Letter Submission

To submit a letter to the editor, please email us at This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.. Letters must contain the author's name, hometown (state as well, if not in New Hampshire) and phone number, but the number will not be published. We do not run anonymous letters. Local issues get priority, as do local writers. We encourage writers to keep letters to no more than 400 words, but will accept longer letters to be run on a space-available basis. Editors reserve the right to edit letters for spelling, grammar, punctuation, excessive length and unsuitable content.


Johnson Amendment is crucial to the integrity of our churches

To The Daily Sun,

If House Republicans succeed in their efforts to gut the Johnson Amendment, it would open the door for Big Money donors and political interest groups to pressure and manipulate our nation’s churches and charities.

Without this amendment, Big Donors would have free reign to use institutions meant for the social good to funnel unlimited amounts of money into political elections in secret — and get a tax break for doing it.

The Johnson Amendment is crucial to uphold the integrity of our churches, our charities and our elections. This is why House Republicans should not gut it!

Nick Jenkins


  • Written by Edward Engler
  • Category: Letters
  • Hits: 37

Trump uses 'Whataboutism' in response to criticism leveled at him

To The Daily Sun,

This may be somewhat presumptuous of me, but I’d like to introduce many contributors and readers of this forum to the term “Whataboutism.” It is a propaganda technique first used by the Soviet Union (rather ironic) in its dealing with the Western world. When cold war criticisms were leveled at the Soviets, the response would be “what about ...” followed by the name of an event or individual in the Western world. It represents a case of appealing to hypocrisy, a logical fallacy that attempts to discredit the opponent’s position by asserting the opponent’s failure to act consistently in accordance with that position without directly refuting or disproving the opponent’s initial argument. It’s a simple way to shrug off criticism or even responsibility for any wrong doing.

Trump uses “Whataboutism” in response to criticism leveled at him, his policies, or his support for controversial global leaders. When asked to defend his behavior or accused of wrong doing, Trump has frequently shifted the topic to Democrats and other figures, such as Barack Obama, Hillary and Bill Clinton, James Comey, etc.

Hillary Clinton, a favorite villain of the right, has been frequently featured by conservative contributors. Instead of applying pressure to the current president, who is grappling with fallout from a federal investigation related to Russian election meddling, they deflect and turn their attention to Clinton and her alleged anarchistic inroads toward a conspired nationwide coup. Whatever Trump does or doesn’t do, these contributors are always willing to yell — “what about” Clinton, she did or didn’t do that worse.

In a belated response to Mr. Meade’s criticism of my last letter; I never claimed that he wrongly stated Secretary Clinton said she was part of the resistance, my concern is that, true to form, Meade paraphrases her NBC interview statement that, “now back to being an activist citizen and part of the resistance” to “part of the resistance.” Apparently including “being an activist citizen” would have detracted from Meade’s intent to portray Clinton as an anarchist.

Robert Miller

  • Written by Edward Engler
  • Category: Letters
  • Hits: 43