Editor,

This is a rebuttal to the Richard MacQuarrie letter published here recently.

Good or bad, voters of any community deserve to be made aware of the backgrounds of individuals who desire to lead and represent them. If a political candidate is shown to have a rather dark past, those who come to a knowledge of this vital fact must consider themselves ethically bound to warn others. The truly unethical decision would be to disguise such facts until it’s too late.

In real life, would you seek the advice of a financial consultant who recommends poorly performing stocks? Would you hire a customer service rep terminated for repeated acts of rudeness in their last job? Would you choose a health insurance company sued in a class action for unfairly denying claims? The answer to all three is a huge NO.

Using that same approach when considering a political candidate for any position, that candidate should at minimum display positive traits, especially maturity, honesty, sincerity, and the wisdom to know when to engage in the ability and skill of cooperation when circumstances demand. Individuals who enter the candidate ring at election time can in no way be found lacking when it comes to fundamental basics like a good job record, or the ability to exercise diplomacy when necessary, and this holds true whatever the party, gender, education level or age.

To summarize all this, the success of democracy on a local, state, or national level depends on a flow of factual information. Regardless of how uncomfortable this may be for some folks, the truth needs to be told for the sake of the community, and all those planning a future there.

Deborah Jones

Langley