POL: If Bush is a moron...

[randal7]

...what does that make John Kerry?

http://www.boston.com/news/nation/washington/articles/2005/06/07/yale_grades_portray_kerry_as_a_lackluster_student?mode=PF


Yale grades portray Kerry as a lackluster student

His 4-year average on par with Bush's

By Michael Kranish, Globe Staff | June 7, 2005

WASHINGTON -- During last year's presidential campaign, John F. Kerry was the candidate often portrayed as intellectual and complex, while George W. Bush was the populist who mangled his sentences.

But newly released records show that Bush and Kerry had a virtually identical grade average at Yale University four decades ago.

In 1999, The New Yorker published a transcript indicating that Bush had received a cumulative score of 77 for his first three years at Yale and a roughly similar average under a non-numerical rating system during his senior year.

Kerry, who graduated two years before Bush, got a cumulative 76 for his four years, according to a transcript that Kerry sent to the Navy when he was applying for officer training school. He received four D's in his freshman year out of 10 courses, but improved his average in later years.

The grade transcript, which Kerry has always declined to release, was included in his Navy record. During the campaign the Globe sought Kerry's naval records, but he refused to waive privacy restrictions for the full file. Late last month, Kerry gave the Navy permission to send the documents to the Globe.

Kerry appeared to be responding to critics who suspected that there might be damaging information in the file about his activities in Vietnam. The military and medical records, however, appear identical to what Kerry has already released. This marks the first time Kerry's grades have been publicly reported.

The transcript shows that Kerry's freshman-year average was 71. He scored a 61 in geology, a 63 and 68 in two history classes, and a 69 in political science. His top score was a 79, in another political science course. Another of his strongest efforts, a 77, came in French class.

Under Yale's grading system in effect at the time, grades between 90 and 100 equaled an A, 80-89 a B, 70-79 a C, 60 to 69 a D, and anything below that was a failing grade. In addition to Kerry's four D's in his freshman year, he received one D in his sophomore year. He did not fail any courses.

''I always told my Dad that D stood for distinction," Kerry said yesterday in a written response to questions, noting that he has previously acknowledged that he spent a lot of time learning to fly instead of focusing on his studies.

Kerry's weak grades came despite years of education at some of the world's most elite prep schools, ranging from Fessenden School in Massachusetts to St. Paul's School in New Hampshire.

It is noteworthy, however, that Kerry received a high honor at Yale despite his mediocre grades: He was chosen to deliver his senior class oration, a testament to his reputation as a public speaker. He delivered a speech questioning the wisdom of the Vietnam War, in which he would soon see combat.

Kerry gradually improved his grades, averaging 81 in his senior year. His highest single grade was an 89, for a political science class in his senior year. Despite his slow start, he went on to be a top student at Naval Candidate School, command a patrol boat in Vietnam, graduate from law school, and become a prosecutor, lieutenant governor, US senator, and presidential candidate.

In his Navy application, Kerry made clear that he spent much of his college time on extracurricular activities, including the Yale Political Union, the Debating Association, soccer, hockey, fencing, and membership in the elite Skull and Bones Society. Asked to describe nonschool training that qualified him for the Navy, Kerry wrote: ''A great deal of sailing -- ocean and otherwise, including some navigation. Scuba diving. Rifle. Beginning of life saving." He said his special interests were ''filming," writing, and politics, noting that the latter subject occupied 15 hours per week.

Gaddis Smith, a retired Yale history professor who taught both Kerry and Bush, said in a telephone interview that he vividly remembers Kerry as a student during the 1964-1965 school year, when Kerry would have been a junior. However, Smith said he doesn't have a specific memory about Bush.

Based on what Smith recalls teaching that year, Kerry scored a 71 and 79 in two of Smith's courses. When Smith was told those scores, he responded: ''Uh, oh. I thought he was good student. Those aren't very good grades." To put the grades in perspective, Smith said that he had a well-earned reputation for being tough, and noted that such grades would probably be about 10 points higher in a similar class today because of the impact of what he called ''grade inflation."

