Driving liberals, dhimmis and illegal alien apologists absolutely insane since 2005...

Washpo Laments Jeff Dion’s Implosion

By Greg L | 27 May 2007 | 51st HOD District | 24 Comments

Today’s metro section in the Washington Post has a very interesting piece of spin regarding Jeff Dion’s withdrawal from the Democratic convention for the 51st District. Apparently pointing out that a candidate running for office has a personals ad running on gay.com is considered a “personal attack”. That’s novel. It’s pretty amazing how the left and it’s allies at the Washington Post just can’t admit to themselves that Jeff Dion was simply a terrible candidate with an enormous amount of political baggage.

From today’s print edition article:

Jeff Dion, a Democratic candidate for the 51st House of Delegates in Prince William County’s 51st District, dropped out of the race for his party’s nomination late Friday after weeks of personal attacks by conservative blogs.

The gay father and crime victim advocate was dogged by online assaults on his sexuality and family life. Dion said his decision was influenced by other party members, who were worried that he could not win in November and that anti-gay sentiment would dominate the campaign.

In a statement on his Web site, he wrote that if he continued, “the other side would create a toxic atmosphere that would make it impossible for us to have a real debate about the important issues facing our Commonwealth.”

Dion said he will support attorney Paul Nichols, who will be the Democratic nominee.

I wonder why the online edition of this report is different than the print edition, and tones down the rhetoric so much. Did the editors realize after the fact just how goofy this article is?

UPDATE: Even the lefties agree.



The opinions expressed here are solely the views of the author, and not representative of the position of any organization, political party, doughnut shop, knitting guild, or waste recycling facility, but may be correctly attributed to the Vast Right-Wing Conspiracy. If anything in the above article has offended you, please click here to receive an immediate apology.

BVBL is not a charity and your support is not tax-deductible.

You can follow the discussion through the Comments feed.

24 Comments

  1. Bryanna said on 27 May 2007 at 4:06 pm:
    Flag comment

    Jeff Dion was hell-bent on being in the 51st Delegate race. Nothing was holding him back, not his past or his sexual orientation. This candidate was rearing to go. He didn’t drop out because he was scaried off, or thought he couldn’t win but because his party told him that he was no longer their top pick, they found someone they believe will win against Faisal, not Julie but Faisal. That is Paul Nichols. This isn’t about Jeff Dion, you’re way out of line on this one.

    Imagine if Kopko had asked Gill not to run because he thought it best for the Party? A rather profound twist of fate, ay Greg?

  2. Anonymous said on 27 May 2007 at 8:44 pm:
    Flag comment

    The blog was the top news story on WMAL 630 AM at 3:00 P.M. today.

  3. James Young said on 27 May 2007 at 9:48 pm:
    Flag comment

    I heard that report, too, at about 5 o’clock. Dion is apparently claiming that you “outed” him.

  4. Greg L said on 27 May 2007 at 10:12 pm:
    Flag comment

    Interesting that I could “out” someone who is already “out”. Does that qualify as “toxic”?

  5. anon said on 27 May 2007 at 11:19 pm:
    Flag comment

    Channel 4 news just reported that he was under attack by bloggers and that was the reason he “dropped out.”

  6. DCposter said on 27 May 2007 at 11:29 pm:
    Flag comment

    The fact is you people were obsessed with Dion’s sexual orientation and most of your attacks centered around it. The gay.com ad was absurdly tame and had nothing to do with Dion’s candidacy, but apparently your idea of privacy and personal freedom only extends to your own bedroom doors.

    The tactics and attitudes of so-called conservatives like you people are contributing to a fairly obvious political realignment away from the GOP. Independent voters now say 3-to-1 they’ll support a Democrat for president in 2008. Sane, normal Americans find your style of politics repugnant. You are not conservatives. You’re just Republicans and you stand for nothing outside your narrow worldview.

    Wake up. Grow up. Stop attacking people who aren’t like you. Stop trying to shove your religion down other people’s throats like you’re a bunch of Islamist extremists. Try decency. Try real conservatism.

  7. Greg L said on 28 May 2007 at 12:12 am:
    Flag comment

    Funny, I wasn’t in Jeff Dion’s bedroom and that personals ad came up just fine for me.

    What kind of idiot would have a personals ad running on a site by the name of “gay.com” when he is running for the House of Delegates in a Republican district, and had previously described himself as being in a “committed relationship”? Even Democrats think this is utterly brain-dead.

    But you keep on thinking that Dion’s candidacy was a good idea.

  8. Riley, Not O'Reilly said on 28 May 2007 at 8:39 am:
    Flag comment

    “DC Poster.” Washington Post? Hey, Greg, check the IP to see if that came from their newsroom…

  9. Bryanna said on 28 May 2007 at 10:26 am:
    Flag comment

    Okay, Greg. Be nice. DCposter is standing up for what they believe in and that is very admirable. Jeff is human and feels pain like all the rest of us. Certainly he must be feeling ashamed about the upheavel of his anticipated candidacy.

