Sorry, but if you're shocked about the bit about Reagan, you've been buying the myth for over three decades. I think the much more interesting aspect of this article is the author's working out of Nixon's mind. He focuses on Nixon's belief in variations in IQ by race.
"As Steven Pinker argued at length in his book The Blank Slate, those who equate testable scientific claims with various ‘isms’ (sexism, racism, fascism, etc.) are effectively holding our morals hostage to the facts. By using the word ‘racist’ to describe a claim such as ‘genes may contribute to psychological differences between human populations,’ they are implying that:
The claim must be false; but also that
If the claim were ever shown to be true, then racism would be “scientifically correct.”
Yet as Pinker notes, this is a complete non-sequitur:
I hope that once this line of reasoning is laid out, it will immediately set off alarm bells. We should not concede that any foreseeable discovery about humans could have such horrible implications. The problem is not with the possibility that people might differ from one another, which is a factual question that could turn out one way or the other. The problem is with the line of reasoning that says that if people do turn out to be different, then discrimination, oppression, or genocide would be OK after all."
BTW, you'll note that only to naturalistic atheists would something like differences in intelligence mean that someone or some group is "inferior" in terms of their humanity. If this all is a cosmic accident, with no higher purpose, no ultimate justice, then things like intelligence or strength or beauty do render some groups or some individuals superior to others. However, if you believe we are all created equal, in God's image, none of those things affect the worth of a group or an individual.