Bush went to Yale from 1964 to 1968; his highest grades were 88s in anthropology, history, and philosophy, according to The New Yorker article. He received one D in his four years, a 69 in astronomy. Bush has said he was a C student.

Like Kerry, Bush reportedly suffered through a difficult freshman year and then pulled his grades up.

Michael Kranish can be reached at [email protected]

Yes, the election is over, and the horse is dead. Still, since so many people on the left love to run down Bush's intelligence, this article gave me a chuckle. I thought I'd share it with you all.

[sabotai]

Bill Gates must really be a moron too since he dropped out...

[Swaggs]

I think the coke and booze are what fried Bush's brain.

[Mr. Sparkle]

It makes me rather sad that both our previous Presidential candidates are C students. Most of my friends are C students, and just imagining them as President makes me want to curl up in a ball and ask for mommy.

[MrBigglesworth]

People can see Bush is less than intelligent because of more than his grades.

Recent example:
It seemed like to me they based some of their decisions on the word of -- and the allegations -- by people who were held in detention, people who hate America, people that had been trained in some instances to disassemble -- that means not tell the truth.

[Mr. Sparkle]

Bush supporter or not, one has to admit that slips like that are utterly hilarious. It's not so much that he got the word wrong, it's that he proceeded to define the very word he fucked up. Unintentional comedy at its finest.

[Ksyrup]

I think the coke and booze are what fried Bush's brain.
I was going to say, factor in the drugs, and Bush probably has the equivalent to an 84 or something...

[Bee]

Maybe next election we can get a choice of someone who was at least a B student?

[Ksyrup]

Don't blame me, I voted for Turd Sandwich.

[Joe]

What were Hillary's grades? Or was she too busy being on her back through all her college years?

[Raiders Army]

What were Hillary's grades? Or was she too busy being on her back through all her college years?
Yes, those bull dykes had to take turns on her.

[QuikSand]

Very classy.

[flere-imsaho]

Lost in the shuffle over Kerry's grades is the fact that he also allowed his Navy records to be released, and they more or less contradict every thing the Swift Boat Scum had to say about him. Included, apparently, are commendations from some of the Swift Boat Scum themselves.

All of which begs the question: why didn't Kerry let these documents be seen before the election, to derail the Swift Boat Scum?

Idiot.

[MalcPow]

What were Hillary's grades? Or was she too busy being on her back through all her college years?

She went to Yale Law from Wellesley, so they were pretty good. I'm guessing she can multi-task or something.

[cartman]

The two most intelligent presidents we have had over the past 40 years were probably Nixon and Clinton. And they both had articles of impeachment served on them by the House.

[John Galt]

The two most intelligent presidents we have had over the past 40 years were probably Nixon and Clinton. And they both had articles of impeachment served on them by the House.

Why do so say that? To me, without a doubt Carter was the most intelligent president of that time frame. They only viable candidate in that same time that was more intelligent, IMO, was probably Gingrich. Carter's greatest skill was his intellect, but unfortunately his leadership was sorely lacking.

[QuikSand]

Why do so say that? To me, without a doubt Carter was the most intelligent president of that time frame. They only viable candidate in that same time that was more intelligent, IMO, was probably Gingrich. Carter's greatest skill was his intellect, but unfortunately his leadership was sorely lacking.

Agreed -- but it helps make the same intended point. There's more to it than just intellect.

[jeff061]

Kerry wasn't a coke fiend for a decade or two.

[John Galt]

Agreed -- but it helps make the same intended point. There's more to it than just intellect.

True. That's why I have no real care over whether Kerry or Bush was smarter, but I found it odd to say Clinton and Nixon were unusually intelligent (especially when compared to Carter).

[BrianD]

Lost in the shuffle over Kerry's grades is the fact that he also allowed his Navy records to be released, and they more or less contradict every thing the Swift Boat Scum had to say about him. Included, apparently, are commendations from some of the Swift Boat Scum themselves.

All of which begs the question: why didn't Kerry let these documents be seen before the election, to derail the Swift Boat Scum?

Idiot.

