Home Archives Random Quotes Latest Comments Top 100 Submit Quote Search Log In

Quote# 13223

[There have been assassination attempts on 15 out of 43 presidents (35%), with 4 sucesses. Being a president is dangerous enough to deserve more protection than the average person.]

That has absolutely no effect on the percent chance of one of America's nearly 300 million people today attempting to assassinate the president.

I overestimated the source of those statistics; they are not even educated guesses, but completely irrelevant historical facts.

Defensor Fidei, Christianforums 20 Comments [7/21/2006 12:00:00 AM]
Fundie Index: 2
Submitted By: Norseman
WTF?! || meh
Username:
Comment:



1
NotMe

If I read this correctly, which can be hard at times, then he is absolutely right.

No matter how many presidents have been the target of (attempted) assassinations, it doesn't influence the likelyhood of the current president being killed. Just like the results of flipping a coin 19 times can't be used to predict the 20th.

I overestimated the source of those statistics; they are not even educated guesses, but completely irrelevant historical facts.


But the stupid manages to enter the post. How can they be less than educated guesses when they are know to be facts?

7/22/2006 10:50:04 PM

Hadanelith

Statistically, he's right; but he's right by accident.

7/23/2006 3:21:38 AM

haywood jablomy

er, that's supposed to be \"Fidei Defensor\" (Defender of the Faith - one of the titles of the British monarch).

7/23/2006 5:43:51 AM

Napoleon the Clown

What are you talking about, DF/FD/whatever?

7/23/2006 8:46:00 AM

Nowhere Man

\"...they are not even educated guesses, but completely irrelevant historical facts.\"

Is this guy seriously saying that an educated guess is worth more than a fact? This must be the mindset from whuch \"Intelligent Design\" sprung.

7/23/2006 9:55:28 PM

Adrian

I just don't get this guy: of course the chances for a random average individual to murder an US president are abysmally low, most normal never meet a president, and even those who do and hate said president in majority aren't killers... But just because most people wouldn't kill a president doesn't mean that there aren't ready and competent assassins out there. I'm pretty sure there are lots of people who would love nothing more than to whack Dubya if given half a chance (or even less hated US presidents like Clinton).

And historical facts less relevant than educated guesses? I suppose this shouldn't surprise me coming from someone who believes the uneducated guesses of nomadic shepherds from 2000+ years ago to be the absolute truth, but...

7/24/2006 7:37:24 AM

kkkron

'I overestimated the source of those statistics; they are not even educated guesses, but completely irrelevant historical facts.'

I reject your answer because it's fact!

7/24/2006 9:31:48 AM

tracer

er, that's supposed to be \"Fidei Defensor\" (Defender of the Faith - one of the titles of the British monarch).

That's the beauty of Latin -- word order doesn't matter. Defensor Fidei and Fidei Defensor both mean \"Defender of the Faith.\"

Latin uses inflected case-endings on individual words, rather than word order, to convey meaning. (For example, Brutus Portiam amat means \"Brutus loves Portia\", but Brutum Portia amat means \"Portia loves Brutus\".)

7/24/2006 9:32:26 PM

Haywood Jablomy

I stand corrected. Latin class was too long ago.

7/25/2006 1:20:21 PM

Pete

You really like to quote Mythbusters (TV Show), \"I reject your reality and substitute my own[God]\"

7/27/2006 3:54:51 PM

Brain_In_A_Jar

I think something in my head just broke.

7/29/2006 3:42:20 PM

Defensor Fidei

There is zero correlation between the the number of U.S. presidents assassinated throughout history and the chance of George Bush being assassinated today. They are independent variables. As I said those historical facts are completely irrelevant. Might as well have said \"3 out of 43 presidents were named George, therefore George W. Bush deserves more protection than the average person.\"


\"Defensor Fidei\" has nothing to do with the British \"monarch.\"

7/29/2006 7:10:07 PM

Crosis

<<< That has absolutely no effect on the percent chance of one of America's nearly 300 million people today attempting to assassinate the president. >>>

Hey look, the blind squirrel found a nut! (Actually, it's probably not \"absolutely no effect\" ... the fact that attempts have succeeded in the past may encourage those who would consider trying it this time around, or the low success rate may discourage them.)

<<< There is zero correlation between the the number of U.S. presidents assassinated throughout history and the chance of George Bush being assassinated today. They are independent variables. >>>

As I noted above, they may not be completely independent. But even so, you would have to be arguing that previous presidents have been unlucky in the number of attempts to say that his chances of facing an assassination attempt are much lower. (Of course, that's an oversimplification, but being President has its dangers simply because power can attract enemies, and you can't make everyone happy. I don't know whether Bush is better off or worse off than the average President in this regard - he's pissed off a lot more people than most Presidents, but he seems to have avoided really ticking off the folks who have the sort of personality and the means to actually do it.)

7/30/2006 9:44:35 PM

pauline

stupid facts!

ooh. and i was beaten to the latin already!

12/10/2006 2:58:32 PM

Rahab

If you read that a certain way, it seems like he's saying there are 300 million people in America who want to assassinate the president. LOL

1/28/2007 5:35:34 AM

Defensor Fidei

\"ooh. and i was beaten to the latin already!\"

What \"latin\" were you beaten to?


\"If you read that a certain way, it seems like he's saying there are 300 million people in America who want to assassinate the president. LOL\"

I wish this statement were true, but you must be using quite a convoluted system of logic to come up with that conclusion...

2/1/2007 3:38:45 AM

Hawker Hurricane

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fidei_defensor

Fidei defensor or Defender of the Faith has been one of the subsidiary titles of the English (and later British, Canadian and New Zealand) Monarchs since it was granted on October 17, 1521 by Pope Leo X to Tudor King Henry VIII of England (some other major Catholic Kingdoms have obtained similar pious titles, such as Apostolic King). - from Wiki

And Hawker Hurricane has nothing to do with the Battle of Britain...

2/1/2007 3:50:24 AM

Defensor Fidei

Hawker Hurricane, what is your point with the Wiki article on British monarchs?

2/18/2007 7:11:41 PM

Quantum Mechanic

"completely irrelevant historical facts"

Wow.

Thanks for the laughs.

6/10/2011 10:20:01 AM

Crimson Lizard

This thread is proof that you can lead a jackass to facts, but you can't make him think.
Oh, and I liked the "monarch" bit in quotes. Does this twit think the British monarchy is invalid somehow?

6/8/2013 6:42:15 PM
1