Arguments, Disputes & Debates – When To AVOID Arguing Because No Debate Is Necessary Or Sufficient! Arguing That Which Can Be “Looked Up” is Pointless And A Waste Of Time! If You Argue Foolishly Or Argue With Fools, What Does That Make You?


Some folks will argue anything, anytime, anywhere! That of course is ridiculous! You argue or debate ideas, concepts, preferences, unproven theories, applications, opinions in which a difference of opinion may occur, which may or may not lead to an agreeable bilateral resolution.


In courtrooms, lawyers argue the law and its applications, precedents, multiple laws and which law takes precedence, opinions, identifications, theories and logic; and they refute the opposition’s laws, facts and witnesses. All facets, except logic itself, may be debatable. The only argument against LOGIC is that it is ILLOGIC or that it is IRRELEVANT!


Logic itself, however, is not debatable! Either it is, or it isn’t! If the D.A. and the Defense Attorney have different theories on what actually occurred, neither of those “theories” is a proof or logic, but supposition. People often act in defiance of the logical.


“Arguing Provable Facts” is the prime example of that “logical argument” anomaly because neither side’s theory consists of provable facts! If it were, the case is a slam-dunk!


If you can look it up in a reliable reference or Google it, debating it is plumb silly! Winning such an argument by outtalking your opponent, overwhelming your opponent with so-called “logical argument”, arguing ad hominem, or shutting your opponent up because the “audience” is on your side – none of those tactics are persuasive. Only confirmation from a reliable source is acceptable.


“Right is right, even if everyone thinks you’re wrong; and wrong is wrong, even if everyone thinks you’re right!”


And a person is not automatically wrong because he or she has been wrong, even multiple times before!


“Even a broken clock gives the correct time twice a day!”


However there is one small caveat: Reliable Sources are not always correct. Before 1492, the only “Reliable Fact” you could look up was that the Earth was flat. Before the Wright Brothers, artificial manned flight was unproven. And the Holy Bible as a source of enlightenment is invalid because there is no supporting alternative source for the Bible, which can be proven to be independent. The Quran, for example, may have the exact same source as the Bible. Therefore the Quran can neither disprove nor corroborate the Bible. Even religious folk claim both emanate from God. It isn’t that God is an unreliable source; it is that theologians’ assertion that God is the source of both Tomes is itself unproven, and certainly, if it were true, the Bible and the Quran would not be uniquely independent sources. They would emanate from the SAME source!


And no source can substantiate itself, regardless of its origin. That amounts to a CIRCULAR REASONING or CIRCULAR ARGUMENT!


Years ago, a friend, Frank and I were discussing the Fact that neither of us had seen a third person. Frank and I made a pact that we would individually research whether or not that individual was alive or dead. About 5-10 minutes after Frank and I hung up our phones, I began my research. The first phone call I made elicited, “He’s dead!” I asked how that person knew and was informed he had just learned it via telephone from Frank. Had I not asked “How?”, I would certainly have perpetuated that False information as Fact. Both Frank and I had mutual “sources”. That assertion “He’s dead” was achieved because Frank had asked the question, not because Frank had made the assertion.


A couple of years later, I ran into that 3rd individual about whom we had done the research. It seems he had gone back to Virginia in the interim. That brings up another variable, which must be included in any debate or dispute: make certain you have considered EVERY POSSIBLE OPTION!


A person is either alive or dead – that is true. But the mere fact that two persons have not seen a 3rd person for some time, death does not cover all the possibilities. What about relocation? What about prison? What about illness or incapacitation? What about change of habit? What about mere coincidence? Yes, I was party to illogical syllogistic reasoning. Hopefully I am beyond that today!


Recently a friend refuted my word about whether a particular area had a particular zip code or not. Another instance occurred when I was challenged on whether a particular address on a particular street belonged to one zip area or another. And today, someone attempted to argue with me about voting procedures.


In all 3 instances I refused to engage because these are facts that can easily be determined. Arguing about these Facts is pointless! Who is right or wrong is not the point. The point is










Tabacco never – I mean NEVER – votes Republican! That does not make me 100% Democrat! I generally vote Democratic – not ALWAYS however – with the object of preventing Republicans from getting elected. I voted for Green Party candidate (Howie) against Hillary Clinton for her NY Senate seat because I knew my vote would not throw the election to her Republican opponent. See the difference!


I vote for the “lesser of two evils” because our so-called democratic system of government gives me only 2 choices: Democrats (the frying pan) and Republicans (the FIRE)!


If you believe that America practices actual DEMOCRACY, then take 2-steps backward on the edge of a very high cliff overlooking the ocean!


I call Democrat-Republican-Democrat-Republican-Democrat-Republican-Democrat-Republican, (NOT Democracy), but




Regardless of which candidate for political office loses, the 1% WINS! Heads, they win, and Tails, you lose! And you call that Democracy?


Maybe the United States of America is NOT the Paragon of Virtue and Fairness you have been indoctrinated to believe it is; just perhaps the USA is





Tabacco: I consider myself both a funnel and a filter. I funnel information, not readily available on the Mass Media, which is ignored and/or suppressed. I filter out the irrelevancies and trivialities to save both the time and effort of my Readers and bring consternation to the enemies of Truth & Fairness! When you read Tabacco, if you don’t learn something NEW, I’ve wasted your time.


