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contain the author's name, hometown (state as well, if not in New Hampshire) and phone number, but the number will not be published.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


Democrats have a shallow farm team for the coming years

To The Daily Sun,

We are living in the most interesting of times where few things are certain. There is one. Like it or lump it, Republicans at the moment are running much of politics in America. This will change, how quickly, no one knows. A second certainty. The Democratic Party is anemic with young blood.

The greatest destruction to the Democrats during the Obama decade has been the loss of upcoming stars at the state and local level. That is the only minor league training ground. It takes many years to cultivate young talent and bring it to the top with name recognition. The Democratic Party lost 50 percent of their political footholds in local and state government in the decade between 2006 and 2016, one of the most rapid losses of power ever witnessed in politics.

Obama may have been personally popular but the Democrats message was and still is most unpopular. Tax and spend in a country where its children are drowning in $20 trillion of record debt is a very brain-dead theme. Every "subsidy" and every "free" is a new living standard death wish for middle class worker who pays for most of it.

The best place to grow leaders and presidents is in governors mansions. The Democrats now hold just 15 governorships. The Republicans 34. Those statistics are the reverse of 10 years ago. It is a similar lopsided story for state legislatures where the real nitty-gritty of politics in the country takes place. To understand it more clearly. Look no further than last year's run for the presidency. The Republicans had 20 hard-charging elephants competing. The Democrats had just three donkeys. The first, Bernie Sanders, will be 79 in 2020. The second, Hillary Clinton. She has said publicly, and emphatically she will not run again for public office. She's no spring chicken herself. She turns 70 in a month, while I haven't seen Martin O'Malley's name in the paper for more than a year. Surely, we can’t forget the most recognized demon diva of all time Nancy Pelosi. Should she decide to run in 2020, she would be 80. When someone says, "The Democrats are an old party." It is a truth, literally.

No party keeps its footholds forever. It will be no different for Republicans. Their current power will ebb. But It is more than clear the Democrats have a darn shallow farm team of young, recognized talent that can instantly transition to take the top jobs. Could the Republicans govern so poorly that voters are willing to put Democrats in. That is surely possible.

Trump's election illustrates this as perfectly as anything could. When people lead as ineffectively as Obama anything can and will happen. There is a great deal of difference between personal popularity and having the ability and skill to lead a nation from the front, not from the rear as Obama did.

Trump is as unpopular as Obama was popular. That doesn’t mean Trump can't get the job done far better. The economy is already glowing much brighter while consumer confidence is exploding no matter the collective, 24/7 media assault to kill trump with the singular focus not to make the country better and life better for you, but simply to give power back to Democrats after Obama turned in the poorest economic record of any president since World War II ended in the mid-1940s. Why in hell would any one in their right mind want to give the economy back to the party that produced that level of failure?

Tony Boutin


  • Written by Mike Mortensen
  • Category: Letters
  • Hits: 358

Who gets to decide if another person or fetus deserves life?

To The Daily Sun,

There has been some back and forth on the subject of abortion on these pages over the past few days. I am moved to put in my two cents.

The first thing I want to say is that people on the pro-choice side characterize those on the pro-life side as lacking compassion and understanding and having no regard for what women go through.
I don't see it that way. I think the pro-choicers are the ones lacking compassion and understanding. When I was a teenager in the late '60s and early '70s, I was all gung ho for the push for a more liberal and humanitarian society that was taking off then. It was the abortion issue that drove me away. The left said they cared about the underdog; the forgotten, the powerless, the disenfranchized. I was all in. Then I learned that part of this movement encompassed the idea of "abortion on demand." It didn't make sense to me. It seemed to go against everything they said they believed. It was unjust. The mother, unless she was raped, had a choice in getting pregnant. But the soon-to-be murdered baby, had no choice. How was that fair? They were trying to pose the woman as the one without power who needed our support, but clearly it was the baby who was powerless, not the woman.

One of the main arguments the pro-choicers made then was that since the fetus couldn't live outside the womb, it was a "parasite." But who gets to decide that if another person at a certain stage of life doesn't have the same capabilities they do, they can decree the other life has less value? Wasn't the whole "movement," as they called it then, about validating the person on the outside; the one with differences, the one in the minority, the one with less power? Who is more powerless than a fetus? And besides, who among us isn't a "parasite?" How long would any of us last if there was no more food or water or air? We are all dependent creatures. There is an almost Nazi-like coldness in this push to depersonalize the fetus in order to justify killing it.

Yesterday, a letter writer critized a previous letter writer who had written that the fetus has a desire to live, just as all living things do, even a spider that runs away at your approach because it wants to live. The writer questioned this and said that unless the fetus can tell us in sign language through an ultrasound that it wants to live, she wasn't buying it. But the desire to live is inherent in all living creatures. It's part of the life force. So it's self-evident that the fetus wants to live. To mock the fetus in a jesting way, demanding it express itself when we know it can't, reminded me of the stories I used to hear of the cruelty directed at American slaves on the auction block. Owners would expect them to smile and make a good presentation to enhance their saleability. To not only rip the heart and life out of a human being, but expect them to put on a show at that moment; to make light of their horror in order to accomodate the depraved desires of their tormentor, is evil beyond comprehension. In my soul, I felt her mockery of the helpless, hunted fetus to be on this level.

I hope John Demakowski keeps writing because I enjoy his letters. The other writer called him narrow minded and said he should stop writing because she doesn't agree with him. How ridiculous is that? I hope he keeps writing and I hope he keeps referencing the Bible, our instruction book for living. The other writer said he quotes the Good Book, but doesn't live it. Really? How does she know that?

I'll sum up with a little Bible quote of my own. When questioned by His disciples about what the signs of the end times would be, Our Lord said, 'Because iniquity shall abound, the love of many will wax cold." Matt 24:12
I think love waxes cold in the face of iniquity because you have to harden your heart to rationalize doing what you know is wrong. The Lord also said that God's law hangs on 2 commandments; to love God and love your neighbor. Matt 22: 37-40. So iniquity, by defintion, according to Jesus, is the negation of love. I guess there are people in this world who would have to be trapped in the womb themselves, scrambling to evade the suction machine before they could understand that abortion is not love.

Hillarie Goldstein


  • Written by Mike Mortensen
  • Category: Letters
  • Hits: 363