Quote:
Originally Posted by Platapus
Well I am basing my opinions on the several polygraph examinations I have been subjected to as well as my researcher when I was applying to be a polygraph examination in the military. What happened here is very unusual.
...
This one guy, retired FBI or not, is doing polygraph system a disservice by whipping up a few questions, asking them multiple times and then selecting the dataset that favors his client and publishing that.
This is not how it is supposed to work. It only helps harm the already low confidence in the polygraph system.
|
Your experience with polygraph(s) is accurate -- if a person is getting something serious like a high security clearance or is being criminally investigated; but, for the use of polygraph in civil actions or in situations like Dr. Ford, the bar is much lower; remember, those sorts of tests are usually carried out at the behest of a client's own counsel with the purpose of reinforcing their client's own interests. Where the test might get more particular and comprehensive would be if the matter involved high stakes litigation or if the opposing counsel asked to conduct their own test, in which case their motivation would be to probe with the intent of discrediting the person being tested...
I've never actually had a polygraph test, but came near twice, for two different jobs for which I applied, one where they filled the position before I had to take a test and the other where I found a position elsewhere also before the test was to be given; in both cases; I did enquire as to the scope, nature and process of the potential examination; one was apparently very through and the other was represented as being rather brief and cursory, sort of "We have to at least go through the motions"; I kind of wish I had taken at least one of the tests, if only as an interesting experience...
Quote:
Originally Posted by Onkel Neal
Different times. When I was in high school, pressuring a girl on a date was nothing unusual. What is considered rape now was not the same then. And if you are high-minded and this shocks you, sorry. But don't take my word for it, just review some of the popular culture of the time. That's just the way things were then. |
Being of an age (an old age), my teen years were in the 1960s and I can tell you one thing: if a guy tried to molest a girl and word got back to her father, brother(s), any other male family members, or a close male friend of the girl, the guy who did the molesting would have been subjected to a bit of "curbside justice" even if there were no law(s) explicitly prohibiting the molestation. I don't know about where anybody else grew up, but there were even enough gentlemen in our neighborhood, who, even though unrelated to the girl, would have also taken offense, intervened, and given out a bit of the "justice" as well. Wrong is wrong, no matter when or if there are any actual laws proscribing the wrong at the time of the incident. Any person who engages in such behavior is wrong, no matter what; and , though, a person may not be subject to official repercussions, that a person would engage in such actions speaks to the character, or lack thereof of that person, calling into question their personal morality, judgement, and ability to accept responsibility...
That said, what I really find troubling is the meltdown Kavanaugh displayed at Thursday's hearings: unhinged, evasive, at times near hysterics, I'm not sure he is, by any measure, up to the rigors of being a Supreme Court Justice. Surely, he can't be the only candidate that Trump and the GOP can come up with; maybe its time to cut possible losses and find someone else; if Kavanuagh is the 'best and the brightest' they can come up with, then their candidate pool must be the worst and the darkest. I just know there must be someone within the judicial ranks of the GOP else who won't be such a major embarrassment to the Party and to the country...
Poll:Opposition To Kavanaugh Grows-After Ford hearing:
http://nymag.com/daily/intelligencer...d-hearing.html
Quote:
Originally Posted by em2nought
This might as well be a picture of every Republican since Reagan, and until Trump in regard to dealing with the DemonRats 
 |
You mean the same Trump who handed over to the Israelis highly classified and sensitive intelligence over the opposition of his own Intel officials who feared compromising US operations and operatives; or do you mean the same Trump who, also over the objections of Republican lawmakers, his defense advisers and some of his own economic officials, regarding known abuses and breaches, cleared the way for a sweetheart deal for China's ZTE telecom after China poured USD $500,000,000 into a project that is to bear trump's name; or do you mean the same Trump who has repeatedly refused to acknowledge or even defend the US against Russian interference in internal US governmental activities ; or do you mean the same Trump who has been the slavish pet of Putin and who has done every thing short of presenting his haunches like a baboon (a "huuuuge" yellw baboon) in heat to his Russian master? Dou you mean all of the above Trumps?...
Yeah, right, Trump is no Neville Chamberlain...
<O>