- Thu Oct 04, 2018 7:32 pm
#108755
No, credibility in this sort of scenario springs from plausibility, believability, and sincerity.
A lack of credibility springs from evasiveness, defensiveness, diversions, loss of temper, and disrespect of those doing the questioning.
Ford never said she didn't fly. She just said she was afraid of flying, just as thousands of other people who fly every day.
What does that have to do with anything?
My wife had a real fear of heights and things like walking out in the middle of 20-foot wide bridges where it was impossible to fall off. But when she walked with me on a bridge, she could walk to the rail and look down, she wasn't afraid then. That doesn't mean her fear wasn't real or was faked. It just means she could face her fear under certain circumstances.
You insist on looking at this with a simplistic mind that ignores the reality of this sort of thing. It isn't all this or all that all the time. But for some reason you're willing to take an ex-boyfriend's word as gospel about how she appeared to handle the situations when he might not have a clue what she was actually facing inside.
I know a woman who lived in a small house because that was what she could afford, but she lived in fear of it every day. She slept on the living room floor on pillows because she was afraid of being trapped in the bedroom by an intruder that was unlikely to ever come. On the living room floor she felt she could go out either the front door or the back door depending on where the intruder entered. But she still never slept well when she was alone, no matter where she slept.
This stuff isn't rational or reasonable. You're trying to make logical sense out of things that aren't logical. The residual effects of the assaults they endured left them a mess inside for decades, despite quite successful careers in medicine and business. They appeared in control, fearless, and quite competent at all times. Except when you really got to know them and they let you in.
As to Kavanaugh's credibility...if I knew nothing else about him, I would have trouble believing a word he said simply because of his demeanor under questioning. This isn't a court of law. I don't need to prove anything. But I can make a call based on my best judgment of character from listening to them, just as a jury does when deciding the credibility of any witness. Add to that the fact that I personally heard him lie for no reason about stupid things that are provable. Who does that? Not a qualified Supreme Court Justice.