I suggest you get in line immediately to be tested. If they find any
intelligence,
please let us know.

--
"j" ganz @@
www.sailnow.com

"Maxprop" wrote in message
ink.net...


Actually, This says it all
http://chrisevans3d.com/files/iq.htm
State Avg. IQ 2004
1 Connecticut 113 Kerry
2 Massachusetts 111 Kerry
3 New Jersey 111 Kerry
4 New York 109 Kerry
5 Rhode Island 107 Kerry
6 Hawaii 106 Kerry
7 Maryland 105 Kerry
8 New Hampshire 105 Kerry
9 Illinois 104 Kerry
10 Delaware 103 Kerry
11 Minnesota 102 Kerry
12 Vermont 102 Kerry
13 Washington 102 Kerry
14 California 101 Kerry
15 Pennsylvania 101 Kerry
16 Maine 100 Kerry
17 Virginia 100 Bush
18 Wisconsin 100 Kerry
19 Colorado 99 Bush
20 Iowa 99 Bush
21 Michigan 99 Kerry
22 Nevada 99 Bush
23 Ohio 99 Bush
24 Oregon 99 Kerry
25 Alaska 98 Bush
26 Florida 98 Bush
27 Missouri 98 Bush
28 Kansas 96 Bush
29 Nebraska 95 Bush
30 Arizona 94 Bush
31 Indiana 94 Bush
32 Tennessee 94 Bush
33 North Carolina 93 Bush
34 West Virginia 93 Bush
35 Arkansas 92 Bush
36 Georgia 92 Bush
37 Kentucky 92 Bush
38 New Mexico 92 Bush
39 North Dakota 92 Bush
40 Texas 92 Bush
41 Alabama 90 Bush
42 Louisiana 90 Bush
43 Montana 90 Bush
44 Oklahoma 90 Bush
45 South Dakota 90 Bush
46 South Carolina 89 Bush
47 Wyoming 89 Bush
48 Idaho 87 Bush
49 Utah 87 Bush
50 Mississippi 85 Bush

This is pretty amazing bull****, considering that less than 2% of
Americans undergo any sort of testing to ascertain intelligence. Waaaay
back when, US school kids were given Stanford Binet or Wechsler IQ
assessment scores via testing, but that practice stopped eons ago, mostly
because such scores were grossly inaccurate or even prejudicial. So where
did this info originate (above). In some liberal's wildest imagination,
no doubt.

State some facts, Oz, not garbage.

Max

"Jonathan Ganz" wrote in message

they find any
intelligence,
please let us know.

Stanford-Binet: 144
Wechsler: 130

Not a genius, but not bad either. Better than your BS "study" quoted for
any of the Kerry states.

Max

In article . net,
Maxprop wrote:

"Jonathan Ganz" wrote in message

they find any
intelligence,
please let us know.

Stanford-Binet: 144
Wechsler: 130

Not a genius, but not bad either. Better than your BS "study" quoted for
any of the Kerry states.

Not my study, and you're IQ is a bit low for this ng. You might want
to consider taking a remedial course or two. Even Mr. Poodle has a
higher IQ.




--
Jonathan Ganz (j gan z @ $ail no w.c=o=m)
http://www.sailnow.com
"If there's no wind, row."

"Jonathan Ganz" wrote in message

In article . net,
Maxprop wrote:

"Jonathan Ganz" wrote in message

they find any
intelligence,
please let us know.

Stanford-Binet: 144
Wechsler: 130

Not a genius, but not bad either. Better than your BS "study" quoted for
any of the Kerry states.


Not my study, and you're IQ is a bit low for this ng.

Yeah I know. Doesn't Bubbles claim 170 or something? And didn't Jaxoff
claim to be a member of Mensa? LOL.

You might want
to consider taking a remedial course or two.

Are you implying that IQ can be altered by remediation?

Even Mr. Poodle has a
higher IQ.

I'm inclined to wonder exactly what IQ numbers you've posted over the years.
If your inability to debate is any indication, you may want to keep them
close to the vest.

Max

In article . net,
Maxprop wrote:
Are you implying that IQ can be altered by remediation?

No, but in your case, anything would help.

I'm inclined to wonder exactly what IQ numbers you've posted over the years.
If your inability to debate is any indication, you may want to keep them
close to the vest.

Sorry, but I'm a grownup. I don't need to brag. Feel free though.



--
Jonathan Ganz (j gan z @ $ail no w.c=o=m)
http://www.sailnow.com
"If there's no wind, row."

"Jonathan Ganz"

Sorry, but I'm a grownup. I don't need to brag. Feel free though.

Are you listening, Bubbles?

Max

Maxprop wrote:
Stanford-Binet: 144
Wechsler: 130

Not a genius, but not bad either.

But it doesn't do you much good, does it... you're still dumb enough to
claim... repeatedly... that I am a "liberal."

DSK

"DSK" wrote in message

Maxprop wrote:

Not a genius, but not bad either.

But it doesn't do you much good, does it... you're still dumb enough to
claim... repeatedly... that I am a "liberal."

What do IQ scores from my youth have to do with such an assessment? One has
only to be modestly perceptive to glean that you are substantially
left-of-center in your particular brand of political dogma. I'll bet even
Bubbles or Jon could arrive at that particular conclusion, Cleopatra.

Max

Maxprop wrote:
.... One has
only to be modestly perceptive to glean that you are substantially
left-of-center in your particular brand of political dogma.

Post some of my dogmatic views that are substantially "left of center"
Max. Your bluff is being called... not for the first time either. You
haven't answered this, because you can't.

Until you quote my statements of my "left of center" or "liberal" views,
you're just an empty head flapping an empty mouth.

DSK

"DSK" wrote in message

Maxprop wrote:
.... One has
only to be modestly perceptive to glean that you are substantially
left-of-center in your particular brand of political dogma.

Post some of my dogmatic views that are substantially "left of center"
Max. Your bluff is being called... not for the first time either. You
haven't answered this, because you can't.

Okay, Douggie. I'm not going to drag exact quotes from Google, but I'll
paraphrase or characterize some of the points you've made. 1) When I was
disputing the way welfare has traditionally been used as a selling point for
the dems during campaigns, you accused me of Neaderthalic illogic,
antihumanitarianism, lacking in compassion, etc. Conservatives, while
recognizing that some individuals simply cannot help themselves, also
subscribe to the belief that too many use welfare as a reason to avoid
becoming productive. 2) You've constantly decried the "tax cuts for only
the very wealthy," seemingly ignoring the fact that the very wealthy
constitute roughly 10% of the population but pay roughly 30% of the nations
revenue. Those numbers alone would lead one to the conclusion that that
segment of the population is overtaxed. Your rancor at such tax cuts would
indicate your belief in *redistribution of wealth,* which is page 3 of the
socialist manifesto. 3) You've resorted to name-calling when I advocated
semi-privatization of Social Security. Most conservatives believe that SS
won't endure at its current status, rather needing some sort of overhaul to
enable future generations to retire viably. Not to mention the fact that
"investing" in SS is about as poor an investment as one can possibly make.
The government is an extremely poor manager of one's funds. Shall I
continue? Or will you simply take the Clintonian out with "Deny, deny,
deny?"


Until you quote my statements of my "left of center" or "liberal" views,
you're just an empty head flapping an empty mouth.

Don't hold your breath for quotes. You've gotten all I care to provide, the
operative word being "care."

Max