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contain the author's name, hometown (state as well, if not in New Hampshire) and phone number, but the number will not be published.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

 

Hillary is already beholding to half the Muslim nations on Earth

To The Daily Sun,

I see where Bernadette Loesche wants to make voting more expedient and easier. Well, fine. I just question her plan to achieve this.

First she suggests mandatory voting for all citizens. Two problems here are: First, we would have to correctly identify all the eligible voters. That could put a slight crimp in Democratic Party's turnout in some places like Chicago; second, it would seem to me to violate the individuals rights. No one should be forced to vote any more then someone should be restricted from voting (providing they are eligible).

Her second point I could agree with — an end to gerrymandering. Only problem is how? Gerrymandering has been around as long as (anyone can remember) getting politicians to agree how it could be done is near impossible.

Berni writes as though this is a problem created by Republicans and the Tea Party. Nonsense. Keep in mind many voting districts are designed to assure minority populations have representation. That's gerrymandering, and I'm sure she would scream bloody murder if anyone suggested those districts be carved up.

Then she suggests weekend voting which I can't see affording any greater turnout. Would sports fans give up their games for the chance to vote, or a family vacation be curtailed? Doesn't sound like a valid improvement to me.

So what is so difficult with the way it is? If a person is away, say in the military or overseas or out of state on business, they can get absentee ballots. If home all they have to do is go to the polls and vote. Businesses allow workers time to go and vote if they want to. Thing is, many people just don't bother. So nothing Berni suggests would change that but her intentions are good even if she slips in a cheep shot at the GOP and the Tea Party.

On another subject I read where Hillary is being sued by two of the Benghazi victims families for wrongful deaths. Good luck to them, but they have a snowball's chance in you know where. I don't believe there is a court in this country that would touch this. We have already seen that the FBI and the Justice Department are no longer independent from political power so why should we expect anything more from the courts?

The Clintions have been investigated for more criminal activities then Al Capone and have slipped through the justice system time and time again. The system is rigged, folks. If any one of us had done even a fraction of the things Hillary has done we would be sitting in a federal penitentiary counting the years until we get out. And this is the person Democrats say is qualified for the presidency?

Hillary is already beholding to half the Muslim nations on earth and these are nations with some of the worst human rights violations on the planet. Does Hillary ever address any of this, heck no, she's been bought off and everyone knows it. She gives lip service it women's rights, gay rights and condemns fundamental(ist) Christians, the Tea Party, conservatives — anyone except Muslims.

How is that even possible? It's only possible because she will do anything to win. Any means justify s the ends and her ends are total control and subjection of the nation to her views and agendas and the rules and laws and rights of anyone else is expendable. You see it's all about Hillary.

Steve Earle
Gilford

  • Category: Letters
  • Hits: 323

It's against the law to take down political signs on private property

To The Daily Sun,

Brian Gallagher of Sanbornton, running for State Senate in District 2, has learned many of his signs, on private property, have been removed, thrown into the woods or destroyed. Gallagher is running a positive grassroots campaign and finds it disappointing that this type of activity is taking place in our friendly, local communities.

Gallagher, my dear friend, has stated to me, "Political campaigning is at times very arduous but in all instances rewarding," as he travels about in District 2. He has often mentioned to me that everyone whom he has met has been receptive and encouraging. The fruits of hard work will pay off, he often reminds me.

Brian has been very encouraged by those whom he has spoken with in the law enforcement community, that they will soon identify those that are responsible for the removal of the signs.
Brian's optimistic attitude of working together can achieve many successes for all of the communities in this large district. — state Senate District 2.

P.S. Personally, I would be very careful for those taking down signs because as they use to say on an old television show "Smile, you are on Candid Camera," lots of homeowners these days now have surveillance cameras. Remember, those taking down anyone's sign should be aware that it is against the law. But if those individuals continue this illegal activity, you may want to smile, because you may be on camera.

Guy J. Giunta, Jr.
Sanbornton

 

  • Category: Letters
  • Hits: 430