    What we need to be talking about is Paul Nichols. His money trail indicates he’s an Independent and is a supporter of Sean Connaughton. Cross over votes are a strong possibility favoring the Democrats.

    The 51st District residents and voters seem to prefer having the right to choose on election day and not necessarily based on a party.

    Impressive strategic play by the Democrats.

  10. anonymous said on 28 May 2007 at 10:45 am:
    Flag comment

    US President Tim Kalemkarian, US Senate Tim Kalemkarian, US House Tim Kalemkarian: best major candidate.

  11. novamiddleman said on 28 May 2007 at 10:56 am:
    Flag comment

    Paul Nichols is for all intensive purposes a moderate. Delegates of the 51st please keep november in mind when you cast your vote for the R nominee. We need this seat to stay in the R column.

  12. Genevieve said on 28 May 2007 at 3:52 pm:
    Flag comment

    “Even Democrats think this is utterly brain-dead.”

    Seriously, am I the only one that remembers that even staffers on political campaigns, or candidates’ children have been ripped to shreds for online profiles? It doesn’t matter at this point if it is right or wrong- Greg already posted about Mr. Dion’s profile, and there’s nothing that can be done about that at this point. What matters now is “How many times does this have to happen for people to realize that nothing is private on the Internet?” Just delete your profiles before declaring your candidacy, or, better yet, don’t set one up with personal information if you plan on running for office!

  13. James Young said on 28 May 2007 at 4:59 pm:
    Flag comment

    Once again, we witness the wonderful spectacle of a far Left activist (and his defenders) who, having demanded public validation of his (and others’) personal perversions, relies upon those personal perversions as a defense when he is accused of irresponsibility (in reference to your calling attention to his advertisement) or dishonesty (in reference to his posted biography, which implied that he had been awarded/had custody of his children (that he “lives in Lake Ridge with his children”)).

    But oh, wait! That was the trail blazed by Bill Clinton! Worked for him.

    And I note, Greg, that he responded to your citation of his personal advertisement, while he still has failed to respond to the point that I made repeatedly about his dishonest — to the best of my knowledge, which was based upon personal observation — biography. Responding was something exceedingly easy to do, and would have resulted in an immediate cessation of my criticism of him on that point.

    Perhaps those differing responses were based upon your greater readership, Greg. But I doubt it.

  14. Jeff Dion said on 28 May 2007 at 9:18 pm:
    Flag comment

    James, once and for all, Jane and I have joint legal custody of the kids and they spend exactly half-time (seven out of fourteen days) at my house. The children’s address of record for church is my house, for school its Jane’s house. We both have bank accounts for them at either address. Our family (Jane and her husband Kevin included) consider the kids to live at both homes equally. You can charachterize that anyway you wish. During the seven years since our marriage ended, we have reached ammicable agreements on everything and never had to seek court intervention to arbiter any dispute.

    I never claimed that Bloggers “outed” me. Because you are quite correct that you can’t out someone who is already out.

    I have not claimed that bloggers drove me from the race. Nothing on the blogs that was true bothered me, but it made other Democrats nuts. I ended my candidacy because Democrats asked me to do so.

    Greg, I challenge you to find anytime in the last year when i had previously described myself as being in “a committed relationship.” I was in a committed relationship for three years that ended last summer. I wish it hadn’t, but it wasn’t my choice.

    And yes, James Young and his wife attended a church dinner party at my home in, I believe, the spring of 2005. I give James lots of credit for showing up. There he met the man I was dating. However, despite any assumptions James may have made, The man and I never lived together or held ourselves out as “domestic partners;” he always had his own home in Fairfax. As the subject of Blog commentary, I am continually bemused at how often the facts don’t come out right.

  15. Con Vallian said on 28 May 2007 at 11:23 pm:
    Flag comment

    Why does James Young carry one about “pervision?” Just because it’s not a man-woman relationship, its a pervision? Geeze, what is with these nuts in the PW GOP?

    Next thing you know, Lingufeller and Marshell and Jacks will be telling us breeders what position we need to use to have sex.

    And what the Hoover Dam does this have to do with somone’s ability to represent us in the 51st District?

    If I want a someone moral and very monogamousto vote for, how about how republicans raised money for such perverts as cheat on my wife Virginia Republican Vance Wilkins? Or toss my legs up in the air former Virginina Republican Congress Ed Schrock?

    Like Republicans in Virginia are not perverts? It was common knowledge that Goofy Ball Allen had the gay-est congressional staff in DC.

    Talk about ur glass houses. May Almighty God have mercy on your perverted souls.

  16. Greg L said on 29 May 2007 at 12:27 am:
    Flag comment

    Jeff,

    I had been under the impression, perhaps mistakenly, that you had a stable relationship with a partner who was residing with you in your home. If this was outdated information and not correct, I apologize for the inaccuracy.

