The Conservative Cave
Current Events => Archives => Politics => Election 2012 => Topic started by: bijou on May 22, 2012, 03:25:16 PM
-
President Barack Obama is hailed by his supporters and the mainstream media as one of the most brilliant men ever to hold the office. However, his refusal to release his academic records, his admitted deficiencies as a student, and his frequent factual errors--even in his chosen field of constitutional law--have cast doubt upon his supposed genius. Now, Breitbart News has established that Obama's grades and Scholastic Aptitude Test (SAT) scores may have been even lower than those of his supposedly less capable predecessor, George W. Bush.
Breitbart News has learned that the transfer class that entered Columbia College in the fall of 1981 with Obama was one of the worst in recent memory, according to Columbia officials at the time.
A Nov. 18, 1981 article in the Columbia Spectator, “Tight Housing Discourages Transfer Applications to CC,†written by student Jeremy Feldman and quoting admissions officials, reported: “On paper at least, the quality of the students accepted [as transfers] has declined along with the number of applicants, the officials say.†...
http://www.breitbart.com/Big-Government/2012/05/22/Exclusive-The-Vetting-Obama-Wrong-on-Columbia-Admission-Transfer-Class-Had-Low-SAT-Scores-Grades
-
Would not surprise me in the least. The whole "most brilliant men ever to hold the office" completely lacks any supporting evidence that has been released to the public and therefore I believe the claim is as substantial as the Emperor's new wardrobe. There has been NOTHING factual to support this claim, it is pure hype. If they had a damned thing to back it up, we would have been force-fed Obama's sterling record of scholastic achievement 24/7/365 for the past four years.
-
The only feather in Obama's cap is his "constitutional law professor" title that was touted all the time until it turns out most of his signature legislation pieces are unconstitutional.
-
Would not surprise me in the least...
I wonder if there is a way to compare GT scores with SAT.
I'd be interested to know how I stack.
-
The only feather in Obama's cap is his "constitutional law professor" title that was touted all the time until it turns out most of his signature legislation pieces are unconstitutional.
And he wasn't even that, he was an adjunct. That's a nice way of saying lecture the first-year students and fetch my dry-cleaning while you don't get paid for it.
-
I wonder if there is a way to compare GT scores with SAT.
I'd be interested to know how I stack.
What was your GT?
-
I wonder if there is a way to compare GT scores with SAT.
I'd be interested to know how I stack.
IIRC, the standard deviation for the old SAT's was about 160 points with an average of 1000. So if you had an AFQT of 95, you should score around 1320 English/Math, give or take a few points.
-
I wonder if there is a way to compare GT scores with SAT.
I'd be interested to know how I stack.
Not sure, there is not as demanding a math component to the GT as compared to the SAT, as I recall, so I'm not sure there is a valid translation. I believe the scoring basis of the SAT has changed since I took it many years ago, too.
-
Not sure, there is not as demanding a math component to the GT as compared to the SAT, as I recall, so I'm not sure there is a valid translation. I believe the scoring basis of the SAT has changed since I took it many years ago, too.
I took my SAT in 1983. I know it has changed since then.
I don't recall my SAT score, but I do recall both of my GT scores.
-
What was your GT?
138
And yes, it's in my iPerms, so the doubters can :tongue:
-
Not sure, there is not as demanding a math component to the GT as compared to the SAT, as I recall, so I'm not sure there is a valid translation. I believe the scoring basis of the SAT has changed since I took it many years ago, too.
I took the SAT test in the spring of 1963. I made 780+ on the math part and just barely over the minimum on the English part 400+ something. Had a total of 1200+ a few points for a total.
I have an excuse for my grammar and spelling mistakes....I'm stupid. :-)
-
I took the SAT test in the spring of 1963. I made 780+ on the math part and just barely over the minimum on the English part 400+ something. Had a total of 1200+ a few points for a total.
I have an excuse for my grammar and spelling mistakes....I'm stupid. :-)
I didn't do as well as that on the math, I think it was 692, but I did crack 700 on the verbal at 752. And for you whippersnappers out there, the max on each was 800 when Johnny and I took it. I did max the GT though.
-
I took my SATs one of the last years the max score was still 1600, I got an 800 on the math and a 450 on the verbal.
-
Would not surprise me in the least. The whole "most brilliant men ever to hold the office" completely lacks any supporting evidence that has been released to the public and therefore I believe the claim is as substantial as the Emperor's new wardrobe. There has been NOTHING factual to support this claim, it is pure hype. If they had a damned thing to back it up, we would have been force-fed Obama's sterling record of scholastic achievement 24/7/365 for the past four years.
Whenever a lib is president they say "he's the smartest president in history."
I remember some hollywood guy O'Reilly back in the '90s say the same thing about Clinton but when O'Reilly asked him what, specifically, about Clinton was intelligent the hollywood guy couldn't answer.
-
138
And yes, it's in my iPerms, so the doubters can :tongue:
See, now you're gonna make me pull out my line scores. GT is what, VE + MK?
-
He will never show the scores he is too much of a loser
-
He will never show the scores he is too much of a loser
Even better, a thin skinned loser.
-
I don't even remember my scores.
-
I don't even remember my scores.
Back in your day, scores were recorded thusly: LXXXII
-
Back in your day, scores were recorded thusly: LXXXII
...and inscribed on stone.
-
(http://www.ikea.com/us/en/images/products/mula-abacus__21167_PE106157_S4.jpg)