[img]1916|right|Robert Zirgulis||no_popup[/img]In adulthood, as in your student years, if you want to be popular and accepted, you face a stark choice: Embrace the fraternity or you will be scorned.
Nearly everyone has a chance to choose. One has not.
With all volunteers in the room, in lockstep, taking one step backward, I rise this morning in defense of the School Board candidacy of Robert Zirgulis.
In each of his three campaigns, he has attracted uncommonly harsh critics. Even if they know little about Mr. Zirgulis, they soon become as determined as horseflies at a picnic to scar if not ruin his chances.
He is forthright, honest and plain-spoken.
He is the embodiment of the hallowed concept of a grassroots candidate. Minus a well-formed fundraising constituency, he hosts events in his front yard.
What could be more traditionally American?
President McKinley ran almost his entire campaign from his front porch.
A centerpiece of each Zirgulis campaign has been drumming up interest for re-opening the Natatorium. On cue, it has drawn a drowning-out chorus of boos because, well, just because.
As far as is known, Mr. Zirgulis is upstanding. His rectitude is unmarked. He has led an honorable life, and raised his sons as a single father.
He works as a substitute teacher and in real estate. Unless he has squirreled away uncounted millions in a secret account, he is of modest short-term and long-term means, and he lives moderately.
He has espoused a variety of causes, none quirky.
He deserves the degree of sincere respect that automatically is accorded to his fellow candidates.
This is not an endorsement of Mr. Zirgulis. The newspaper does not endorse.
It is a defense of his honor, of his worthiness of fair consideration.
