Hi Miss Tique! I didn’t realise you’d return to this thread. It’s good to have you back.
No, I don’t know the words, being non-Christian is a primary reason why. But, I do know most of the words to The Twelve Beers of Christmas… “Five golden toques!”
Thanks for asking!
Here’s my question…
Why on EARTH can’t the Redskins do something right on special teams???
ARGH!
Hi Amy! Nice to see the Redskins losing (although, as soon as I click Submit Reply, they’ll score to take the league).
Anyway, here’s why, pay close attention:
Jack Kent Cooke dies. His will states that the team will be sold, and that his son doesn’t have any more right than I do to buy it. Of course, he gets outbid by Daniel Snyder.
Snyder, inspired by Peter Angelos with the Orioles, decides the best way not to win a championship is to spend money. Lots of it.
(Incidentally, Snyder’s company, Snyder Communications, has its headquarters in a tiny, nondescript office here in Rockville, a ten minute walk from my apartment.)
For salary cap reasons, the Cowboys release “Neion” Deion “Prime Time” Sanders. Snyder drools.
The Redskins, to free room under the salary cap for Deion, release Brian Mitchell, the heart and soul of the Redskins special teams. (I’d say he was the heart and soul of the team, but that’s Darrell Green’s gig.)
Sanders signs with the Redskins. Brian Mitchell signs with the EAGLES and proceeds to set the record for career yards in punt returns.
Deion stinks it up. He gets burnt more often than a bad cook’s dinner, and he even botches a punt return when the ball bounces off his face mask. His show-boat style rubs off on the rest of the special teams, and viola, they stink.
Thanks for asking!
[QUOTE]
*Originally posted by Montfort *
**
Um…betrayed and killed??
Sorry, but the English historian in me has to challenge this. You may be sympathetic towards Montfort or Henry III/Edward, but there’s really no justification for labeling Edward’s behavior as “a betrayal”.
Simon de Montfort was opposed to the King, Henry III, Edward’s father. There was no “betrayal” at all. Montfort had held Edward under “house arrest” when he took control of the government from Henry III. Edward escaped and opposed Montfort in the right of his father (who, incidentally, was holding Henry III hostage at the battle of Evesham).
Edward outmanuevered Montfort and beat him “fair and square”. Montfort is alleged to have said, right before the final battle, that Edward’s battle tactics were sound and “it was from me that he learned it” (Montfort and Edward were friends before Montfort opposed Henry III, and there may well be some truth to Montfort’s boast that he tutored Edward on military matters.)
I assure you, I’m absolutely not sympathetic to Henry III/Edward I. Despite what Edward did to de Montfort, which I have made my sympathies toward rather obviously known, he did Really Bad Things to the Scottish as well as the Welsh, that are still undone, seven-hundred years later.
Anyway, the histories I’ve read (and, admittedly, it’s been a while so I’m probably wrong – I’ll cede to you on this) said that Edward reneged on a deal he had with Simon to force Henry into accepting the Baron’s demands and tricked him into a battle de Montfort couldn’t win.
Of course, I have no cites handy, so feel free to correct my admittedly-biased memory.
As always, thanks for asking!
[QUOTE]
*Originally posted by Montfort *
**
Continuing the historical hijack…
I will grant you that Henry III was a weak king, and Edward was absolutely ruthless and wouldn’t allow scruple to get in the way of exercising his power. (Personally, I believe that he’s a victim of bad press with respect to the Welsh and Scots. Frankly, it depends on if you’re sympathetic to the English, Welsh, or Scotland.)
Further, there is much to be said for Simon de Montfort’s attempts to curb royal power, and instill the parliamentary system of government.
HOWEVER, my recollection, which includes browsing a biography of Simon de Montfort that I really need to buy and read cover to cover (you know, as soon as I break my addiction to this damned board), is that Montfort’s own hands weren’t exactly clean. As I recall, there was some talk that he intended to dethrone Henry/Edward and place his own progeny on the throne (though nothing came of this). In any event, he was arguably every bit as ruthless as the Plantagenets he sought to curb/depose.
I do know that at some point, Edward and Montfort–who were political allies–broke with each other. It’s possible that Edward gave Montfort some cause to believe he was betrayed, but the reverse may have been equally likely.
I AM relatively sure that Edward used sound military tactics to beat Montfort at Evesham and that any “trickery” he used was considered “fair game” at the time. (He trapped and surrounded Montfort at a mountain pass, where Montfort was marching to link up with his son. Unbeknownst to him, Edward had already attacked and destroyed his son’s army. Montfort WAS forced to fight a battle he couldn’t possibly win, but the accounts I read indicate that he was outmanuevered, not “tricked”.)
P.S. You’re welcome. If we want to debate more English history, your sig will probably get “paroled” within the next 24 hours…
Montfort, you said that you play a bass guitar, and that you had played in a band.
what are your favorite songs to play on a bass guitar?
