Friday 22 June 2018

The Farage Argument Sketch

With apologies to John Cleese, Graham Chapman and Micahel Palin.

(Nigel Farage walks into Broadcasting House.)

Farage: Ah. I'd like to have an argument, please.

Receptionist: Certainly sir. Have you been here before?

Farage: No, this is my first time.

ReceptionistI see. Well, do you want to have a five-minute argument on the Radio 4 Today Programme, or were you thinking of making regular appearances on Question Time?

FarageWell, what qualifications do you need?

Receptionist: Well, you just need to be prepared to take an contrary viewpoint and be available for the Today Programme but you will need to establish a narrow-minded and chauvinistic point of view for regular appearances Question Time. 

Farage: Well, I think it's probably best if I start with The Today Programme and then see how it goes from there, okay?

Receptionist: Fine. I'll see who's free at the moment.


Receptionist: Mr. Naughtie’s free, but he's a little bit conciliatory. Ahh yes, Try Mr. Humphrys; room 12.

Farage: Thank you. (Walks down the hall. Opens door.)

Holy man: Let us spare a few moments of thought for somebody in yesterday’s news.

Farage: Well, Well, I was told outside that... 

Holy man: When Jesus was in a completely different but not dissimilar situation he would talk in pointless riddles

Farage: What? 

Holy Man: So just think how wonderful it would be if everyone was as lovely as Jesus.

Farage: Yes, but I came here for an argument!! 

Holy Man: OH! Oh! I'm sorry! This is tedious platitude for the day for listeners who still think that people who believe in invisible sky fairies have a greater sense of morality than people who favour science, reason and critical thinking.

Farage: Oh! Oh I see! 

Holy ManAha! No, you want to come back at about five to eight, I’ll be finished by then.

Farage: Oh...Sorry... 

Holy Man: Not at all! 

Holy Man: (under his breath) amphibious git. 

(Farage waits a few minutes and then re-enters.)

Farage: Is this the right room for an argument where two entirely unequal points of view can be debated as if both arguments where equally valid.

Humphrys: Yes.

No comments: