I need your honest opinion!

Forums: Monty Python
Email this Topic • Print this Page

Recently, I participated in a thread where suddenly a poster - for the sake of anonymity I will refer to him as "Possum" - stormed in and made this announcement:

Possum wrote:

The cowardly, double talking, double dealing French are useless as they were just before World War II.

As you can easily see from this snippet, this was a thread in the politics forum. To me, it sounded like an earnest, candid statement. I immediately felt that this was something the poster held dear to his heart, and responded in a likewise manner by posting this picture

and adding

old europe wrote:

You don't frighten us, you English pig-dog! Go and boil your bottoms, son of a silly person. I don't want to talk to you no more, you empty-headed animal food trough wiper. I fart in your general direction. Your mother was a hamster and your father smelt of elderberries.

Posting in the politics forum, I was sure I did strike the right note: never admit any mistakes, insult your opponent as much as possible, but leave a back door open so that you can later claim you actually meant the opposite of what you had said.

The opportunity to verify this came up quite soon. On a different thread the aforementioned poster maintained

Possum wrote:

And, I must add, Old Europe, In that discussion, it is not kosher to lose your temper as you did a few days ago with your name calling. I must say, however, that your imprecations were inventive!!!

Obviously I had been right! The friendly, diplomatic tone of my post had been recognized as such! You can certainly imagine how happy I felt, and you would probably have answered in much the same way I did:

old europe wrote:

My "name calling" was a reference to Monty Python's Holy Grail, which you were probably ignorant of.

After a bit of friendly banter, such as referring the other poster to the dictionary definition of the word "ignorance" and similar cordialities, I was sure we had finally reached a mutual understanding that is, if I may say so, not exceptional for the discussions in the politics forum.

However, I was quite taken aback when my opponent admitted, after a little while

Possum wrote:

Yes, I was ignorant of the reference you made because I do not waste my time watching Idiots like Monty Python!!!

What had I done wrong? I somebody agreed with me, it would certainly mean that I had misjudged the situation? Was I wrong in assuming that knowlegde of Monty Python is a prerequisite for disussing political issues?

I decided to come over here and ask a crowd of people who were not involved in the discussion for their opinion. Do you think that being able to quote Monty Python from memory should be a mandatory qualification for politicians, or even for simple folk like me who are merely interested in politics? Or would you rather say that watching Monty Python is indeed a waste of time?

I hope you can help me!

Topic Stats
Top Replies
Link to this Topic

Type: Discussion • Score: 1 • Views: 13,304 • Replies: 287

No top replies

I only know Monty Python second hand, as it were, from people quoting them all the time. Is second hand good enough? If so, I wholeheartedly agree with you.

0 Replies

That Monty Python and his frontal nudity! For shame!

0 Replies

You're big mistake was engaging in a debate with Bernard, I mean Possum, and expecting him to acknowledge anything outside his own tiny twisted world view having any value at all.

0 Replies

Watching Monty Python is never a waste of time.

Being able to quote Monty Python from memory - well, oe, didn't you recently win one million with that on Who Wants to Be a Millionaire? :wink:

0 Replies

It is my long and carefully considered view that attempting to discuss politics without a thoroughgoing familiarity with the works of the esteemed Pythons is like attempting to carry water in a sieve.

I would venture to add that the relative lack of people with this familiarity is one of the problems with American politics, and international behaviour generally. I also worry about the Germans in this regard, Frankly.

I would add that a similar lack of familiarity with the Pythons, as well as such works of staggering genius as Seinfeld and Till Death Us Do Part is a severe handicap for the Relationships Forum, and the Philosophy Forum similarly.

Not to mention Red Dwarf, Yes Minister and Yes Prime Minister, and the Orpheus of satire, John Clarke.

Oldeurope, you understate your case, if anything.

Possum is a tragic exemplar to us all of what happens when a person is not exposed early enough to such influences.

0 Replies

Red Dwarf - Smeeeeeg

0 Replies

smorgs wrote:

Red Dwarf - Smeeeeeg

Do you dare utter the sacred expression in sneerance, woman?

0 Replies

omigod deb - I think you stumbled onto something there, tongue firmly in cheek. Blind acquiescence to authority, no sense of doubt, the fear when deeply held beliefs are questioned, cognitive dissonance, the inability to appreciate irony! I understand Bernard! Where's my gun?

