Lantos should debate

Lantos also boasts of his refusal to debate any opponent prior to the March primary. As a constituent, it seems I am expected to accept at face value the congressman's claim that his years of experience qualifies him to occupy an office others must earn. Unlike candidates opposing him, Lantos feels he has the luxury to choose when he will leave office without having to define to those he hopes to represent and who will ultimately decide his fate, his stance on the issues.

Most would agree that debate is an indicator of a vibrant democracy, the fact that Lantos so flippantly rejects this value fails to endear me to him. In fact, it leads me to question why he is hiding, what he is hiding and what he gains by doing so? How can one believe a legislator will successfully contest issues in the house if they are unwilling to debate those they describe as relative newcomers lacking their experience?

I question why anyone should support a candidate unwilling to defend their rational for holding office each election cycle.

I ask Lantos to reconsider his position as well as to appeal to the media to provide an impartial view of the issues and candidates on the ballot in March, regardless of Lantos' willingness to participate in that process.

Barry Marchessault

Daly City