    You say that other democrats pressured you to withdraw, and that not only seems to be the case here, but it is entirely consistent with the behavior I have observed from DPVA in the past. They have a habit of bringing tremendous pressure into the process of local delegate selections, and I’ve heard some rather stunning stories about how this has been done.

  17. James Young said on 29 May 2007 at 12:21 pm:
    Flag comment

    Thank you for clearing that up, Jeff. Now we can talk about the issue with complete information. I would point out that, had you pointed that out months ago, we could have done so then. I don’t think I have anything for which I need to apologize, since my very first comment on the issue, back on 9 December, was that “Greg, I don’t know details (only what I observe), but I am not convinced that Dion HAS custody of his children. I attend the same church as Dion — as does his ex-wife — and I was under the impression that they had joint custody, at best (from his perspective). My impression is that she has primary physical custody; however, he is quite a dutiful father in the sense that he spends much time with his children, and frequently takes them to church.” I simply raised a question, and raised the same question when it wasn’t answered.

    I haven’t gone back and checked, but I don’t believe that I ever made any comment about your relationship with virtually anyone, save to say that you are “quite a dutiful father in the sense that he spends much time with his children, and frequently takes them to church.”

    That’s certainly damning, and again, based upon personal observation.

    And as for blogs driving other Democrats ‘muts,” someone must observe that it’s a short drive.

    And BTW, “Con Vallian,” I can honestly say that I’ve never said a word about “pervision.” Indeed, I can honestly say that I haven’t the foggiest notion as to what you’re talking about.

  18. DCposter said on 29 May 2007 at 8:50 pm:
    Flag comment

    I’m in awe of Jeff for posting comments on this blog.

    For the record, I have no affiliation whatsoever with the Washington Post.

    But to my earlier point, I’d really like one of you who consider yourselves conservatives to comment on my arguments. Why is Jeff Dion’s sexual orientation material to his candidacy? Why should YOUR religion-based discrimination be allowed to tear down the career of an obviously committed public servant who happens to be gay and refuses to lie about it?

    Why isn’t a debate about the merits (or lack thereof ) of a candidate’s views and policy positions enough for you?

    This kind of politics is unworthy of people who love democracy. It’s depressing and tired.

  19. DCposter said on 29 May 2007 at 8:53 pm:
    Flag comment

    I’m in awe of Jeff for posting comments on this blog.

    For the record, I have no affiliation whatsoever with the Washington Post.

    But to my earlier point, why isn’t a debate about the merits (or lack thereof ) of a candidate’s views and policy positions enough for you? Why is a candidate’s perfectly legal private life fair game for you?

  20. Greg L said on 29 May 2007 at 9:05 pm:
    Flag comment

    Forgive me if I’m wrong here, but I honestly don’t feel that you actually care to know how conservatives feel and why they feel that way. You’ve already got your mind set that I, and many like me, are just ignorant, bigoted, xenophobic, homophobic and unenlightened neanderthals who hold false convictions and suffer from some sort of mental defect for having faith in our Creator.

    What would be the point in engaging with you? I feel it would be as productive as arguing with a turnip.

  21. DCposter said on 29 May 2007 at 11:41 pm:
    Flag comment

    I can understand that, Greg L., though we all come to arguments with certain mindsets. So let me put it less passionately:

    Is a candidate’s sexual orientation material to his candidacy? And if so, why?

  22. James Young said on 30 May 2007 at 11:26 am:
    Flag comment

    DCPoster asks “Why is a candidate’s perfectly legal private life fair game for you?”

    “Perfectly legal”? Not according to the laws of the Commonwealth of Virginia, which bar sodomy.

    As for “an obviously committed public servant who happens to be gay and refuses to lie about it,” Jeff Dion was, a few months ago, listed as an adult leader in a Cub Scout Pack. Given the well-known bar upon homosexuals in the Boy Scouts of America (of which the Cub Scouts are a part), it is obvious that he was lying to someone about it.

  23. anon said on 30 May 2007 at 6:07 pm:
    Flag comment

    So now James Young is spending time observing Mr. Dion’s bedroom … my goodness.

    Please, step away from the peephole …

  24. DCposter said on 30 May 2007 at 8:57 pm:
    Flag comment

    Mr. Young:

    Sodomy is still illegal in Virginia? I thought the Supreme Court of the United States ruled such laws unconstitutional in Lawrence v. Texas. Or is the Commonwealth somehow exempt from the U.S. constitution?

    I’m going out on a limb here and guessing Jeff was never asked by the Cub Scouts about his sexual orientation.

    But even having dispensed with that silliness, you fail to answer the root questions. Not an unusual tactic of your side, actually. At base, your objection to gay people is rooted in religion-based discrimination. That’s regrettable to me, but not altogether uncommon on the extreme wing of the GOP.

    I happen not to share your view of religion’s place in public life. Luckily for me, neither did our founding fathers, nor does an outright majority of the U.S. electorate. Your ilk is losing popular support faster than Rosie O’Donnell at a Junior League tea.

    But you hang in there, pumpkin.

Comments are closed.


Views: 2484