A+ A A-

Hard to know the truth because of such bias against Patriots

To The Daily Sun,

I see Mike Finn has a letter here, Tuesday, regarding the Patriots and the "deflategate." Like him I'm a lifelong New England sports fan, especially the Patriots.

To clear up one misconception for Mike, each team has their own balls, 25 of them. Twelve are game balls the rest extras. Still saying that all the balls must be approved, standard NFL balls. I've read conflicting reports about where the responsibility lies for the inflation pressure and more so on the reports that 10 balls were all 2 psi under-inflated.

One thing is certain, the game officials are responsible to inspect all game balls and approve them which they were said to have done. One new report circulating has it the intercepted ball the Colts had possession of was the only one 2 psi under the rest were only 1 psi of less. Hard to know the truth here. (There is) so much bias against the Pats around and rumors are rampart.

One thing I can say is for the 55 or so years I've been watching football I have never seen or heard losing teams make an issue about the pressure, or lack there of, of the air in footballs. Also, if Mike or others are interested there is a great site, nepatriotsdraft.com, where fans from all over share their thoughts and ideas.

Steve Earle


Last Updated on Monday, 02 February 2015 09:52

Hits: 106

You're no smarter than the rest of us because you're a professor

To The Daily Sun,

George Maloof needs to take a large gulp of his own advice. There is no contributor to The Sun plagued with more self delusion, wrapped in the grip of insecurity, seeing more green-eyed, bogeymen behind every tree than George Maloof. Watching those insecurities play out in this paper is an absolute hilarity. For God's sake George, what ever you do don't gulp sufficient courage to address by name the person your trying to shower with condescension.

You think simply mentioning the persons name gives credibility to the other persons point of view. You couldn't possibly do that given the Mount Rushmore size of your professor ego that requires a pickup truck to lug it around. Your greatest " fear" is if you use the persons name you might possibly have to defend your views which almost all have more holes than a slice of Swiss cheese.

Your nothing more than a chip off the old Leo Sandy block. He had the same problem. Leo didn't want to debate, he just wanted to pontificate from some high, ivy-walled perch with a snobby nose. Like you, when asked to defend his logic he did his best to paint all who disagreed as attackers making " veiled threats." I have the names of some fine psychologists who can help you out of your deep-seated paranoia. Maybe it goes back to your childhood? You and Leo swim in bath of continual delusion of self importance for fear some one will expose yours and his fallibility.

The latest victim of your paranoia is John Demakowski. You laughingly conclude because John suggested your remarks bordered on blasphemy this was a" veiled threat". If I took your parking place you would see it as a threat. If I looked you straight in the eye you might conclude the same thing. John is looking for you to debate. Like Leo, you see "veiled threats" by everyone who disagree with you. Professors, have their egos on the moon, and see their intellect on Mars. They are not going to engage in debate with the lay community. That is simply " below them." But like Leo you have no problem sending down your epistles expecting no comment or challenge.

This is my challenge to you George. Debate, and address directly the person your trying to speak "down to" in a condescendingly way. If you don't, I am going to write satire about you, your insecurity, your out-sized ego, and your hot-air-filed self delusion until this paper ceases publication. George, that is a direct threat if you didn't catch it. Defend the sink holes in your logic or suffer the consequences.

You're simply no smarter than the rest of us because your a professor. Your views need to be held to the same litmus test of "truth and logic" that all ideas do. In fact maybe even held to a higher standard, because you try to convince others your education makes your ideas bullet proof. That is 100 percent pure BS. Barack Obama had letters behind his name, graduated from what is believed to be the top university in the country, had the same air of supremacy to his ideas. Look at the unmitigated economic and social disaster those ideas caused. It must be green-eyed bogeymen behind the failure. For a man who can't see God, you sure see lots of other creatures most don't.

Tony Boutin


Last Updated on Monday, 02 February 2015 09:45

Hits: 168

'All My Children' it's not but 'All My Sons' won't disappoint

To The Daily Sun,

I want to start by saying I'm a huge fan of The Laconia Daily Sun. I feel incredibly grateful to live and work in an area where the arts are so well represented in our local newspaper. The Sun and its staff go above and beyond to foster a sense of an artistic community, and I can't thank them enough.

