Top 7 Ways that E.W. Jackson is Better than Bill Bolling

Cry-baby Bill Bolling (RINO) is now running to the media to badmouth Bishop E.W. Jackson, the man that Republicans nominated as his successor on Saturday.  In (dis)honor of Bolling’s incessant whining, we present to you the Top 7 Ways that Jackson is better than Bolling

  1. Jackson cries out of compassion, love, pain, or sorrow. Bolling cries because he isn’t handed what he wants on a silver platter.
  2. Jackson stands for something bigger than himself. Bolling stands for Bolling.
  3. Jackson never supported a tax increase. Bolling has done so twice (HB3202 and Plan ’13 From Outer Space).
  4. Jackson walked into a fight with the odds stacked against him and won. Bolling walks away from fights unless the odds are fixed in his favor.
  5. Jackson has had more of a positive influence on the Commonwealth by personally helping people over the years than Bolling could ever dream of having.
  6. Jackson has had his life turned upside down by regulations. Bolling supported turning your life upside down with Plan ’13 From Outer Space.
  7. Jackson can inspire with his rhetoric. Bolling demoralizes with his whimpering.

Someone please tell Bill Bolling that the only time we want to see him with his mouth open ever again is when he is stuffing a sandwich in his pie hole.

BOLLINGNow GTFO…


19 thoughts on “Top 7 Ways that E.W. Jackson is Better than Bill Bolling

  1. I’m proud of BIll Bolling. He has given decades of service to this party and our Commonwealth. I’m glad you waste your time to demean a man who has done more for the Conservative movement than majority of the people who read this blog. If you think he is so bad, then ignore him.

  2. Bill Bolling lacks the minimum backbone for leadership or he never would have been suckered into the “agreement” with McDonnell. What hubris!!! Who were these two to decide who would govern Virginia??? E.W. Jackson was not nearly my first choice except EVERY time he got up to speak. Yes, it’s about the Constitution. Yes, it’s about individual freedom. Yes, it’s about personal property rights. Bolling is embarrassed primarily because he never seems to have developed any passionate causes beyond moving up the political food chain. Win or lose E.W. is the man to support and protect as much as we possibly can from those “lying Leftist attack dogs. ” I’m ready to tumble!

  3. Bolling got screwed out of the nomination by the small clique of right wingers. Bolling would have gone on to beat McAuliffe. The Bishop will get his butt whipped in this election….and together he and Cooch will go up in flames politically!!!! hohohohohoho fcs we dont even have to campaign this year!!!

    1. nice rewrite of history. Bolling was angling for a coronation. When he got handed a convention fight — he gave up. Ken demonstrated that he understands how to mobilise the grass roots. Bolling demonstrated just how little stomach he has for a fight.

  4. @Ken….in your political world, back room deals about who will run for what office is the democratic way to go. Oh, DEMOCRAT! ….never mind.

    1. Now YOU are dead wrong about ‘back room’ deals…………What do you call your cuddly little convention?

    2. At our little convention, the backroom was unable to prevail! The people won, not the backroom deal makers! Party leadership was NOT happy about it! Surely you’ve heard……….

    3. It is my humble opinion that a ‘convention’ consists of people with the time, money and interest to drop their lives and go to far off places…like richmond……and vote for people who normally are most conservative….you may recall, even Sean Connaughton could not beat Bolling in a state-wide race and of course this warmed Bolling up for the big event…………just a thought……….maybe your party might want to do away with conventions! if there is anything left of the party after november…..

  5. Epic. Bolling wanted a primary because that’s the only way he has a chance, by relying on sound bites and low-information voters. Jackson is, like Cuccinelli, the anti-Bolling.

  6. Geez, every time i think you guys finally “get it”, you reach for the floor……now you say Bolling wanted a primary convention (like most other normal candidates) and you say he would rely on sound-bites and “low-information voters”…………..LOW INFORMATION VOTERS, LOW INFORMATION VOTERS??? who do you think YOU are? Mitt Romney? YOU ARE THE ESSENCE OF A LOW INFORMATION VOTER!! need we start a litmus test for voting? how about only people who listen to rush limbaugh every day can vote??