I'm guessing he didn't want his grades to come out at a time they were pushing hard to brand Bush as an idiot. It doesn't work well to say the guy is an idiot and then let it be known that he got higher grades.

In the grand scheme of things, this is meaningless. How many people get Cs in college because they aren't that bright, and how many do because they are having fun and not really caring about their studies? Grades you get when you are 20 really don't say much about your intelligence at 40+. Intelligence also doesn't equate to wisdom or leadership. Book-smart =/= world-smart.

[cartman]

Why do so say that? To me, without a doubt Carter was the most intelligent president of that time frame. They only viable candidate in that same time that was more intelligent, IMO, was probably Gingrich. Carter's greatest skill was his intellect, but unfortunately his leadership was sorely lacking.


I was going off of book smarts, not the overall package. Clinton was a Rhodes scholar, and they just don't hand those out to average students. Nixon graduated 3rd in his class from Duke Law School.

[John Galt]

I was going off of book smarts, not the overall package. Clinton was a Rhodes scholar, and they just don't hand those out to average students. Nixon graduated 3rd in his class from Duke Law School.

I guess I'm not as impressed with paper credentials. Rhodes scholars, in particular, are kind of unusual because they require an athletic proficiency as well, so it isn't just intellect. And maybe the Rhodes scholars and Duke Law School grads I've known really haven't wowed me. Either way, Yalies in particular like Kerry and Bush tend to be some of the most unjustly arrogant people I've known. Legacy students often know how to say the "right" things without any intelligence behind it.

With that being said, I thought Carter was by all accounts brilliant. But as I said, there is an extremely low correlation between high intelligence and being a good president, so it isn't really that important. Being an idiot, however, probably is correlated to being a bad president, but I don't think there are too many examples of that.

[st.cronin]

John, just admit that you want to make love to Jimmy Carter.

:D

[Glengoyne]

OOoh I know.. Kerry is an unelectable moron. ;)

[digamma]

Rhodes scholars, in particular, are kind of unusual because they require an athletic proficiency as well, so it isn't just intellect.
I don't think the Rhodes requires athletic proficiency. It may have at one time, but not now.

[flere-imsaho]

To get off topic for a sec, since I've known a number of Rhodes Scholars as well as people who ran the program....

I guess I'm not as impressed with paper credentials. Rhodes scholars, in particular, are kind of unusual because they require an athletic proficiency as well, so it isn't just intellect.

Actually, it's not necessarily athletic prowess, but what they're looking for is a combination of great academics and exceptional achievement in extracurriculars, which could include sports, community work, music, etc....

That's what they say. In reality, unfortunately, Rhodes Scholars tend to be a bit of a hit-and-miss bunch, in my experience. The selection committee tends to look for "good stories" above and beyond all, and panders heavily to getting a good demographic mix (which should be a concept familiar to anyone who's applied to an Ivy League, who all do the same thing).

Clinton's a good example of this. While he's certainly bright, he definitely got the scholarship in part because of being a "good story" and being from a part of the country not awash in either a) previous Rhodes Scholars or b) Rhodes Scholar candidates (at the time).

On top of this, Clinton kind of squandered the experience. The Rhodes Scholarship basically pays for everything, and gets you a stipend on top of it, for the entire time you're at Oxford. It's incredibly sweet. Clinton started arguably Oxford's hardest degree, PPE (Politics, Philosophy, Economics - a degree typically taken by anyone intending to go into global politics), but dropped it after a year for an easier course, I believe just in politics, and then dropped out altogether, failing to get a degree at all.

Anyway, I'm not sure where I was going with that, so just consider it an interesting diversion.....

[digamma]

I don't think the Rhodes requires athletic proficiency. It may have at one time, but not now.
Dola...after googling the criteria, "physical vigor" is listed as a component to selection, but based on those who I knew who were selected for the Rhodes, it certainly couldn't have been a very large component.

[John Galt]

Dola...after googling the criteria, "physical vigor" is listed as a component to selection, but based on those who I knew who were selected for the Rhodes, it certainly couldn't have been a very large component.

