George,

According to Guest, there was no question specific to driving under the influence.  This was his comback to the examiner when she asked about the question pertaining to falsifying information on his application.

Guest,

I'm the head Goofball!  

You stated:

"I was no more concerned with the specific question about driving under the influence then, than I am now sitting in front of my PC. What did concern me however was the uneducated  (she professed she had no college education) and inexperienced (after I asked about the "science" of polygraphy, she mentioned her three weeks of "intense" training) examiner who's personal bias and individual interpretation of the semantics "under the influence" would serve to render a decision about me. I wanted to clarify whether she defined "under the influence" as ever having a drink and then driving or if she was suggesting the denotation of the illegal state of being intoxicated while driving. If it were the latter, my answer was a resounding "No." I just wanted to close the gap so to speak and diminish any possible differentiation in definition that may have existed between myself and the way she defined the question."

So what you're saying is, the qualifications of the examiner, or lack there of as you saw them, were what concerned you, not your DUI activity, even though when she asked you about the falsification question you brought up the DUI concerns.  Interesting.  Why didn't you simply explain to her that the reason you responded to that  particular question was because you were concerned about her poor qualifications?  

Maybe because it sounds like so much bullshit?

You say you wanted to clarify how your examiner defined under the influence.  Interesting.  Did you want this clarification before or after the exam was administered?  Was that before or after the examiner asked you about your responses to the question pertaining to falsifying your application?  

In your original post you stated you were the one to bring up your concerns about DUI.  Now you state you wanted to "clarify whether she defined 'under the influence' as ever having a drink and then driving or if she was suggesting the denotation of the illegal state of being intoxicated while driving."  Your original post did not indicate the examiner said anything specific to DUI activity.  She simply was suggesting the question about falsifying your application caused you concern.  You then brought up DUI.

Finally you stated,
"I welcome and appreciate any other intelligent and reasonable comments regarding the original post - thank you! "

No you don't.  All you want is someone to get on and agree with your perception that you got potentially screwed, that is was the examiners fault, etc, etc, etc.  Well, you've come to the right place, however you just won't hear it from me!

Batman