Georgie, you stated in the original post here: “I mean, would you want to support a guy who is so backward in his views that he says, “You won’t hear me suggesting that if you’re sexually active, you should try condoms”? So then, if you choose to have sex, I guess Patty boy thinks it should be unprotected.”

Uh, the answer to that is a no-brainer for those who still believe that sex outside of marriage is considered fornication (= immoral)…and sex with multiple partners is also fornication (= immoral)…and that sex generally leads to babies (so if you don’t want babies, then don’t have sex). If you choose to have sex without knowing who your partner is or how promiscuous he/she is, then you choose to face the consequences.

As for the HPV vaccination controversy…I don’t understand how trumpeting the parental opt-out clause is something all social conservatives should rally around. Why didn’t they just leave this vaccination optional? It’s like suggesting the birth control pill should be mandated to all those who start their period, to stave off unwanted pregnancies that ultimately lead to abortions. The better option is to promote ABSTINENCE until MARRIAGE and then remain faithful to your spouse for life. This is what “Family Values” is all about. Has the RPV gone off it’s rocker? Why are we shrinking away from social values?

If we want to prevent sexually transmitted diseases, then we need to promote abstinence until marriage, and faithfulness in marriage, and marriage for life. Think of the amount of money we’d save as a country if we didn’t have to pay for the sins of a sexually immoral life…now that should appease the fiscal conservatives.

But hey, if you’re a “moderate conservative” and you don’t believe that a sexually immoral lifestyle needs to be condemned, then fine. But Bill Bolling claims to be a social conservative trying to win the socially conservative vote, so why doesn’t he stand for socially conservative values?

What you fail to tell people when you are on your high horse as 7th district chair is how in 2008 you tried to screw Bob Marshall’s campaign from speaking at the 7th district convention because you supported Jim Gilmore. Or maybe how as credentials chair of the state convention last year there were many irregularities that some claim helped your guy Jim Gilmore. You want to start accusing other people of dishonest things, I suggest you think again!

What you fail to realize is you and your friends efforts to make the republican party so exclusive and unfair is killing our party.

Or is he a “true conservative”

Make up your mind, rudder.

Tsk Tsk I see you are willing to compromise your integrity to attack Muldoon. Just like your smear piece a few weeks ago, you conveniently only tell half the story regarding the Duane Morris Government Committee in an effort to disingenuously craft an attack on Patrick Muldoon — this PAC is bi-partisan and also contributed to Bush, Allen, Gilmore, Santorum etc. etc. Are you attacking the values of these candidtates too, or are your smear tactics selective?

The Duane Morris Government Committee has given money to noted abortion supporters Joe Biden, Hillary Clinton, Bob Casey, Chris Dodd and loads of other pro-abortion Democrats.

Real conservative values there, Patty!

His entire Republican home district has repudiated him, but supporters of Hillary Clinton and Joe Biden give him 10 grand?

The fact is that Bolling supported the bill that included the parental opt out provision. That is a mandate to Virginia parents — take action or the state will force your daughter to be vaccinated. Again, you have pointed to no facts that show Muldoon’s statements to be false. CHANGING THE FONT DOES NOT CHANGE THE FACTS.

Next.

What has Muldoon said about Bolling that was false? Where do I begin?? For starters, let’s look at where he says Bolling “mandated” that 12 year old girls receive the HPV vaccine. The TRUTH, if you bother to look it up, is that Bolling very clearly stated his OPPOSITION to this mandate and fought for the parental opt-out measure that ended up passing the Senate. His only promotion that had anything to do with this issue was an education for parents that linked the HPV virus to cervical cancer – it had nothing to do with the vaccine.

Do you want more examples, because there are PLENTY!!!

Why did Muldoon feel going after a solid choice like Bill Bolling was a good idea? Why not at least wait for somebody with less support, a weaker target? If you want to claim that Bolling isn’t perfect, go right ahead. To claim he’s not conservative or not a good choice would be totally off mark.