It is a "big" component, but is usually filled with a silly sport. Archers and rowers seem to be a lot of Rhodes scholars. My point is that the stereo-typical brainiac rarely is a Rhodes scholar which makes the award unique.

[John Galt]

To get off topic for a sec, since I've known a number of Rhodes Scholars as well as people who ran the program....



Actually, it's not necessarily athletic prowess, but what they're looking for is a combination of great academics and exceptional achievement in extracurriculars, which could include sports, community work, music, etc....

That's what they say. In reality, unfortunately, Rhodes Scholars tend to be a bit of a hit-and-miss bunch, in my experience. The selection committee tends to look for "good stories" above and beyond all, and panders heavily to getting a good demographic mix (which should be a concept familiar to anyone who's applied to an Ivy League, who all do the same thing).

Clinton's a good example of this. While he's certainly bright, he definitely got the scholarship in part because of being a "good story" and being from a part of the country not awash in either a) previous Rhodes Scholars or b) Rhodes Scholar candidates (at the time).

On top of this, Clinton kind of squandered the experience. The Rhodes Scholarship basically pays for everything, and gets you a stipend on top of it, for the entire time you're at Oxford. It's incredibly sweet. Clinton started arguably Oxford's hardest degree, PPE (Politics, Philosophy, Economics - a degree typically taken by anyone intending to go into global politics), but dropped it after a year for an easier course, I believe just in politics, and then dropped out altogether, failing to get a degree at all.

Anyway, I'm not sure where I was going with that, so just consider it an interesting diversion.....

I agree Rhodes Scholars are really hit-or-miss and I've wondered why. I remember taking a couple different Rhodes Scholars to lunch for interviews with my old firm and they seemed dumb as bricks. They were certainly full of themselves, but one in particular seemed to lack any tact and was telling anecdotes where his facts were all wrong. Very unimpressive. I don't think we made offers to any of the Rhodes Scholars I met.

[flere-imsaho]

I've met a few Rhodes scholars who were outrageously brilliant, don't get me wrong, but if there was a trait I'd use to categorize them, it would be "shameless self-promotionists".

In general, I've been far more impressed with Fulbrights, and without exception impressed by MacArthurs.

[digamma]

It is a "big" component, but is usually filled with a silly sport. Archers and rowers seem to be a lot of Rhodes scholars. My point is that the stereo-typical brainiac rarely is a Rhodes scholar which makes the award unique.
I agree with your last sentence, but tend to agree with flere that it isn't necessarily based on athletics, but rather extracurriculars in general. I think the first sentence is probably better stated:

Athletics can be a big component for some candidates--certainly a hook used to distinguish the candidate from the field.

Interestingly, here are the bios of the 2003 US Rhodes Scholars. Certainly a number of them have an athletic mention, but I'd classify an equal number as being closer to "stereo-typical" brainiacs.

http://www.rhodesscholar.org/win2003.html

[QuikSand]

Dola...after googling the criteria, "physical vigor" is listed as a component to selection, but based on those who I knew who were selected for the Rhodes, it certainly couldn't have been a very large component.

At my school, they made quite a bit out of this. If you were seeking to apply for a Rhodes scholarship, they were very insistent on you having a variety of athletic accomplishments. I don't have any insider knowledge on how important it is to the selction body, but my U seemed to think it was a very big deal.

[John Galt]

I agree with your last sentence, but tend to agree with flere that it isn't necessarily based on athletics, but rather extracurriculars in general. I think the first sentence is probably better stated:

Athletics can be a big component for some candidates--certainly a hook used to distinguish the candidate from the field.

Interestingly, here are the bios of the 2003 US Rhodes Scholars. Certainly a number of them have an athletic mention, but I'd classify an equal number as being closer to "stereo-typical" brainiacs.

http://www.rhodesscholar.org/win2003.html

My impression is that the bios deemphasize the physical component, but it is still an important criteria in the selection process (part of being a true Renaissance person). I could be wrong, but I do think Rhodes is pretty unique in that regard.

[MrBigglesworth]

All of which begs the question: why didn't Kerry let these documents be seen before the election, to derail the Swift Boat Scum?