I'll admit I had a little chuckle opening the weekend's paper to discover that the title of a recent press release I sent stated that the Winni Players were to stage "All My Children" this coming weekend. While entertaining, the trials and tribulations of the denizens of the soap opera town Pine Valley are not exactly the same as those in Arthur Miller's mid-century masterpiece, "All My Sons".

"All My Children" kept dedicated viewers, including my own mom, transfixed for 41 years with stories of babies switched at birth, a sister pushing her twin down a well, and more. "All My Sons", is a searing family drama about a man whose blind pursuit of the American Dream destroys lives, and ultimately rips apart his own family. Both are gripping and entertaining in very different ways.

We hope you will come to check out the incredible cast and company of "All My Sons" this weekend. If you're expecting Erica Kane, you may be disappointed. If your looking for top-quality, moving, and heartfelt community theater, you definitely won't be.

Lesley Pankhurst
Marketing Manager

Winnipesaukee Playhouse


Last Updated on Monday, 02 February 2015 09:41

Hits: 262

Not a good idea to allow light manufacturing district along 127

To The Daily Sun,

On March 10 Sanbornton voters we will be asked to vote on five proposed zoning amendments submitted by the Sanbornton Planning Board. Amendment four proposes establishing a Commercial (Light Manufacturing permitted) Zoning District. This would increase the size of the current Commercial Zoning District along Route 127 beyond the Sanbornton General Store toward Franklin, and would allow light manufacturing in that area.

I have some major concerns about this proposed amendment regarding air, land, water and noise pollution.

The definition of Light Manufacturing in the Town Zoning Ordinance book — Article 3 page 3.4 item 31, means a use involving the manufacture of a product such that all resulting dust, flash, fumes, gases, odors, refuse matter, smoke, vapor, hazardous or toxic materials, electro-magnetic interference or radio-active emission shall be completely and effectively confined within a building, or so regulated as to prevent any nuisance or hazard to the public health or safety and further provided that no vibration or other disturbance is perceptible without the use of instruments, at the boundary of the parcel involved. Provided also that noise shall be restricted to a peak level of 65 dBa between the hours of 7 a.m. and 7 p.m., and 45 dBa between the hours of 7 p.m. and 7 a.m.

That is a pretty unsettling description of what would be allowed. Do we really want to allow the possibility of polluting the air and earth and enduring noise around the clock at different dBa levels? Additionally, according to a town map prepared by the Lakes Region Planning Commission, this area is a Aquifer Conservation Zone. This would further indicate that this location is inappropriate for the new zoning recommendation.

I am voting against this proposed amendment on election day and I hope all concerned citizens will vote against it as well.

Bill Whalen

Last Updated on Monday, 02 February 2015 09:37

Hits: 211

Lucrative abortion industry doesn't talk about fact you can't take it back

To The Daily Sun,

I always enjoy John Demakowski's letters. I saw the column from Scott Cracraft on "What Would Jesus Do?," and I thought of writing an answer to it. Then I said to myself, "Let John Demakowski do it. He can say it better than you can. "I am always heartened by his stance for God and biblical truths.

I will add my two cents, however. On the subject of abortion, one thing that has always galled me is that even people who are pro-abortion have come up with this concocted idea that if abortion is going to be curtailed at all, the time to do that is when the child could live outside the womb. This basically says that if the child can measure up to an adult standard — that of existing independently from the mother — that affords him some right to exist. Who is anyone to say to another human being, 'If you can meet my standards, you can live? Who is any adult to say that a younger life form is worth less? Where do you get off? What gives you that right? A fetus is at his stage of life, just as a child is at his and a grown-up is at his. No one has the right to say one of them is less worthy than the other.

The other thing I want to say is that I knew a woman a long time ago who was a liberal left-wing feminist with all the attitudes and opinions that go along with it. And one day when she talked about her abortion she cried for a good five minutes and kept saying, "I can't take it back. I can't change it. If I could I would, but I can't." So yes, women do often have deep regrets and this is one thing the lucrative abortion industry would like to keep from them.

Hillarie Goldstein


Last Updated on Friday, 30 January 2015 11:23

Hits: 111

The Laconia Daily Sun - All Rights Reserved
Privacy Policy
Powered by BENN a division of the Pittsburgh Post-Gazette