Lie detectors and Willard Romney.

[ChairmanAgnostic]

Polygraphs were invented slightly after the turn of the century by a medical student. He believed that measuring respiration, breathing rates, perspiration and blood pressure would reflect when a person was withholding or misstating the truth.

Today's security companies (including Xi) boast of 90%+ accuracy of their computerized polygraphs. The truth is slightly different.

According to most psychologists, the polygraph can be accurate no more than 60-61% of the time, or in layman's terms, a tiny pinch above pure chance. In other words, simply flipping a coin to determine the honesty of a particular answer would almost be as accurate as a polygraph.

For this reason, Herb Cain's promise to take a polygraph test is really quite safe, given the equivocation he added to his offer. If only 24 women allege that he was a serial sexual predator, and 999 women would claim that he never laid a hand on them, or in them, as it were, the chances are that he would come out smelling like a freshly cooked 'za. Given his demanding and bizarre ways, I suspect that even then, the allegations would eventually be proven true, and people would see him for what he really is - a powerful, rich, abusive, bizarre asshole. Except to the small army of Tea Baggers who believe every contrary fact is a Liberal Conspiracy, people already know that Cain is toast. The only question is Rye, Wheat, White, or Walnut.

The real problem lies with Mitt Romney. In the same paragraph, he has managed to take contrary positions on the simplest of issues, simply because this sycophant believes that he must at some time hold every position that would garner him at least one vote. The HUGE victory we accomplished in Mississippi found Romney against the purpose of the fetal empowerment statute, then for it, and most recently, strongly for it.

Then the vote came. Even in ultra-conservative Mississippi, 60% of the voters REJECTED the christian conservative effort to control 50% of the population's bodies. Put another way, Mitt Romney, not only managed to step in it, change opinions, come out strongly in favor a horrible statute, but he managed to reach down and spread it all over his tailored shirt and silk tie. Unless his election team decided to dress him like a "real person" with a dry cleaned, ironed and creased pair of jeans and a brand new checkered shirt (the wearing of which is probably outlawed in all states but Oklahoma, Texas, and South Dakota). No matter how he tries to spin it, he fucked the duck sideways, and his quacked up strong support of the statute will stick on him until the GOP finally choses a nominee.

Can you imagine being the polygraph operator with the Mittster being questioned? He will indicate yes, no, maybe, and maybe not in the same damned sentence. Because he has held so many contradictory positions, often during the same day, he can never be accused of lying. At some point, he will have taken enough positions on an issue, that he can justify one of them as "truthful."

Of course, other GOPers would be impossible to question under a polygraph. Perry will forget the question halfway through his answer. Bachmann will be sure to misquote Ronald Reagan, confuse some fictional novel with reality, claim that Jesus spoke to her and convinced her to run. Santorum? Frankly, who cares about him?

Now, the Newt. There would be a challenge. I would pay money to watch his questioning. It would probably take 4 questions before he started bitching out the polygraph operator.