James Woods is credited with a famously high IQ, he has said he scored 180. Woods knows perfectly well that whatever test he took then as a youngster bears no direct comparison to modern standard tests. He is, of course, a major narcissist. At 66 he replaced his 26 year old GF with a 20 year old etc. Narcissists exaggerate and outright lie about themselves, it is their thing along with as young women as they can get away with for many of them. It hardly matters if you can't have a conversation with her if its all about you being worshipped. He also famously went after Sean Young accusing her of stalking and ended up paying her. "In 1988, Woods sued Sean Young for $2 million, accusing her of stalking him after they appeared together in the film The Boost.[25] Young later countered that Woods had overreacted after she had spurned his advances on set.[26] The suit was settled out of court in August 1989[27][28] including a payment of $227,000 to Young to cover her legal costs.[29]" Attack as revenge.. where have we seen that before? Woods is a poker player, but not a notably successful one. http://pokerdb.thehendonmob.com/player.php?a=r&n=25086 They can seem more successful than their abilities should accord as the person who demands more tends to get more. For comparison, Jodie Foster is also considered a highly intelligent actor. Foster was a brilliant child actress, high school valedictorian and graduated cum laude from Yale University. Her IQ is 132 she says so gifted as a mature adult, I'm sure it was higher when young. 140-160 is the genius range. Foster seems to not be a narcissist and a hard worker. I would argue that looking at the pair, Woods is full of horseshit. He is probably in the 130 area like 2% of the population and I'd accept Trump was until a decade back when he started to decline. Geriatric brains ~70 drop in IQ steeply so every year now he gets less and less. Anyway, I like many of James Woods' movies but fuck bullshitting old man narcissists.
That isn't realistic at all. Now, if RBG was slumped over in the sleeping position...You'd have a winner!
I think you're overstating Trump's and Woods' IQs. I don't care what Woods says, he was never anywhere near the IQ he said he has (had). That's just FOS. His tweets presently suggest he's struggling with triple digits. Can't comment on Jodie Foster, whom I like and who is obviously intelligent, but I don't know where the 160 estimate comes from. Those are serious numbers not to be taken lightly. As for Trump, I doubt his was (ever) 130. The guy kept fucking up and getting bailed out by his old man so many times that he evidently didn't learn from his mistakes, over and over again. People with IQs in the 130 range are considered bright and should able to learn from their mistakes, at least on the second or third go-around. And the principal difference between then and now is that he was able to speak in complete sentences when he was younger. Quite the benchmark, eh?
Anti-Trump media couldn't stop Kavanaugh confirmation, despite frantic all-out effort By Dan Gainor | Fox News Facebook Twitter Flipboard Comments Print Email Chief Justice John G. Roberts, Jr., administers the Constitutional Oath to Judge Brett M. Kavanaugh in the Justices’ Conference Room, Supreme Court Building. Mrs. Ashley Kavanaugh holds the Bible. Credit: Fred Schilling, Collection of the Supreme Court of the United States. The president who promised “winning”delivered bigtime Saturday and the anti-Trump media had a complete collapse about it. President Trump’s 2016 promise came true with a huge win when the Senate confirmed Judge Brett Kavanaugh for a seat on the Supreme Court in a 50-48 vote. The battle over the successful Supreme Court nomination unified the rightagainst the left and the media like nothing seen since Trump first announced he was a presidential candidate. Conservatives of all stripes saw the uncorroborated attacks on Kavanaugh as part of what NBC News Political Director Chuck Todd called a “‘cold’ civil war.” That made this battle too important for the liberal media to play honestly. So they pulled out all the stops. Journalists questioned Kavanaugh’s “judicial temperament,” and the “sham investigation” of his background by the FBI. They called President Trump a “sexist, egotistical, lying, hypocritical bigot.” Kavanaugh supporters were even compared to Nazis or the people who would attend lynchings. CNN mentioned Kavanaugh and “rape” 191 times in 18 days – more than 10 times per day. The network went out of its way to hide the Democratic affiliation and political connections of the man charged with doxxing members of Congress in both TV and online reports. (Hint: He had worked for three different top Democrats.) And CNN’s Jim Sciutto wrote off the whole attack on Kavanaugh – including allegations that Kavanaugh had been present at a party when a gang rape occurred – as “politics,” claiming “candidates have been accused of horrible things for years.” CBS put the entirety of the 1990s into the Memory Hole – except for the part about Anita Hill. Anchors asked about the Kavanaugh nomination in an interview with Chelsea Clinton, whose disgraced, disbarred and impeached father has been accused of rape. I bet you can guess who they didn’t ask about. In one of the more embarrassing episodes, The New York Times let liberal Sunday Magazine writer Emily Bazelon nab the top byline in a