Idiot.
I think there are arguments on both sides of whether or not it was a good idea to release the documents. Not only the grades, but would that have really been the end of it? There was no integrity in the harshest Kerry critics (Swift Boat Vets for one, as seen by the released documents), they wouldn't have stopped there. They would have been demanding that they be able to inspect Kerry's wounds on live television or debate the producers on Stolen Honor, and if he refused, well, he had something to hide and was a weak coward, as opposed to the brave job Bush did protecting Galveston from Charlie by working on political campaigns in Alabama. It wouldn't have changed much, the right wing machine would have just gone on to the next outrageous lie and people would believe it, just like they did the Swift Boat Vets.

[Buccaneer]

Very similar debate to what went on in the early 1860s. The Eastern elites thought Lincoln was a moron and an uneducated dolt. But much like Carter, Lincoln's brilliance was deceptive (plus he was a superb pragmatic leader). Folks like that are not encouraged to seek out the Presidency in today's Sound Bite and Video Feed Age.

[BigJohn&TheLions]

...what does that make John Kerry?

A loser who lost to a moron?

Seriously, this just shows how bad the options have gotten. The only reason Kerry or Gore almost occupied the White House is due to the opponent they both lost to. Conversely, if Bush had a higher quality opponent in either election he also loses. political races generally have come down to a choice between cow dung and horse dung for dinner... Either way you go, you're just fed a pile of shit.

[MrBug708]

Since when does a GPA matter how good of a president a person would make? Has very little to do.

[Neon_Chaos]

My favorite Bush blunder was the one on Jay Leno, when he was on the election trail speaking to a mass of people...

"I want to say again... we WILL NOT HAVE AN ALL-VOLUNTEER ARMY!!!"

-Stunned silence from the crowd. Confusion in Bush's face. Realization sets in.-

"...we WILL have an all-volunteer army!"

-Big sigh of relief from the crowd. Bush with his sheepish stupid ass grin.-

It was so f'n hilarious.

[clintl]

I thought this recent one was hilarious:

In terms of, umm -- you know, the -- the detainees, we've had thousands of people detained. We've investigated every single complaint against the detainees. It seemed like to me they based some of their decisions on, on the word of, uhh -- and the allegations -- by people who were held in detention, people who hate America, people that had been trained in some instances to disassemble -- that means not tell the truth. And so it was an absurd report. It just is. And, uhh, you know -- yes, sir.

George W. Bush - Disassembling the English language since 1946.

[BrianD]

Landing on 'disassembling' while shooting for 'dissembling'...I think that counts as a hit for Bush. :)

[MrBigglesworth]

Landing on 'disassembling' while shooting for 'dissembling'...I think that counts as a hit for Bush. :)
What I found ironic was that he had the arrogance to explain what a simple word meant as if he was the only one in the room who ever heard of it, but got the word wrong.

My favorite though while we are on the topic:
"There's an old saying in Tennessee — I know it's in Texas, probably in Tennessee — that says, fool me once, shame on — shame on you. Fool me — you can't get fooled again."

[sterlingice]

Reminds me of a joke from Conan last night (paraphrase, of course): "And talking to the President of Azerbaijan, George Bush wished him luck in his battle against Harry Potter".

SI

[Neon_Chaos]

Reminds me of a joke from Conan last night (paraphrase, of course): "And talking to the President of Azerbaijan, George Bush wished him luck in his battle against Harry Potter".


BWAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA. Jeez. I almost spilled my coffee on that one.

[HomerJSimpson]

Idiot.

That sums up Kerry's campaign pretty nicely. It would also describe anyone who would vote for him in a Primary election in the next Presidential election.

[HomerJSimpson]

The two most intelligent presidents we have had over the past 40 years were probably Nixon and Clinton. And they both had articles of impeachment served on them by the House.


Carter was smarter than both (and was a worse President than both).

[sterlingice]

Carter was smarter than both (and was a worse President than both).
Thankfully, since he's been out of office, he's been one of the best "ex-Presidents" ever, using his celebrity for a lot of good causes like Habitat for Humanity.

SI