Sunday, January 07, 2007

Still No Word From Dion

Well, another Sunday, another service attended by myself and Democrat nominee for Occoquan Supervisor Jeff Dion at the church we attend (his daughter and my son are both in the Youth Choir, and sang at the early service today), and still no effort to answer the questions raised here and here, even in a personal aside.

Is Dion hiding an obfuscation? Sure, candidates don't have an obligation to respond to every allegation made in the blogosphere --- they could waste a great deal of time doing so, particularly with regard to wild allegations --- but this seems like such a simple one to answer. Plus, I don't have a record of wild, outrageous, libelous, and/or slanderous allegations.

I simply raise simple questions: Are Dion's bio and media reports which state that "He lives in Lake Ridge with his children," which leave the impression that he has custody of his minor children, even though he is divorced and sharing living arrangements with a homosexual paramour, mean that he has custody of those children? Does he "live in Lake Ridge with his children" in the same way that I live in Montclair with Maureen Caddigan, i.e., we live in the same community, in homes separated by a mile or more?

Were it demonstrated to me that my information were incorrect, I would happily publicize it here.

It is so easy to clear up this confusion. Yet Dion has not done so. One can only assume that his failure to do so means that the answer does not aid his cause. After all, if Dion is misrepresenting by artful evasion his custody status, answering the question would not aid his cause. A candidate's choices are a relevant inquiry for public consumption; hence, the fact that Dion "switched teams," in the Seinfeld parlance, is something of interest to voters.

Likewise, a prospective public official's frankness in his or her public pronouncements, particularly in something as elemental as his biography, is important to voters. And if Dion is misrepresenting himself and his custody status by artful obfuscation, voters are entitled to know that, as well. If voters and constituents are presented with a candidate whose every statement must be parsed for alternate and perhaps contradictory meanings (see, i.e., the Great Prevaricator AKA Bill Clinton), then they should know that before entering the voting booth. If Dion can't even tell the truth about his custody status and is publicizing false impressions, how can voters hope to assess his qualifications and policy prescriptions as a predicate to making an informed choice? In short, what else is Jeff Dion lying about?

It has been reported to me, as recently as this evening, that Dion does not have custody of his children from his previous marriage. Yet the bio remains unchanged. And seems specifically and intentionally designed to leave the false impression that he does.

6 comments:

David said...

You really seem to have an inflated view of your own importance.

James Young said...

That's a pretty bold assertion from someone who believes that the meaning of words should be changed to suit his perversion.

James Young said...

And that's not an "inflated view of [my] own importance." It's a simple enough thing to clarify, with potentially devastating consequences if my understanding is wrong and gains general acceptance. That he does not do so makes it almost certain that there's a "there" there.

Charles said...

I don't understand. You asked him directly, and he wouldn't answer the question?

James Young said...

No, Charles, I didn't "ask him directly," other than here. I've made the point here, numerous times, and we know that Dion monitors the blogosphere (he has a site, has responded when Jim Riley raised a point, and is on Waldo's aggregator).

Not Jack Tripper said...

I live in America with Suzanne Sommers.

That is a truthful statement.