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contain the author's name, hometown (state as well, if not in New Hampshire) and phone number, but the number will not be published.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


Threats & more government controls won't encourage business

To The Daily Sun,

The Aug. 21 issue has several letters deserving comment.

To Bernadette Loesch: We get it; you don't like Donald Trump or Republicans. But where's your useful comment related to the drug or the illegal immigration problems? Drug kingpins already are major targets in the war on drugs. You start getting evidence against the kingpins by arresting users and pushers. You must deal with the users because they harm innocent people to get money for drugs, and, of course, without users there would be no illegal drug problem.

If you open immigration to everyone wanting to escape "horrendous living conditions", billions of people will come here; all of them will consider you part of the 1 percent.

No one claimed a border wall/fence solves the illegal immigration problem. Yet a wall/fence, promised by Congress, would help address about 60 percent of the problem. About 40 percent of the problem is from visa violators.

A good wall/fence coupled with good interior enforcement of our immigration laws would discourage illegal immigration which would reduce the number of families separated by illegal immigration, deaths and sexual assaults during illegal border crossings, and the number of Americans harmed by illegal aliens.

To James Veverka: Just because you said there is a consensus on man-made-global-warming doesn't make it true or relevant since facts aren't determined by consensus. Michael Crichton wondered why so many critics of man-made global warming were retired scientists and professors. Following that thought, I will concede: There appears to be a consensus among "scientists" who want future government funding that their "research" needs to support the "solutions" to the man-made-global-warming hoax that benefits the politicians and bureaucrats.

For Mike Dowal: Since the 1950s America has been driving jobs out of our country due to excessive government policies, taxes, requirements (e.g., Obamacare), bureaucratic delays and costs (adding 15 percent to average business costs); hostile union practices; increasing energy costs; and bad management.
Adding threats and more government controls won't encourage employers to keep or grow jobs here, investors to create new jobs here, or for good jobs to return here. If we stop driving jobs away and make the U.S. the best place to conduct business, then businesses will invest and create good jobs here.
Unfortunately President Obama either doesn't know how to, or doesn't care to make the U.S. the best place to create and grow businesses. Hopefully our next president has the knowledge and cares enough about the American people to create a strongly growing economy so that every American can get a good job.

Don Ewing

  • Category: Letters
  • Hits: 276

Which side of the wall that divides USA do you want to live on?

To The Daily Sun,

The editorial cartoon on Aug. 27 suggested that a border wall that would really protect America would be built surrounding the NRA. As a life member, I could actually see some potential for that idea. The purpose of the wall would be to let people decide which kind of a country they would really like to live in.

One side still cherishes our God, our families, our jobs, our independence. One that still promotes self-reliance, integrity and personal responsibility. Where, as Dr. King asked, people are judged by the content of their character, not the color of their skin. Where all people had equal economic opportunities and the law applied equally to every individual. I seem to remember a place like that.

On the other side of the wall, anything goes. The law is really just a polite request to behave yourself. Depending on who you are, you might be able to get away with taxing and regulating your political opponents away, or controlling the people's very lives by controlling what kind of care they might receive when they get sick. Where you are constantly flooded with new unknown people bringing in equally unknown agendas, substances, diseases. Where you are not allowed to protect yourself from the criminals who want to take your stuff. Where your kids leave school without learning critical skills they will need to keep a job. That is, if they could find a job after the government has taxed and regulated many companies to death and the rest have been burned to the ground. And when you get robbed, raped or killed by one of your fellow citizens, they police might show up to help, or not.

But of course there are both kinds of places here in the United States already, existing side by side with ever increasing conflict. What if there was a great big wall to separate us from each other like the Berlin Wall in Germany. Which side would you want to live on?

Alan Moon

  • Category: Letters
  • Hits: 435