  7. Bolling is the classic establishment Republican. No spine, when it comes to confrontation with the moonbats in the Democrat party. He is however quick to attack conservative Republicans. He is another McCain. Furthermore, he demands absolute loyalty regardless of his actions, or lack thereof — and is unwilling to fight even for his own nomination. He wanted a coronation. He demonstrates NO loyalty towards the party, especially the conservative wing. The conservative wing is the part that actually does the door knocking, poll working phone banking. In short he is an ingrate and a hypocrite.

    1. Bolling is a statesman for politely dropping out of the race and then not running as an independent. Of course, if he stayed in, then Cooch/Jackson could blame Bolling for their inevitable loss in November.

  8. I’M not the one who needs to get dosed Robert……….perhaps if you people all got dosed before your “CONVENTION”, you would have come out with a politically viable ticket. You all get upset about the 2nd Amendment. I get upset seeing your ‘party’ flying down the toilet……………We really do need a two-party system…………if you alll keep going the way you are, there will be one-party rule………….and that wont be good either……..

    1. Ken, hey I was just following on our previous thread. Relax.

      As for “We really need a two party system” I agree, its just that the Democrat party has gone totally to hell. They are socialists. The seek to redistribute wealth. You can deny all day long, but it does not change the fact.

      The law in this country has been perverted. A human being needs to be safe in his person, he needs to be able to able to enjoy the fruits of his labor, and he needs to be free to speak, go, work and associate as he sees fit. Protecting these three elements are the proper purpose of the law. When the law expands beyond protection of these three elements it becomes an instrument of plunder and oppression.

      The Democrats and Republicans alike are guilty of going beyond this. The difference is that in the ranks of the Republican party are those who wish to reverse this trend. The Democrat leadership — and the president is the poster child for this — seeks to expand the role of government through further perversion of the law.

      I do not think you will ever come to understand this. I do not think you are capable of this. But I am trying anyhow. You are the windmill I am tilting at today.

    2. Relax, I was just continuing from our previous thread.😉

      As for We really do need a two-party system I could not agree more. The Democrat party has become the Socialist party in all but name. The race to the bottom is over, the Democrats have won. Lets look at the past two presidential elections. McCain and romney are both social liberals, big government Rockefeller Republicans. Ideal candidates according to you … well, they lost. Also they were called extremists as well. I guess anyone to the right of Bill Clinton is extremist. Guess what? I am categorically disinterested in having Democrats pick Republican candidates.

      I am also disinterested in Democrat lite (see above).

  9. @Ken Relax, I was only continuing the ‘tin foil hat’ thread from a previous post.

    As for the need for a two party system — I could not agree more. The Democrat Party is now the socialist party in all but name. You can deny this all day long, but it does not change the facts on the ground.

    As for the convention results … Really? Lets look at the McCain and Romney nominations. Both are Big Government, socially liberal, Rockefeller Republicans. They lost. They were also called extremists by the likes of you. I guess anyone to the right of Bill Clinton is an extremist according the the vaunted members of the press and the left. Guess what? I am categorically disinterested in having Democrats choosing, let alone approving of, Republican candidates.

  10. If this were something more important than backbiting among party hacks, the Ancient Greeks would have made a play about it. The irony of Bolling being called a RINO is so tantalizing. Bolling was always the first to throw the RINO grenade at anyone who got in his way, and, since we’re not talking substance, just rhetoric, whether we’re talking about Cuccinelli or Bolling or anyone else active in Republican politics in Virginia today (I may have to have a standing Jackson exception, but I don’t know enough about the man to be sure), Bolling’s rhetoric has always been at least as “conservative” (in the cartoon sense that controls our politics these days) as Cuccinelli’s. This is all sound and fury signifying nothing.

Comments are closed.