The American Spectator

Reader Mail

Mormons in America

11.2.07 @ 12:02AM

(Page 6 of 6)

As Hernnstein and Murray suggest, even though blacks as a group have an IQ one standard deviation lower than the general population, a "secret" fact not disputed by anyone in the field of psychometrics, the dominant effect of intelligence on one's ultimate socio-economic status requires attention to intellectually dull whites as well as intellectually dull blacks, and given the 87/13 ratio of whites to blacks, there will be far more intellectually dull whites than intellectually dull blacks, even after adjusting for the group IQ difference.

The authors of The Bell Curve note that a room full of white women with a group IQ of 120 has the same rates of college graduation, career progress, socio-economic status, marriage and children within marriage as a room full of black women with a group IQ of 120. They also note that a room full of white women with a group IQ of 80 has the same rates of high school dropout, children out of wedlock, single parenthood, and narcotics abuse as a room full of black women with a group IQ of 80.

What does it all mean? It means the attention needs to be directed to differences in intelligence, not race. Sounds like the antithesis of racism, but somehow that's not how the hysterical drive-by media paints it.
-- Frank Natoli
Newton, New Jersey

A LITTLE HELP FROM MY FRIENDS
Re: Elizabeth Nolan Brown's Clove Encounters:

According to your writer, Miss Brown, the 2004 National Youth Tobacco Survey obtained data on the different types of tobacco/smoking done by said youths. I see that the total of all the types listed equals only 49%. Does that mean that all of the rest of the smoking is marijuana, or was the survey done maybe with youths that were themselves under the influence of said wacky-tobacci?

I personally have found no influence of marijuana on the ability to do basic arithmetic -- this is from my friends, I mean...
-- Jimmy Antley
Gadsden, Alabama

2001: A SPACE ODDITY
Re: Kate Shaw's letter (under "All Movies Are of Their Era") in Reader Mail's Who Elects the Brain Dead?:

Regarding Kate Shaw's letter of 1 November, I just have to comment that I was around when Kubrick's 2001: A Space Odyssey was first released. I went to see it with my girlfriend (now my wife) at the Key Theater in Georgetown. We were apparently the only two people in the theater who did not think the movie was "heavy, man." But then, we were probably the only two people in the theater who weren't stoned (maybe Mrs. Shaw's kids will enjoy the film more if she let them toke up before popping the DVD in the player). Recently, we watched the film again with our two teenage daughters, whose reaction afterwards was "What the heck was that all about?" Good question -- like most of Kubrick's films, there was a lot less there than met the eye, and in the cold light of sobriety, it doesn't age very well.

On the other hand, both thoroughly enjoyed Apollo 13, neither had to be told that it already happened. They also loved The Right Stuff, which is a better movie than either 2001 or Apollo 13. But then, Dad's been an aerospace analyst for close to 30 years, and both he and Mom have actually met Chuck Yeager -- and, yes, he's as charming in person as he is in the film (he's the bartender at Pancho's).

There are plenty of really good films out there--and in some ways, we are living through a golden age of children's films (especially animation). Parents just have to do more preparatio evengelorum before dragging them off to the theater.
-- Stuart Koehl
Falls Church, Virginia

COP OUT
Re: Christopher Orlet's Forever Young:

Near the end of "Forever Young" (10/26/07), a review of Death of a Grown-Up by Diana West, Christopher Orlet writes a line that undermines the entire force of both his review and of West's book: "Most of us, however, have to live in the real world, have families to support, put in 9-hour work days, and in general act our age." Quite so, and hence, the problem identified in the book and the review is not really widespread at all. If a few inconsequential old "adolescents" wish to behave a certain way, "most of us" -- along with our schools, businesses, and country -- will be entirely unaffected. A perfect reason not to read such a misleading and inconsquential book.
-- Rob Tally
San Marcos, Texas

Christopher Orlet replies:
By "most of us" I meant TAS readers. The few, the proud, the grown-up.

Letter to the Editor

topics:
Education, Bill Clinton, Mainstream Media, Business, Religion, Catholicism, Islam, Environment, Books, Movies, Law, Military, Iraq, Iran, NATO, Africa