silly story that attacked Kavanaugh for “throwing ice” at a man in a bar more than three decades ago. Back in July, Bazelon had made her opposition to Kavanaugh’s nomination very clear. She tweeted: “As a YaleLawSch grad & lecturer, I strongly disassociate myself from tonight’s praise of Brett Kavanaugh” and criticized the “hard-right turn on voting rights and so much more.” Even The Washington Post criticizedThe New York Times for violating “one of the foundational promises of the Times” not to mix opinions with news. A Times spokeswoman admitted, “editors should have used a newsroom reporter for that assignment.” Duh. But there was a lot more wrong than just that. Watchers of “The View” got a full dose of guilty until proven innocent. Co-host Sunny Hostin raged about personal “truth” and argued “that women should be believed.” The New York Review of Books blasted Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell, R-Ky., for the “hyperpolarization of American politics”and as “someone whom historians will look back on as the gravedigger of American democracy.” Just in case that reference was too subtle for anyone, the NYRB piece ran with a photo of Adolf Hitler. Vox ran its version of the article and had a different photo of Hitler giving the Nazi salute. Journalists just adored the “stunning act of bipartisanship” by Sen. Jeff Flake, R-Ariz., and called him a “hero” for stalling the Kavanaugh confirmation for a week by insisting on yet another FBI investigation of the nominee’s background. But somehow, Democratic Sen. Joe Manchin of West Virginia didn’t get the same positive treatment for his bipartisanship when he announced he would vote with Republicans for Kavanaugh. Despite the wild anti-Kavanaugh bias, some journalists had to admit that this was “perhaps his best week as president,” as CNN’s Political Director David Chalian explained in describing Trump’s success. Politico headlined one story: “How Trump saved Kavanaugh.” The Washington Post credited Trump with the “turbocharging momentum behind Kavanaugh just as his fate appeared most in doubt.” And The New York Times summed up Kavanaugh and the good economic news of the week (the lowest unemployment rate since 1969) and described it with the headline: “After Lots of Bluster, Trump Has a Week to Brag About.” 2. News Outlets Openly Opposed the Pick: People used to believe there was actual separation between the news and opinion sections at news organizations. That fantasy went out with drive-in movies and malt shops. Now editorials reflect the “news” product, or vice versa. The New York Times published its latest anti-Kavanaugh editorial in a state of high dudgeon. “The High Court Brought Low,” it was headlined. “Don’t let Donald Trump and Brett Kavanaugh have the last word about American justice.” Ewww, scary. Cue your haunted house or “Monster Mash” audio. The editorial went on to blast Republicans Trump, Kavanaugh and McConnell. Here’s epic Timesian anger: “The degrading spectacle of Judge Brett Kavanaugh’s confirmation process is behind us; the degrading era of his service on the Supreme Court lies ahead.” Times staffers have written more than a dozen anti-Kavanaugh editorials, so please understand why they are sore losers. The editorial whined about “a confirmation process, and now almost certainly a justice, tainted by dishonesty, shamelessness, self-pity, indifference to women’s fears and calculated divisiveness.” The Washington Post generated similar anti-Kavanaugh numbers and encouraged senators to “Vote ‘no’ on Kavanaugh.” USA Today lacked the vitriol but shared the sentiment. “Vote no on Brett Kavanaugh's confirmation,” it urged. Naturally, both the Los Angeles Times (“Our answer is no.”) and New York Daily News (“For shame, Republicans.”) were opposed to Kavanaugh’s Supreme Court confirmation. 3. Hollywood Flipped Out: Left Coast celebrities also went ballistic over Kavanaugh. Leading the pack was entertainer Bette Midler, who also managed to offend her fellow liberals. Midler tweeted that “women are the n-word of the world.” When she got criticized for that hot take, she posted an explanation tying her original tweet to a Yoko Ono quote from 1972. Twitter users, who mostly weren’t alive in 1972, once more criticized her. She ended up deleting both. HuffPost called her “The Clueless White Lady Of The World.” Hulu comedian Sarah Silverman didn’t delete her comment calling for Trump to be raped. “I hope you someday understand what it is to be held down against your will and violated. Your compassion is startless,” she tweeted. She also compared Kavanaugh interrupting Sen. Dianne Feinstein, D-Calif., to rape, calling it “the socially acceptable equivalent of putting a hand over her mouth.” There were many more outlandish reactions, including multiple celebs getting arrested. Theoretical funny person Kathy Griffin used four tweets to tally 14 separate four-letter words, most of them versions of “F---.” She concluded her little rant by telling Sen. Susan Collins, R-Maine, “F-------- YOUUUUUU”(without the dashes) for supporting Kavanaugh. Actress Tatum O’Neal copied that strategy but kept her four-letter words to four letters, telling Collins: “f--- you.” HBO’s John Oliver ranted about Kavanaugh being an “unhinged partisan”in his vulgar attack that included a comparison to sex with dogs. And 1980s movie star Molly Ringwald called Collins “a betrayer of women.”
