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contain the author's name, hometown (state as well, if not in New Hampshire) and phone number, but the number will not be published.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


‘Junk mail’ is a useless and irresponsible waste of resources

To The Daily Sun,
Joel Edinburg's letter on advertising flyers in the Tuesday Sun hit a hot-spot with me.

The unsolicited inclusion of advertising flyers and other assorted junk mail in our daily mail is both wasteful and irresponsible. It requires tons of resources to produce including paper, ink, and energy, and creates tons of useless waste to be disposed of or recycled mostly without having served a useful purpose. It also requires labor and the labor costs at the post office to sort and deliver this material. This includes flyers from super markets, auto dealers, as well as daily "bugles" from various towns in the area.

I once contacted the post office to see if I could "unsubscribe" from one of the "bugles" and was told that since the distributors pay for a mailing permit to distribute them that the U.S. Postal Service has to deliver them. Shame on Uncle Sam if that's true.

If we are truly trying to be environmentally conscious, the delivery of tons of paper to our mail, much of which goes immediately into the trash without serving a useful purpose should be stopped. It's a shame that legislation can't be adopted that would allow a person to unsubscribe to this useless and irresponsible waste of resources.

Ed Rushbrook


  • Category: Letters
  • Hits: 323

Trump is a legitimate candidate, just not the establishment’s pet

To The Daily Sun,

Middle of last week someone commented to the effect that "Trump is not a legitimate Republican candidate." What I failed to find in her message was why? And just what does constitute a "legitimate candidate"?

In the last senatorial elections, the New Hampshire Republican Committee rammed a Massachusetts RINO, after finagling his New Hampshire residency, down Republicans' throats for the New Hampshire senatorial candidate. The Democrats said, "thank you." Does being the establishment pet make someone a legitimate candidate?

Back to candidates for the POTUS: our Constitution lays out the eligibility requirements. (http://www.presidentsusa.net/qualifications.html) U.S. Constitution, Article II, Section 1 — No person except a natural born citizen, or a citizen of the United States, at the time of the adoption of this Constitution, shall be eligible to the office of president; neither shall any person be eligible to that office who shall not have attained to the age of 35 years, and been 14 years a resident within the United States.

I do not see anything there that disqualifies Trump so he must be a "legitimate candidate".

While Trump is superb at bringing America's true issues to light, he is a totalitarian. I see too much likelihood of him going Obama's way, bypassing Congress with "pen an phone." What I think needs to happen is for the RNC "establishment" to get their collective tails in gear and uphold their campaign promises — or expect Trump to be their party's choice.

A.C.R. Piper


  • Category: Letters
  • Hits: 381