Herman Cain did NOT agree to take a lie detector test (ay yi yi)

[jsmirman]

Why is your typical media outlet so impossibly stupid?

Standard Headline: "Herman Cain: I'd take lie detector test to rebut Sharon Bialek claims"

The Actual Quotation: ""Yes. I absolutely would," Cain said when asked about taking a test. "But I'm not going to do that unless I have a good reason to do that. Of course I would be willing to do a lie detector test."

Judge the Headline: Technically Correct, Glaringly Incomplete, Horribly Misleading.

Yes, he "would take a lie detector test" - IMPOSING A CONDITIONAL ON THAT WILLINGNESS - "I would take a lie detector test (IF CERTAIN CONDITIONS THAT ARE COMPLETELY UNDEFINED AND THAT I HAVE NO INTEREST IN SPELLING OUT ARE MET)."

It's what we've learned, in so little time with the man, to be classic Cain. He goes in three directions in just 32 words!

I would - but I'm not going to - of course I would.

The party that lives to mock Clinton's Clintonisms seriously can get behind this???

Because the takeaway? He just said that he's not going to take a lie detector test. That's ALL that was said.




Comments on the accuracy of a polygraph not necessary here, please - as a law student I know the basics, those basics being that they yield too many false positives and that there is much less of a problem with false negatives.

I just also, as an almost-finished law student, find it maddening that people like Cain pour dreck like this into a spoon and the media gladly laps it up. It's unbelievable.

[louis-t]

1. And NO ONE will ask him anything about it at the 'debate' tonight.

That, I promise.

[Cirque du So-What]

10. Absolutely GD right!

If I were a gambler, I would buy all of DU a (insert favorite treat) tomorrow if so much as a peep about it is uttered.

[monmouth]

11. A Black Walnut ice cream cone would be lovely...n/t

[jsmirman]

2. To be clear, this is CBS News, CNN, probably a few others...

I should have made clear that these are the Non-Fox/scurrilous Republican trash rag outlets that are parroting this dram of stupidity.

[slackmaster]

3. Lie detectors are unreliably and can be fooled quite easily, especially by a sociopath

:hi:

[jsmirman]

4. Did you read my post???

I specifically asked that we not devolve into a discussion of lie detectors.

It's my understanding that it is not that easy to fool them and that the "easy to fool" thing is a canard, but that they are overly prone to picking up readings that could just as easily mean "nervous" as they are likely to mean "lying."

You and I could kick this back and forth to debate the merits of lie detectors.

BUT HELLO THAT IS NOT THE POINT

:argh:


Crikey, he could have been saying I am "willing" to (insert anything) (say, "go bungee jumping"), and the point of the initial post would remain the same.

Thank you for missing the point.

[slackmaster]

8. No, I can't read your post because I've had you on Ignore for six months.

:nuke:

[jsmirman]

9. What??? I probably haven't posted once in the last year!

Which would make that an extremely curious decision...

You are a strange bird.

:freak:

[Crazy Dave]

5. I actually had a lie detector lie about me

Back in the mid 80s it was the equivalent of today's background/credit check screening.

Long story short, when applying for a restaurant manager position and asked had I ever stole anything from work I answered no and meant no but the machine and the operator who "stands behind his machine" felt like I was lying. Maybe I was subconsciously thinking about the free fountain drinks I used to get when I worked at a hot dog stand in the mall six years prior as a teen.

[jenmito]

6. ALL of the people on MSNBC knew that he didn't agree to take a LDT. Chris Matthews

and all of his guests commented on that, asking, "What did he say about taking a lie detector test? It was like his answer on his position on abortion..." "'Definitely, if I felt it were necessary,' meaning, 'Definitely not.'" That's a paraphrase, but close. They were mocking him.

[jsmirman]

7. It's sad that I have to appreciate that, but I do

it's good that some people were capable of translating.

What's maddening, though, is that for people who get their news online (like me...) - what I posted? Is being used as the headline.

And I fear that the "get their news online" crowd is as likely as any to just read the headline.

The Yahoo/FOX deal is a particularly appalling reality. Thank goodness Yahoo has reaped the winds of failure it so richly sowed. Because the commitment to pushing out that volume of misleading and dishonest news is shameful, in a world where what is communicated online really matters.

[CreekDog]

12. i have no time for him, but lie detectors are incredibly inaccurate

if he was willing to take one, i'd have even less confidence in his judgement!