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contain the author's name, hometown (state as well, if not in New Hampshire) and phone number, but the number will not be published.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


Cruz's immigration plan is better & he will make a better president

To The Daily Sun,
Many of Bernadette Loesch's "facts" are only true in her imagination. Hopefully, Loesch doesn't intentionally try to deceive readers (although one has to wonder since she doesn't provide links to her references). Probably she just repeats, in her March 25 letter, without verifying, false claims from sources like moveon.org or The Huffington Post — which I believe do try to deceive people.
Reviewing the references that Loesch describes reveals clear media bias, it shows the media trying to get Donald Trump to say things that they have condemned and/or ridiculed; they guide interviews away from a complete picture of his plans, and they report what they wanted to hear as opposed to what Trump actually said.
The focus of Trump interviews is to get Trump to say that he will round up and deport 11 million illegal aliens, which interviewers falsely assert is too difficult, costly, and unfair. Some reporters even falsely claim he says it. Interviewers ignore the other aspects of Trump's immigration plan in order to try to discredit him based on their misrepresentations.
Loesch provides some explicit and some ambiguous references but her claims are not substantiated in any that I could find. Feel free to do your own investigation; for the explicit references see: Meet the Press (http://goo.gl/XVYkqE), Dana Bash interview (http://goo.gl/99b6Jw), Bloomberg interview (https://goo.gl/XBGIDZ), and Mika Brzezinski (http://goo.gl/tDmyJ4).
Interestingly, people might also wish to view Mika Brzezinski's challenge to her panel to come up with a better plan than Trump's for Muslim immigration; they can't (https://goo.gl/gwvcNi).
Loesch refers to Trump's Immigration Plan (see: https://goo.gl/YG2ZUx), but she apparently hasn't read or doesn't understand it. Trump's plan doesn't specify rounding up and deporting 11 million illegal aliens, it makes three main points and then elaborates on them: "A nation without a border is not a nation", "A nation without laws is not a nation" and "A nation that does not serve its own people is not a nation".
What is it about our open Southern border that progressives love so much? Is it the illegal drugs that kill 40,000-50,000 Americans annually? Is it the potential terrorists coming illegally from hostile countries? Is it the sexual molestation of 60-70 percent of the female illegal border crossers as reported by the UN and/or the "picturesque" rape trees? Is it the hundreds of murders and tens of thousands of rapes and other crimes committed annually by illegal aliens? Is it the flooding of our hospitals with sick, non-paying, non-English speaking illegals that causes long delays for treatment and financial losses causing emergency room closings? Is the flooding of our schools with under-educated non-English speaking illegals who deprive American children of proper educational opportunities? Is it the many billions of dollars we spend dealing with illegal aliens and the problems they cause? Is it the taking of income and opportunities from American workers? Is it the increased cost of living for American households, many of which struggle to make ends meet, to pay subsidies for illegal aliens, welfare for displaced American workers, and the other costs that illegal aliens create?
Unless one wants more Americans to be poor; to lose jobs, opportunities, and hope; to be crime and terrorist attack victims; and to feel oppressed by their government; it's hard to imagine why everyone wouldn't want our borders secured and illegal immigration ended.
Trump's immigration plan, similar to other Republican candidate plans and essentially what I described in my March 17 letter, says stop the inflow of illegals, stop visa overstays, remove the incentives (welfare, jobs, sanctuary cities, birthright citizenship, and criminal opportunities) for illegals to come and stay here so they return home on their own, and then deport the comparatively few remaining illegals starting with criminal illegal aliens.
Since President Obama has released (not deported) at least 76,000 criminal illegal aliens since 2013 to prey on American citizens, the first job is to find and deport these people and other criminal illegal aliens captured by law enforcement.
While Trump's immigration plan is good, he has already been modifying his initial position, apparently to curry favor with the media.
Ted Cruz's immigration plan is better (see: http://www.tedcruz.org/), and Cruz would make a much better president. Ted Cruz has demonstrated his commitment to delivering on his campaign promises; to promote freedom, opportunity, and Constitutional government. Ted Cruz would be a president working for the American people, not the special interests and not the corrupt and despised Washington establishment.
Whether the Republican presidential front runner or nominee is Trump, Cruz, or someone else, we can expect leftists like Loesch to make false charges against him or her.
Don Ewing

  • Category: Letters
  • Hits: 383

Senators have moral responsibility to stop Obama from appoointment

To The Daily Sun,

It seems interesting that so many liberal writers who would have President Obama appoint a jurist to the Supreme Court, who would dismantle our Constitution, are waxing with indignation in pretense of loving our Constitution, over Congress not allowing this president to chose Antonin Scalia's replacement.
The court before Scalia's passing was equally divided with four liberal jurists, four conservatives, and a libertarian as the swing vote. An appointment by president Obama to replace Scalia could render our Constitution obsolete. As those who hold to the concept of a living Constitution only thinly veil that they want to be our deciders and the Constitution be damned. Our representatives have a constitutional as well as moral responsibility to see that Obama does not make the replacement.

John Demakowski

  • Category: Letters
  • Hits: 523