Tabacco is not a blogger, who thinks; I am a Thinker, who blogs. Speaking Truth to Power!


In 1981′s ‘Body Heat’, Kathleen Turner said, “Knowledge is power”.

T.A.B.A.C.C.O.  (Truth About Business And Congressional Crimes Organization) – Think Tank For Other 95% Of World: WTP = We The People

Subdomain re Exploited Minority Long Island community





This entry was posted in Bush, class+war, compromise, disaster+capitalism, GOP, hypocrisy, knowledge+is+power, Obama, political+ping+pong, Politics, socialism4richcapitalism4poor, sophistry, takebackamerica, warpeace and tagged , , . Bookmark the permalink.

2 Responses to Arguments, Disputes & Debates – When To AVOID Arguing Because No Debate Is Necessary Or Sufficient! Arguing That Which Can Be “Looked Up” is Pointless And A Waste Of Time! If You Argue Foolishly Or Argue With Fools, What Does That Make You?

  1. admin says:


    The Bible and/or the Quran would be accepted by Tabacco as PROOF without any other verification, provided – and only provided – proof can be supplied that God was the inspiration for both Tomes and not ET!

    Neither Clergy nor those Tomes can provide the “proof” required by themselves since the Tomes are reputed to have the same source and the Clergy is most certainly using those joined-at-birth Tomes to make all such Assertions.

    Only GOD HIMSELF can make Tabacco circumvent my own Logical Essential. And no “Pretender” need apply! I would certainly be competent to distinguish between ET in a UFO and God Himself! ET is not as “magical” in 2012AD as he was in BC!


  2. admin says:

    THE DOUBLE STANDARD: When It Makes Good Sense!

    On CBS News I just saw 2 stories that grabbed my attention:

    A) 13-year old boy on L.I. approved to play field hockey on all-girls team, and

    B) Female teacher going on trial for having sex with 16-year-old boy.

    This is as good a place to argue these stories as anyplace else on my blog. So here goes!

    A) The boy in question is slight of build, blond, and wants to play field hockey. With that I have no problem. However, if he becomes the “top scorer” on L.I., he will be evicted from the team in much the same way Christine Jorgenson would have been had that man-turned-woman won too many professional women’s tennis tournaments. Males are generally bigger and stronger than females. That is a fact of nature. That is also particularly true when teens reach the end of puberty and become adults. So if that 13-year-old boy becomes too good, he will pay the price!

    There is another consideration! What will other boys and maybe even some girls say to and about this boy among girls? After all, he is frail and blond! Accusations of “being gay” may precede any actual experimentation on the boy’s part. And what if the boy becomes gay later on! You know lots of folks will change their original positive opinion on the subject toute suite! And any future cross-pollination in sports at any age will be “No way, Jose!”

    B) When a Male teacher has sex with either a female or male student, I agree whole heartedly that the Male teacher has exploited his position of authority. However, there is a grave difference between Males and Females: Females get pregnant, and to date nobody has figured out a way to accomplish that feat in Males!

    So let’s stop pretending that ALL Double Standards are bad, illogical or undesirable. That is RIDICULOSITY at its utmost! I know this is true because no 16-year-old Male would do anything except BRAG if he should be so fortunate as to get some from his teacher. Only a gay boy would even entertain the concept of “child abuse” in such a case. And a gay boy would have declined the invitation in the first place.

    But nobody would DARE ask the 16-year-old his opinion as to whether he was ABUSED or NOT! Why not? Because they, like you and I, know the answer if that boy is being honest. And nobody wants to hear the Truth!

    What’s more, the other guys would feel nothing but ENVY for the boy in question – no vicious taunts here!

    The problems are ours, not the 13-year-old nor the 16-year-old. We are ignorant, sophistic, illogical and myopic! “We” have often been DEAD WRONG about a lot of things! Christopher Columbus, Robert Fulton and Georges Sand are PROOF POSITIVE of the failings of “We and Us”! Columbus (world is NOT FLAT) couldn’t even get funding from his own Italians. Queen Isabella was Spanish! They referred to the Steamboat as “Fulton’s Folly” because “it will never work!”. And Georges Sand, a woman, could only publish her works under a man’s pseudonym in a “man’s world” if she wanted to be taken seriously. Incidentally, she dated Frederic Chopin and was straight in case you didn’t already know!

    “We” should begin understanding that there are FEW RULES, which apply for all situations and in all eras!


    PS 12-year-old student, Vili Fualaau, had sex with his Female Teacher, Mary Kay Letourneau (they first met when he was in the 2nd grade), which sent her to Prison for years in spite of 2 children born to the pair. When Vili got old enough, he married Mary Kay and the pair are still living in wedded bliss – and “We” cannot say or do a damn thing about it. They co-authored a book “Only One Crime, Love”, published in France, but NEVER IN THE USA! –

    I would be willing to bet that adolescent “straight” boys would erect a Statue of me for this comment!

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *


You may use these HTML tags and attributes: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>