Ben Shapiro: Hollywood hypocrisy plays starring bad guy role in Kavanaugh fight By Ben Shapiro | Fox News Facebook Twitter Flipboard Comments Print Email Shapiro: Media's real agenda was to stop Kavanaugh Media pushed the narrative that believing in due process meant undermining #MeToo. The finest celebrities America has to offer took to the streets last week to protest the confirmation of Brett Kavanaugh to the Supreme Court. These folks are nothing short of interpersonal saints and artists of heartbreaking genius. And they made the most of their moment in the sun to press forward their progressive vision for America, and to decry the horrors of Kavanaugh’s supposed sexual brutality. This is somewhat weird. Now, don’t get me wrong. I’m all for higher standards in matters of sex. As a religious Jew, I was rather famously a virgin until my own marriage. But I have to admit, I’m puzzled by Hollywood’s sudden turn toward the traditional. I grew up in Hollywood, We actually film my Fox News special in Los Angeles. I have a number of good friends in the business. Suffice it to say, the city that brought the world the casting couch might not be the best source for moral guidance in politics. Boofing and the Devil’s Triangle, as defined by Urban Dictionary, are the least of the sins in this town. And it’s particularly strange to watch as this particular coterie of celebrities climbs up on their pack of high horses to sneer at Brett Kavanaugh, a devout Catholic father of two who has been married for 14 years. Take Lena Dunham, for example. She showed up in Washington, D.C., to protest Kavanaugh, tweeting, “So many women I love are in DC today. They represent hundreds, thousands & millions of other women. At this point, opposing Kavanaugh is not about a political party. It’s about ensuring that women-people-of every political party are safe.” Lena Dunham wrote in her own book about sexually abusing her younger sister. She wrote, “As she grew, I took to bribing her for her time and affection: one dollar in quarters if I could do her makeup like a ‘motorcycle chick.’ Three pieces of candy if I could kiss her on the lips for five seconds. Whatever she wanted to watch on TV if she would just ‘relax on me.’ Basically, anything a predator might do to woo a small suburban girl I was trying.” That’s the mild stuff from her book. An actress named Emily Ratajkowski claimed that she got herself arrested at the D.C. rally. She tweeted, “Today I was arrested protesting the Supreme Court nomination of Brett Kavanaugh, a man who has been accused by multiple women of sexual assault. Men who hurt women can no longer be placed in positions of power.” You may not remember Ratajkowski, but she got her big start starring with Robin Thicke in his controversial hit “Blurred Lines.” The lyrics to that hit were deemed “kind of rapey” by many feminists. Why? Because the lyrics said, “Talk about getting blasted / I hate these blurred lines / I know you want it / But you’re a good girl / the way you grab me / must want to get nasty.” Whoopi Goldberg showed up as well – and she had this to say on “The View” about Kavanaugh: "The message to women is we’re not listening. That's the message." That’s a far cry from Whoopi’s comments on child molester Roman Polanski just a few years back. Polanski, you’ll remember, fled the country after being arrested for giving a 13-year-old girl champagne and Quaaludes and then sexually assaulting her. Here’s Whoopi’s take on that fine gentleman on “The View”: Whoopi: He was not charged with -- I know it wasn't rape rape. Co-host: statutory rape? Co-host: Child molest maybe. I'm not sure what he was charged with. No? Whoopi: It was something else, but I don't believe it was rape rape. -- And when we get all the information someone will tell me in my ear. -- All I'm trying to get you to understand is when we're talking about what someone did and what they were charged with we have to say what it actually was not what we think it was. It wasn’t “rape, rape,” you see, according to Whoopi. But she’s ready to destroy Brett Kavanaugh without evidence. Whoopi’s fellow panelist on “The View,” Joy Behar, was also fighting mad about Kavanaugh declaring: “The message to boys is, if you become a powerful man you are allowed to grope a woman.” So, if you become powerful, you get to grope women -- according to Republicans. And also according to Joy Behar. It