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contain the author's name, hometown (state as well, if not in New Hampshire) and phone number, but the number will not be published.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


Just because you lost doesn’t mean free speech is only for liberals

To The Daily Sun,

Well, my letter written two weeks ago for last week didn’t see print until this week so I’m trying to catch up here.

In regard to Robert T. Joseph Jr.'s letter last week telling us that the Second Amendment, I think his words were "So the Second Amendment does not in fact promote unlimited use to carry arms." While true, his statement is meaningless because the amendment neither promotes nor limits. All it says is that the government may not infringe the right of the people to keep and bear arms, period. This was confirmed by our Supreme Court as an individual right, period. Making straw man arguments like Mr. Joseph's is meaningless. If he wants to change this it must be by constitutional amendment, period.

I just don't know why liberals have such a hard time understanding this fact.

Also last week, Alan Vervaeke opined on the Harvey Weinstein scandal, finally coming to the conclusion that it's not Harvey's fault, it's society's fault. If you have a headache trying to comprehend that thinking, join the club. No Alan, It was all Harvey. Though the years of cover ups in Hollywood and Washington speak volumes.

I'm jumping ahead to this week for a moment as Alan, in his column, rightly states that laws do not prevent crimes. Then jumps on the pro-gun registration idea. We should note that registration would not prevent crimes either, though. What it does, always, is lead to government seizure of privately owned firearms. So, no, Alan. And dogs and cars are not protected under the Constitution.

Back to last week. Robert Miller dislikes Bob Meade's defense of Trump's criticizing NFL players disrespecting the National Anthem. Yea, well freedom of speech also applies to Trump. Funny thing is Mr. Miller supports the Democratic Party, which champions free speech for the likes of Black Lives Matter, which advocate killing cops, Anarchists who riot, loot, burn, shout down free speech of others, and violently assault those who disagree with them. I might also mention the party that politicized the IRS, Justice Dept, FBI and used illegal activities, cover ups and lies then corrupted the voting process. Might I also mention the shooting of a Republican congressman by another outraged liberal Democrat and the more recent attack of Rand Paul while mowing his lawn. So we're supposed to take his critique of Bob Meade seriously? Another no! Just because your side lost the election doesn't mean free speech is only for liberals, like some consolation prize.

Steve Earle 


(Editor's note: Given the first sentence of the above letter, this seems a good time to repeart The Daily Sun's relatively new policy that it will publish only letter per calendar week per letter writer. If writers send in more than one letter in a given week, the second, third, etc. will be held for publication in subsequent weeks.)

  • Written by Edward Engler
  • Category: Letters
  • Hits: 116

Why is Sanbornton’s town budget surplus so large?

To The Daily Sun,

Once again this year, some good Sanbornton budget news, but it again raises some questions about our budgeting process. Why all that surplus? Perhaps someone at the town office can give a brief presentation about the possible uses of the fund balance and why such a large balance each year.
Last year the 2015-16 budget ended with an unassigned fund balance (which I like to call a budget surplus) of $1,235,428 and this year the 2016-17 budget with an unassigned fund balance of $1,662,486. It seems that each year the fund balance seems to grow bigger and bigger.
What I liked about this situation is that for both budget years the selectmen were able to use some of the unassigned funds, $60,000 the first year and now $93,000 for the second year to reduce or maintain the current tax rate going forward.
So the question again is: Why do we find ourselves with such large unassigned fund balances to begin with? Is there something missing from our budgeting process? Perhaps our selectmen should look at the complete budgeting process that they go through each year and make some changes if necessary in order to have a balanced budget in the years to come. Perhaps the earlier involvement of the Budget Committee would help.
Just a suggestion.
Bill Whalen


  • Written by Mike Mortensen
  • Category: Letters
  • Hits: 483