How to Win an Argument

Of course I'm not going to show you how to do this. In my world, arguments would be solved in two ways: Dance Off (see Michael Jackson's 'Beat It'), or Rap Off (8 mile...he chose not to fight).

But if you are an insecure assnard and want to win a regular argument because you don't have the moral ground to speak from the heart, I will say a few things to help you remain a cowardly person. When you get into the mood where, winning an argument means knowing these strategies, you don't give a damn about that person's feelings. You just want to show how intellectually superior you are to that person. The person you are arguing with may be arguing because of something serious. Please take this into consideration.

1.)Start your argument by saying, "I'm sorry you are so upset..." Someone kept sending me e-mails starting with this sentence. At first it baffled me, because I was not upset. Then I looked up, "How to win an argument" and found that it's a formula. Saying this sentence once, or more, is a chess move because:

a.)First, it assumes that the person speaking (or typing) has a moral high ground by apologizing for your behavior.

b.)This places the "apologetic" person in a attack position. Because it assumes that you are upset, therefor out of control. Anyone who is out of control with emotion has no credibility. That one sentence puts you in a defensive stance because it shifts the topic to your state of mind, rather then the facts of the argument, so you instead must defend your emotional state, not your reason for the argument.

When you're assumed to be the loose cannon here, deflect this dirty tactic by ignoring the comment. In Judo you win by moving out of the way of an attack so the person's momentum becomes their downfall.

Also, if you want to be a jerk, never answer the person's questions to you about the argument in question. Instead, attack their credibility. If you ignore all that was said of you (no matter how true it is) then the other person is really in control because they have the floor to go for your perception of reality, as opposed to facts. So, assholes, ignore the person's complaint and attack their credibility.

Another argument winner is to say that every problem you have with the person was seen with your own eyes, not hearsay. I knew a man vaguely who, in nearly a decade, talked to me about three times. But his friends don't like me. Rather then ignoring me or saying, "Hey Rose, I barely know you", he brought up this one instance where he did talk to me in my early 20's while I was so drunk, to point out that could not remember what was said. One drunk event that I can't even defend does not make me anything but a drunk woman needing a good night's sleep.
-----------------------------
Enough of this talk. I believe adults need to solve all their squabbles with a dance off, or a rap off. Or something creative and bad ass. I almost put a CD on skip with "Now You're Messin With a Son of a Bitch" to these men after lots and lots of my money.

Can't dance? Or rap? Hire a lawyer. Bring up Michael Jackson from the grave, not Johnnie Cochran. Or maybe search the ally ways for a break dancing god. In grave trouble? Import someone with moves like the Chinese imported Chuck Norris to fight Bruce Lee in "Game of Death" (was it Game of Death?)

And if you really don't like the person, ask for Fame type dancing moves. You'll exhaust them to death! Or just keep your pockets full of Oxycotin, 80 milligrams, for Eminem to follow you around.

'Beat It' was an awesome music video. I learned half a air spit because of that man's moves. No Harvard for Michael. Just worry about what outfit to wear. You can hire Don King to promote you.

I suppose we can have trainers in your corner too. Bottle of water, towel, advice. "He did a kip twice, so you counter his move with a slow robot! Got it?"

A Rap Off is important, but you can't use those sentences I mentioned above before the break. You will lose! Just carry a diary around of rhyming words. Either way, you'll have so much rhythmn, no one would want to mess with you.

The world according to Rose. Still no spell check. But when words are sacred to me, they deserve to be capitalized.

Ron Paul

I hope to cut and paste my entire conversation. The response is from a very passionate University Professor.

However, my computer is not letting me. He had two good e-mails on Ron Paul. I disagree with one point here, but will not say what that is because it will ruin the purity of the text.

First, I asked who "Anonymous" is, because a friend of mine said, "Anonymous for President". Then I asked about why people tear him down so much when in reality I believe people would love him. The first e-mail is lost (on my g-mail). Here is his second, very thoughtful reply. Please read with an open mind, and heart.


"Anonymous is the hacker group that works anonymously to bring accountability to both government and corporations. They have hacked into government files and released tons of info from corporations. They would seem to have a lot in common with Ron Paul and his distrust of unlimited government power. The trick with Paul, is to value his values that you agree with and agree that he is not perfect ( his views on rape and abortion etc). The question is does Paul have more in common with your core values and can you accept that he is not you. People seem to think that Paul is supposed to conform to their agenda or he is not right, but he is not trying to conform to the perfect agenda of the left ( he is pro-life), he is trying to be consistent to his own particular values. People seem to have difficulty understanding that a person can be moral and not agree with them on every issue. Paul is a conservative REPUBLICAN, he is not a leftist and therefore when the left attacks him they miss the whole point...he is a REPUBLICAN with a consistent set of moral values. Republicans tend to be white and they tend to not care about issues of race and class. This should not surprise intelligent people. Paul represents a white district in a rural part of Texas and Texas is a racist state...so of course Paul is going to evolve his views over time when it comes to poverty and race. Lyndon Johnson was a Texas racist who got the civil rights act passed and the voting rights act passed. It is not where someone comes from, it is where they are now and where they are going that is important. I think the fact that Paul was a racist in the past is fairly meaningless if he has evoloved his view over time. Change, thoughtful change is good. On abortion Paul is wrong. But he is morally consistent."