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must contain the author's name, hometown (state as well, if not in New Hampshire) and phone number, but the number will not be published.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. Letters may be edited for spelling, grammar, punctuation and legal concerns.


The last court appointment in election year was by Reagan

To The Daily Sun,

With the sudden death of Supreme Court Justice Antonin Scalia we now see more examples of why there has been such vilifying obstructionist tactics in play for these seven-plus years of President Obama's time in office.
The stage has been set. The players are in place. We have been given crucial insight over these many years as to how contentious, argumentative and litigious the GOP has been.

This next appointment to the Supreme Court is most likely to be among one of the most crucial in the history of our country. There are many Supreme Court legal rulings which are in danger of being overturned which have had long standing. This is what is in jeopardy.

The GOP/Tea Party obstructionists are on the "war path" yet again. They will certainly be trying every stratagem or subterfuge in their arsenal in order to gain the advantage of preventing their nemesis from performing his constitutionally prescribed presidential duties. Listen very carefully to their bogus reasons for postponing the replacement of Scalia.

In the past 100 years, the Supreme Court confirmation process has occurred five times during an election year. The most recent was in 1988, when a Democratic Senate confirmed President Reagan's appointment of Anthony M. Kennedy in a 97-0 vote.

As this process wends its way through the maze, we need to keep in mind that President Obama is a scholar of constitutional law. Will those on the right allow our democratic process to work for the good of the entire country? Or will they only be interested in scoring points for their constituency?

Bernadette Loesch

  • Category: Letters
  • Hits: 415

Ayotte & co. are blocking Obama from his constitutional duty

To The Daily Sun,

Kelly Ayotte ran for the Senate as a supposed moderate. Now, we can see that she is anything but. She is a lawyer who is supposed to know and understand the U.S. Constitution. Yet, she has meekly lined up with the radical Republicans in the Senate stating that the Senate will not even hold a hearing on any Supreme Court nominee that President Obama sends to them for consideration.

It is the president's duty to nominate someone to fill a vacancy on the Supreme Court when one occurs. It is the Senate's duty to receive that nomination, hold hearings on the nominee's qualifications to hold that office, and to vote on that nomination. To do otherwise is to shirk their responsibilities, something this Senate has shown a remarkable penchant for doing.

Senator Ayotte, for a change stand up for what is constitutionally required and demand of your leadership that they receive President Obama's nominee, hold hearings on that person's qualifications to be a Supreme Court justice, and vote on those qualifications. If you cannot do that, you have no business holding one of our two Senate seats from New Hampshire.

Dick de Seve

  • Category: Letters
  • Hits: 914