MeredithMay2017

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must contain the author's name, hometown (state as well, if not in New Hampshire) and phone number, but the number will not be published.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.

 

Staying home or voting third party is not a responsible option

To The Daily Sun,

The Presidential Election on November 8 will change the direction of our country for many generations to come, not merely for four or eight years, because the new president will have the duty to nominate so many justices to the U.S. Supreme Court that our country's direction will change, perhaps irrevocably.

Before the untimely death of Justice Scalia, the xourt was notionally divided into two camps of four justices each (Scalia, Thomas, Roberts and Alito on the right; Ginsburg, Breyer, Sotomayor and Kagan on the left), with Justice Kennedy often being the deciding vote on a particular matter, with no certainty in advance on how he might vote on a matter. Even Chief Justice Roberts has not been reliably as conservative as the others in that "block," as evidenced by his tortured reasoning as the deciding vote to uphold Obamacare.

There is a high likelihood that the next president will have to fill seats now held by Justices Ginsburg (83), Kennedy (80), and Breyer (78), in addition to the Scalia seat.

The remaining justices range in age from Kagan (59); Roberts (61); Sotomayor (62); Alito (66) to Thomas (68) — all of whom are likely to remain on the court for a very long time,

What are the possible outcomes? Although she has not released any list of possible candidates for appointment, Clinton would certainly nominate people from the left, to say the least. This would produce a court that would be 6-3 in favor of the left. The Republican candidate has released two lists of names for possible appointment to the court if he wins, all notionally "approved" by The Federalist Society, which would produce a court that would be 7-2 in favor of the right. Or just 6-3 if Roberts waffles again.

These shifts in the "balance" of the court would last for several generations, well beyond one or two terms of the presidency. But what do the potential shifts in the makeup of the Supreme Court portend for our future?

Clinton has already made it very clear that she intends to fight to change several amendments in the Constitution as interpreted by the Supreme Court, including the First Amendment (to restrict or criminalize speech with which the left disagrees), and the Second Amendment (to restrict or eliminate the right of law-abiding individuals to keep and bear arms). She would also continue the attacks on people of strong religious convictions who oppose using taxpayer money to fund abortions or being required to provide mandated insurance coverage for abortions. There are actually many critical issues that are "waiting" for the Supreme Court to come up to full strength before the Justices will agree to hear and decide the cases.

So this presidential election is about much more than who occupies the White House for the next four or eight years. It is about what the fabric of our country will look like for many generations to come. A very scary thought indeed!

There is no turning back. Staying home or not voting in the presidential election, or voting for one of the third party candidates, is not a responsible option for people of good conscience who care about our country's future. Seldom if ever are we offered a candidate for whom to vote that we agree with on every issue, and it usually comes down to picking the lesser of the evils — that certainly will be the case on November 8.

If you want to hear more about the dynamics of the Supreme Court and the future fabric of our country, as it will be affected by the presidential race, I invite you to attend a presentation by this writer on that topic on Wednesday, Oct. 19, at the Moultonborough Library, 4 Holland Street, starting at 7 p.m. The public is invited and there is no charge to attend. Pocket Constitutions will be available for free to help you to follow along. Please email me at This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it. or call me at 293-0565 with any questions.

If any other organization would like to schedule a similar presentation before November 8, please contact the undersigned as soon as possible.

Norman Silber
Gilford

  • Category: Letters
  • Hits: 440

The lies Hillary & Obama have been telling for years are well documented

To The Daily Sun,

And now another one kills five in another gun-free zone. This one a legal immigrant from Turkey whom I suspect just may be a Muslim. I don't know; it's just a wild guess on my part since it seems to be the national sport of Islam.

This was not in some big city. It was a town of 8,600 people. Laconia has a population of around 15,900 or so. Couldn't happen here, right? Think again. It could, especially if Hillary continues the Obama policy of closing their minds to the reality of the threats that the real world presents us.

Folks this is not some abstract, it-can't-happen-to-me-or-mine thing. It can. Clinton is hell-bent on becoming the president, and will do or say anything to that end. She ignores real dangers to us regular citizens as she ignored the dangers to ambassador Chris Stevens in Benghazi. It's all politics all the time with her. She has no empathy, no compassion for anyone except herself. She is a classic narcissist.

Oh sure, Trump is imperfect, but Trump will make every effort to keep us as safe as he possibly can. We can be sure he will not bury his head in the sand and hope nothing goes wrong like Hillary does.

Her big campaign against the right of honest citizens to own or carry firearms is a perfect example. She and her family are constantly surrounded by a small army of highly trained and fully-armed secret service agents and state and local police every time they go out side their home. Ask yourself, are you? A case of do as I say not as I do.

Over and over I have pointed out the documented litany of lies this woman has told us year after year so that it seems she never speaks without lying. We just can't trust her. One writer to this paper referred to my letters as containing "pseudo facts." I'm just wondering which facts they are? Is it the lies Hillary and Obama have been telling for years that are well documented? Is it the death toll from Islamic terrorists attacks, also well reported and documented? How about the less well reported death toll in black sections in cities like Chicago that have been under Democratic administrations for decades?

Can it be the conclusions I draw from these documented facts and events that is objectionable. Are my opinions the "pseudo facts" referred to? I recall a letter writer some years back that had a problem understanding the difference between opinion and facts. This seems to be a like situation. Or perhaps it's just a willful mischaracterization.

Steve Earle

Gilford

  • Category: Letters
  • Hits: 400