And so is Python in many ways. The shoe fits.

An oxymoron is a word or phrase that contradicts itself (the word comes from Greek bits meaning "sharp" and "soft"). It doesn't make any sense at all to say that Python is an oxymoron. Python-the-language isn't the kind of thing that can be an oxymoron; "Python"-the-name obviously isn't one because it doesn't have two parts that could contradict one another.

Does your comment mean anything other than "I don't like Python very much", and if so what?

"essentially", come now.

The point is that python's syntax reads a lot more plainly and logically for learning than something like Java.

I am confused, what is the relevance of the word essentially?

Do you agree or disagree that Python is more readable/closer to pseudocode than say Java or C++? Less syntactic sugar, no need to define namespaces/classes, more intuitive for declarations, etc.

I understood the meaning of their phrase and explained it. You assert that the original phrase is incomprehensible and meaningless. We see things differently.