In this day of incumbent protection, it is proper for us to remember those who served us with courage. Warren Spannaus, a former attorney general of Minnesota, literally put his political life on the line when he repeatedly fought for sensible gun-safety laws ("Attorney general, gubernatorial candidate was DFL giant," Nov. 28).
I so well remember Tom Berg carrying the Spannaus bill in the House. Somehow this piece of legislation turned into a highly charged public war, and it ended the ambitions of two of our finest public servants: Spannaus and Berg. And we the public were losers, because both would have been superb governors.
This nation was founded on the notion of competing ideas, but somewhere we got derailed into an environment of absolutes. In that world, compromise and the exchange of views is unacceptable.
To his credit, Spannaus always stood by our fundamental values of decency, kindness and respect for the views of others. He was a first-rate politician and a revered public servant.
Arne Carlson, Minneapolis
The writer was governor of Minnesota from 1991 to 1999.
SEXUAL MISCONDUCT
Taking issue with editorial and letter writers on Franken issue
Herd mentality and its accompanying sense of moral self-righteousness appear to be in play once again in the lynching of U.S. Sen. Al Franken by those who are calling for the proverbial pound of flesh in return for, well, what? Is there anything he could have said that would have met the requirements of those who choose hate over love, judgment over forgiveness, presumed guilt until innocence is proven ("Franken's apology fails full candor test," Nov. 28)? What would the Star Tribune editorial writer have accepted as adequate candor, acceptable penance, the appropriate mea culpa that would have earned Franken the forgiveness he has asked for? The editorial writer asks what exactly it was that Franken apologized for. I watched the same interview and heard the answer to the question that apparently alluded the writer.
I don't know if Franken was guilty or not of "grabbing" the women's buttocks. I do know that it is easy for some to take offense where none is intended. I do not have to doubt that what the women said was true about Franken touching their buttocks in order to have doubt about whether or not the action constituted an intentional act of sexual impropriety on Franken's part, even if the action may have been inappropriate. He has apologized for any offense given, and has said he will change the way he poses for pictures in the future. I am willing to accept his apology and give him a chance to redeem his past actions, and I invite others to consider doing the same.