0 Replies

hingehead wrote:

omigod deb - I think you stumbled onto something there, tongue firmly in cheek. Blind acquiescence to authority, no sense of doubt, the fear when deeply held beliefs are questioned, cognitive dissonance, the inability to appreciate irony! I understand Bernard! Where's my gun?

If you are truly able to enter the miond of the Possum, I fear the time has, indeed, come to end your life.

But stay thine hand!

I believe your understanding is but dim......go take a walk and think of something else, quickly!!!

And please do not try to understand that individual again. We would miss you greatly. Schniff.

0 Replies

I have a fiendishly cunning plan, as cunning as a fox what used to be Professor of Cunning at Oxford University but has moved on and is now working for the U.N. at the High Commission of International Cunning Planning.

0 Replies

I much prefer Firesign Theatre, however, I am fond of the Monty.

0 Replies

hingehead wrote:

I have a fiendishly cunning plan, as cunning as a fox what used to be Professor of Cunning at Oxford University but has moved on and is now working for the U.N. at the High Commission of International Cunning Planning.

Ohmigod!

How COULD I have failed to mention Blackadder!

0 Replies

Blac Kadder is but the straw on the floor of the basement bar that is Python, m'lady.

Minimally a requirement for politicians, though I think a run-of-the-mill passing-the-chaff as-'twere knowledge sufficient as a requirement for the concerned citizenry. Verbatim recitation is fine for the devoted and the academic, but is likely too much to accomplish for us regular folk. The politicos, by their turn and their presumption, shall be ajudged on their knowledge of the scriptures by the nearest mob of common rabble. Shouts of "Welease Rodewick" and the like signal denial to the pursuit of public office.

0 Replies

patiodog wrote:

Blac Kadder is but the straw on the floor of the basement bar that is Python, m'lady.

Minimally a requirement for politicians, though I think a run-of-the-mill passing-the-chaff as-'twere knowledge sufficient as a requirement for the concerned citizenry. Verbatim recitation is fine for the devoted and the academic, but is likely too much to accomplish for us regular folk. The politicos, by their turn and their presumption, shall be ajudged on their knowledge of the scriptures by the nearest mob of common rabble. Shouts of "Welease Rodewick" and the like signal denial to the pursuit of public office.

I believe it possible that a conservative party leader here once lost an "unloseable" election because he did not know what a Dalek was.

0 Replies

Old Europe showed that he cannot control his temper. Despite all of the blah-blah, he knows that the TOS is clear. One may not "name-call"

EVEN IF YOU LOSE THE ARGUMENT.

The event that set Old Europe off was my post in which I referenced the Classic book. "The Rise and Fall of the Third Reich" by William Shirer in which he wrote that the French could have stopped the Nazis in 1937 when the Nazis went into the Ruhr with only a small force. Shirer gave a good deal of evidence and I replicated part of it. The evidence clearly showed the French to be timorous cowards.

When I posted this, Old Europe lost his cool.

Now, despite all of the name calling and the ridiculous personal attacks, my POST STILL STANDS UNREBUTTED.

SHIRER SAID THE FRENCH COULD HAVE STOPPED HITLER AND DIDN'T BECAUSE THE FRENCH WERE, IN SHIRER'S WORDS---"paralyzed by internal strife and...sinking into defeatism"

As usual- A group with no guts who had to be saved twice by American Military might.

NOW. OLD EUROPE, YOU CAN REPEAT YOUR PERSONAL ATTACKS AND NAME CALLING

AFTER

YOU REBUT SHIRER!!!

You won't because you can't!!!!

0 Replies

And pat he comes....

Why not just threaten to bite his bloody knee caps off?

0 Replies

dlowan wrote:

And pat he comes....

Why not just threaten to bite his bloody knee caps off?

Some are so heavily on turkey, deb, that they even can't do that.

0 Replies

Bernard cannot distinguish the musings of an author from the facts of history. Too bad.

0 Replies

dlowan wrote:

Quote:

Do you dare utter the sacred expression in sneerance, woman?/QUOTE]

Not sneerance - I was paying homage...

x

0 Replies

I need your honest opinion!

Related Topics

Quick Links

My Account

able2know