14 Mar 07
Originally posted by DoctorScribblesYou missed out:
What do you think it is?
1) His self-righteousness.
2) His smugness.
3) His equivocation.
4) His neurotic sidekick Ivanhoe.
5) His belief that his brand of Catholicism is empirically and objectively correct.
6) His lack of logic.
But of your 5, I would have to say 2.
14 Mar 07
Originally posted by DoctorScribblesApparently, the fact that he thinks debating issues is more important than smearing people.
What do you think it is?
1) His self-righteousness.
2) His smugness.
3) His equivocation.
4) His neurotic sidekick Ivanhoe.
5) His belief that his brand of Catholicism is empirically and objectively correct.
14 Mar 07
Originally posted by DoctorScribblesFunnily enough, with the exception of #5, I would have described you the same way. Strange that we so frequently we hate that which is ourselves.
What do you think it is?
1) His self-righteousness.
2) His smugness.
3) His equivocation.
4) His neurotic sidekick Ivanhoe.
5) His belief that his brand of Catholicism is empirically and objectively correct.
14 Mar 07
Originally posted by DoctorScribblesYou continue to flip flop on whether or not you'd have sexual relations with Brittney Spears.
Cite some examples of equivocation on my part.
Otherwise, you are a self-righteous, smug, Ivanhoe obsessed, meglomaniac, know it all, pompous blow hard with delusions of grandeur. These are some of the traits I admire most in you.
14 Mar 07
Originally posted by PalynkaYes, Scribbles is completely obsessed with Ivanhoe's blithering. The man just can't let it go and pursues Ivanhoe with single minded determination. Hence, while 'sidekick' might be a misnomer, they are still joined at the hip.
Royalchicken played that role for some time.