a Harvard grad, as was his cousin FDR.
From a study I read a few years ago and can't quote, Bill Clinton had the highest IQ (180) and his successor, George Bush '43, the lowest, at 91. His father scored ten points higher, at 101. Obama's is extremely disappointing, ranging, according to reports, from 130 to 145 or higher.
So the "genius" of the bunch, Bill Clinton, did rack up some impressive accomplishments during his tenure, like the budget surplus Bush 43 quickly shredded into the present catastrophe. From what history reveals, he tied JFK in the category of promiscuity, both Ivy Leaguers.
(An aside: the highest IQ on record is held by Leonardo da Vinci, with Einstein occupying the relatively mediocre level of 160.)
Lincoln's IQ weighs in at 128, Washington's at 138.
We may therefore conclude that presidential greatness has not much to do with either IQ or school attended. Two out of the four greatest chief executives lacked any college credentials at all. That is to say, neither one would even be considered for that post today.
In the last fifty years or so, IQs of Democratic presidents highly trumped those of their Republican counterparts. To be kind to the GOP, I won't go into more detail.
The IQs of the two presidents judged to be the most intellectual among the bunch are Garfield, IQ 141-52, and Nixon, at 155. I would have guessed Wilson or Jefferson.
Admittedly, the school that boasts attendance by the most presidents is Harvard, at eight. Five went to Yale, and two to Princeton, to compare the scores of the Big Three status toppers.
*****
How did I diverge to this trivial topic, given that the highest IQ in the history of the western world is supposedly held by da Vinci, even though creativity cannot be measured by most standardized tests?
Perhaps to prove the point that presidential qualifications range far and wide, with education and Ivy League seemingly not the most important and sometimes deceptive distractions, icing sweetened with saccharine, as in the case of the two Bush presidencies.
I was wondering where we'd be now economically had Stiglitz and Krugman piloted our course out of the deep recession people wrongly blame on Obama, had the taxpayer bailout gone to the crooks at the bottom of the money ladder as opposed to those at the top (excuse my cynicism). At least it would have been returned to its source, the overtaxed majority of this country as opposed to those whose wealth is exported to Switzerland and other more remote and exotic locations, those illegal tax shelters.
More than that, alas, I cannot say, except that the alternative on the face of it would have been far more ethical. To me economics is such an inexact science. What scares me is that sometimes the PhDs and other experts seem to be trapped by this limitation also, one side arguing alternatives opposite to others'.
On the face of it also, if two out of the four of those considered our greatest presidents never went to college, one entirely self-educated, might we say that life experience or political experience trumps education as a prerequisite for the highest office in the world?
Another consideration is the venue in which the president governed. Among the Mount Rushmore quartet, two were founding fathers and the other two were wartime presidents. FDR took this country through World War II. Woodrow Wilson, also considered one of the best, presided during World War I.
Nine of our past presidents had no military experience at all, including Clinton and Obama, but neither did Woodrow Wilson, FDR, nor the two Adamses.
Eight other presidents in addition to our two greatest did not attend college: Andrew Jackson, Martin Van Buren, Zachardy Taylor, Millard Fillmore, Andrew Johnson, Grover Cleveland, and Harry S Truman. Were Sarah Palin to become president, she'd be among those who attended the most institutions of higher education, as an undergraduate anyway.
I have perused research on the ingredients for an ideal president and concluded that there are many others beyond those I have discussed. Some political scientists even elevate the question to the level of mathematics. But the formula may not even end there. Many other variables enter in. The list of qualities a president should not have is also infinitely debatable. I might tentatively suggest that he or she should have at least an average level of intelligence if not better.
Beyond the above ironies, please be aware that the IQ scores quoted, especially prior to the last century or so, are only estimates that vary from site to site. But most put the two Bushes at the bottom of the heap. And the one with the lowest IQ made the biggest mess of things.
*****
Happy New Year!