turns out she wasn’t quite as angry when Al Franken was accused of sexually assaulting eight different women by grabbing them or trying to kiss them without their consent. In fact, she called Franken a gentleman and defended him fulsomely: "Al Franken attacked, well sort of attacked him verbally, Jeff Sessions. He suddenly became the target of the right wing to get him out of office and then Gillibrand. Is that her name? She was out to get him also. The Democrats decided oh "we are going to take the high road," and they basically lost a really good senator in my opinion. The way I saw that photograph -- where he was putting his hands [on a sleeping woman’s breasts] pretending to touch them, which he didn’t really touch them. That was a sophomoric joke by a comedian in a time when he didn’t know he was going to become a senator. He was fooling around. He was a comic. And to his credit, he said "She didn’t have any ability to consent, she had every right to feel violated by that photo." So he's a gentleman and he took the hit. Can we now move on and get the great senator back and remove the president?” These were just a couple of the celebrities who traveled to D.C. Many more didn’t, and they were far from silent. Matt Damon showed up on “Saturday Night Live” in an interminable 13-minute sketch to mock Kavanaugh as an angry nut. But, you’ll recall that Damon came under fire from #MeToo just last year for the great sin of recognizing a spectrum of bad behavior with regard to sexual misconduct. Damon was actually right. But he was forced to apologize. And now that he’s bent the knee before the radicals of the #MeToo Movement, he’s back in the good graces, and ready to attack Judge Kavanaugh with the enthusiasm of the newly-converted. Of course, actress Alyssa Milano famously showed up at Kavanaugh’s actual hearing, and then bemoaned his nomination, stating that men should be held accountable even if they aren’t exactly guilty. Milano said,“We will not be silenced any longer and if that means that men have a hard time right now then I'm sorry -- this is the way the pendulum has to shift for us to have the equality and security in our country and within our societal views of what it means to be a woman.” Weird, though, that Milano didn’t seem quite all that upset about sexual misconduct by a Democrat back in 2012. She tweeted, “Bill Clinton, I love you so much. Like crazy amounts of love.” You remember Bill Clinton. Soft southern accent. Credibly accused of a brutal rape by Juanita Broaddrick – she says he raped her and then told her to “put some ice on that.” You remember Bill Clinton, the guy credibly accused of sexual assault by Kathleen Willey – she says he grabbed her in the Oval Office, forcibly kissed her, groped her breast, and forced her hand onto his genitals. Bill Clinton, credibly accused of sexual assault by Paula Jones – she says he exposed himself to her, and then told her to “kiss it.” Clinton paid her $850,000 to go away. Nice guy. But Alyssa Milano loved him. Until she realized that she’d been called on it. This past week, she determined that maybe, just maybe, Clinton should have been investigated, too. How magically convenient! And…. America’s pope, Jimmy Kimmel, sounded off against Kavanaugh, too, with this now famous statement: “I think there’s a compromise here. Hear me out on this. So, Kavanaugh gets confirmed to the Supreme Court, okay. Well, in return we get to cut that pesky penis of his off in front of everyone. That's not good, no? I thought I had a solution there for a minute." I seem to remember someone else who had some trouble controlling himself around women. His name was Jimmy Kimmel. Here’s this memorable TV moment: "This game show is called guess what's in my pants. Now, I've stuffed something in my pants and you're allowed to feel around on the outside of the pants, you have 10 seconds to then guess what is in my pants. You ready? Go. You should use two hands, two hands." Now, listen: true sexual misconduct should be called out by anyone and everyone. This isn’t a call for Hollywood celebrities to double down on their own excesses, or to justify the evil behavior of others. But it is a reminder that the sudden willingness to believe decades-old allegations against Brett Kavanaugh is rather convenient from a group of people who gave Roman Polanski an Oscar and spent decades celebrating Harvey Weinstein.