Cranston and Lincoln S&L; Scandal

In response to your editorial “Twilight for Sen. Cranston,” Dec. 9:

There are two things I can always count on The Times to do. One is to support the liberal viewpoint, whatever form it takes. The other is to join the very crowd it has helped provoke in demanding the removal or resignation of the latest politician to fall under the cloud of possible “ethical violations.”

One wondered what would happen when these two editorial imperatives collided. Now we know. The liberal impulse has taken second place to the killer instinct.

Cranston has represented this state in the Senate for over 20 years. To my knowledge, his ethics have never been called into question. I once had the privilege of working closely with Cranston for several months. A more decent, honorable, and hard-working man I have yet to meet.

Even though I, like many others in this state, have come to disagree over the years with his liberal positions, I continue to vote for him, as do they--mainly because we admire his consistency and his obvious dedication both to his principles and to the people of California.

But now that a cloud has settled over the senator, some, like The Times editorial writer, ignore or gloss over his long record of service, and suggest that perhaps he should retire or fade away into oblivion--not because anything has been proven. Not because any specific laws or rules have been clearly judged broken. No--only because there is a “perception” of possible impropriety.

While as a conservative I cannot help but take some satisfaction in seeing prominent Democrats like Jim Wright and Tony Coelho brought down, as an American, I cannot help but be concerned about the fact that any public figure can be destroyed and removed today just because of rumor and innuendo.

As there are no perfect persons among us, who will be left to serve this nation, now that no mistake made by an elected representative will be allowed, tolerated, or forgiven by the media--which seems to have given itself the role of judge, jury and executioner.

Alan Cranston may or may not have acted properly in the Lincoln Savings matter. That remains to be seen. But I know, and The Times knows, that he has served this state and its people well and with distinction for many years.

On that basis alone, until and unless the facts should dictate otherwise, he deserves our support, not our censure.

PETE SUMMERS

La Canada