I can’t imagine anyone who isn’t a believer in Greater Britannia thinking that subjugating and conqurering people who have nothing to do with you just because you share an island and have a bigger army is a bad thing being “bad press.”
And, if you want bad press, read your man Shakespeare’s character assassination of Richard IV.
Yes, that’s why I use his name as my username. Well, that, I think it’s pretty bad-ass that he seduced and married a nun, loved her until he died, and pissed off a king. 
No, his certainly wasn’t. After all, he really pissed Henry off when he married Eleanor. But, no one in those days had clean hands – especially among those in power. If we’re to have a “nobility” debate on who was more noble in their quest, I daresay that de Montfort’s goal of a parliamentary system was more noble than Henry and Edward’s simple power grab.
What’s this biography? I didn’t realise any were still in print, or is this a new one that I’ve missed out on? I haven’t been on a 13c. England research binge in about five years, when I was researching a screenplay that I want to write about this de Montfort/Henry battle.
Actually, this thread and the Pit flame-fest about Missouri’s Senate race I’m having with Origato is doing wonders to my post count.
Keep the questions coming!
Hi anya marie!
My band was doing all original stuff, so of my own songs (I was the chief-songwriter) I really liked my bass line on the last song we wrote, which was called “Shadow Drat City.”
As far as others, I’m not really into playing covers, but I do like playing Rush songs, since Geddy Lee is not only a big influence on my own playing, but he never played a boring bass line. The first song, in fact, that I learned on bass was “Distant Early Warning.”
Ditto, too, for Chris Squire of Yes. And, of course, the man without whom bass guitar would never be a cool instrument: Paul McCartney. “Lucy in the Sky with Diamonds” rocks because of his cool bass line. I also love playing Radiohead songs, particularly “Paranoid Android” and “Lucky.” Colin Greenwood is a great bassist.
Other bassists I like listening to are Tony Levin, Pete Trewavas of Marillion, Flea, Mike Mills of REM, and a few others I can’t remember now that I’m at work.
Thanks for asking!
Montfort, do you prefer to pluck, strum, or pick the bass guitar?
Do you prefer the loose end of the TP roll to go over, or under?
Pluck, definitely. I never use a pick[sup]1[/sup], and I’ll occasionally strum chords, but very rarely.
[sup]1[/sup]Bassists who use a pick are a pet peeve of mine. Ditto those who play 5- or 6- stringed basses. I do just fine with 4 strings, thank you very much.
Thanks for asking!
Over the roll, definitely. I don’t like to reach back around the roll to grab the end of it.
Thanks for asking!
In files, why is there a separate tab index for “Mc”, but not “Mac” or “O’” (O apostrophe)?
Hmm, good question. I’m not sure why. It could be that office supply people consider Mc to be a 27th letter of the alphabet.
Or, Mc is a common enough prefix that it warrants a separate designation? I’m not of Irish descent, so I don’t know.
In sum: I have no clue. Ask Cecil.
Thanks for asking!
Montfort, you are really closing in on the target of 100 posts with the signature line provided by Satan. Does this accomplishment make you feel elated?
Yes, Fletch, it does. I’m secretly kind of glad I had this much attention paid to a vanity thread, and that I’m able to have a lot of fun while I pay off my debt to the devil.
While there have been a lot of mundane questions, there have also been quite a few good, intriguing questions. I thank everyone for asking, and especially you for hanging around in here.
Just 13 more posts to go…
Thanks for asking!
Re the above–well, as long as you get to pad your post count, it’s all good, right?
Let’s see if he’ll still pay attention to this thread now that he’s “free”…
**
Well, this depends on which side your bread is buttered on.
England’s efforts re Scotland, Ireland and Wales could be considered analogous to what our country did to the American Indians, our not letting the Confederates secede, and France’s absorption of Burgundy and Brittany (formerly, semi-independent countries), to name but a few examples. One could argue that it’s only considered different because Scotland and Ireland survived to become separate nations, while the Indian tribes, did not, etc, etc.
**
NOW I have a question: Who in the world is “Richard IV”?? 
**
I believe it’s actually quite debateable that Montfort’s “goal” was a parliamentary system. As I understand it, some historians seem to think that he wanted to become king himself, or at least put his heirs on the throne. As it is, he attempted, for a time, to rule through Henry III (who, along with Edward I, were under “house arrest”).
The biography is “Simon De Montfort” by J.R. Maddicott. Published in 1994 by the Cambridge University Press.
This fascinating discussion prompted me to buy it. It’s definitely in print.
Hmmm… Thanks! 
Montfort, you posted 100 times since Sunday, correct? You have no shame, do you? 
Well, congratulations.
Silver,
I note that you’ve been here since June, and you have over 1400 posts.
I’ve been here since May, and have nearly 1900 posts.
So I don’t think either of us should be talking about “shame” when it comes to high posting rates. :eek:
[sub] on the other hand, neither of US would have been fool enough to make a bet with the devil[/sub] 
[hijack]Silver, I hope things are better with you.[/hijack]