...got your ass kicked on the board so you immediately started in with ad hominem attacks:
http://www.theeroticreview.com/discussion-boards/politics-and-religion-39/icky-dick-cant-help-it-433064?page=

 
coeur-de-lion described posters (posers) like you very well:
http://www.theeroticreview.com/discussion-boards/politics-and-religion-39/are-the-mods-asleep-----431148?frmSearch=1#431148
http://www.theeroticreview.com/discussion-boards/politics-and-religion-39/you-have-not-lost-your-ability-----429782?page=

 
Now you're waving the white flag and running away with your tail between your legs because you have no game and can't take the heat.  Good riddance!

So we’ve talked to each other for years. Some of us decades even. Getting to know the other people here is half the fun. We can agree or disagree with each other, bust each other’s chops and still respect one another. So maybe that’s the part that you don’t get.

New footage of durranDolt surrendering.

I have said repeatedly that the local lefties will not change the positions of the local righties and vice-versa. I post lengthy, sourced comments so that "independent" (silent) readers and thinkers will be informed and make up their own minds (I hope with a silent positive nod to what I post).  
.
My first reply to one of your posts was a sourced link to economic data. Your reply to me was, "Omg! Yes...... I'm sure thats correct. Let me guess,  you're 65+".  The data was official data from the Federal Reserve Economic Data Base. You could have disagreed with the presentation or the analysis or offered data from some other official source but your reply was ad hominem.

It's the same situation in Congress, in the battle of the public opinion / commentaries (broadcast, print, on-line,, etc.), and everywhere else.

Sourced... except most differences are over values, not data.  We have essentially an individualist vs collectivist split.  Those are subjective value propositions.  There is no objective "source" for that.  

I used to be very into posting data. When I was younger and a lefty I used to think that the conclusions were obvious if people just understood the data. What I was blinded to was that the data I chose to present was chosen by me (not intentionally) based upon my own values and biases.  

 
A better way of understanding something isn’t to look at the data per se, but to steel man a particular argument. This is the opposite of a straw man, instead you present (to yourself or others) the strongest possible case for an argument that you disagree with.  

 
If we straw man the abortion argument than if your “pro life” the other side wants to kill babies. If you’re “pro choice” the other side wants to take away women’s rights.  

 
Steel manning is understanding the other person’s position and seeing how they would rationally believe it’s justified. That pro-choice people believe access to abortion is a fundamental human right. That pro-life people believe that abortion is fundamentally no different than murder.  

 
This is what’s frustrating with Imp’s posts. He posts endless links instead of just stating definitively where he stands, and then makes no logical or rational justification for that position.

Perhaps you haven't been spending enough time here. When hacks like Looser and durranDolt don't like the data they try to impeach its source. They NEVER say, "I accept the data but not your interpretation of it." If you can find one example of your premise being correct, I can find loads of examples of you being WRONG.

That's all you need to know about this raging asswipe.
He is covered in his own lies.
And excrement.