Copyright nhgazette
To the editors: This past weekend I stood on the grass edge of a sidewalk for an hour and a half, holding a “no kings” sign, and I watched as hundreds (perhaps thousands) of cars and trucks drove past. Literally several hundreds of drivers and passengers signaled their reaction to the protest, by their thumbs-up expressions of support. By my careful count, only seven drivers expressed their distaste for the protest with either a thumbs-down or middle-finger-raised gesture. If this is even only somewhat indicative of the will of the people, then the 2026 midterm elections bode well for the Democratic party. But as the Democratic party stands now, it does not appear to be united or even to have positions on what has already happened in the past nine months—what they need is a Project 2027 manifesto around which to unite. Trumps’s second term began with clear objectives that were created and enshrined in a document in advance of winning the election. His administration has been enacting polices and practices with ruthless speed that make those objectives a reality because they were organized, ready to take over the government and act on their Project 2025 priorities. The Dems need to learn from this. Dems need to unite around a Project 2027 manifesto that clearly lays out the actions, policies, and actual legislation that they will introduce if they regain control of Congress. IF we are allowed to vote in Federal elections in 2026, and IF enough Representatives and Senators are elected to take control of Congress, then they need to be ready to introduce and act on legislation drafted in advance that 1) rescinds egregious executive orders from the current administration, 2) eliminates the loopholes that the current administration has used to enact their agenda, and most important of all, 3) irrevocably limits campaign funding that absolutely prevents the “purchasing of legislative seats” in any legislative body; no PACs, no “Dark Money,” no individual contributions beyond a low set limit. Legislate to overturn “Citizens United.” Corporations are NOT PEOPLE and therefore have NO free speech rights! Dems should learn from the current administration: unify around a Project 2027 manifesto, and be ready to enact it, beginning on the day they are sworn in. Anything less is a formula for failure that keeps us on the path to destroy Democracy and take away the rest of our freedoms. Dover, N.H. You almost lost us at “Dems need to unite… .” Our editorial brain, such as it is, was momentarily paralyzed by the prospect of having to herd cats. We jump started it by recalling what Will Rogers said: “I am not a member of any organized political party. I am a Democrat.” Accordingly, we reconsidered. You have issued a call for action, and, in our way, we support it. Here’s why: Return with us now to those thrilling days of the second Reagan administration. It’s January, 1986, and the Department of Energy [DOE] has just announced that south-western New Hampshire has a one-in-26 chance of being selected as the Eastern U.S. dump site for high-level nuclear waste from commercial nuclear power plants. Among those living at Ground Zero at the time, the editor, having been at Altamont for the infamous Stones concert, and in Saigon during the Tet Offensive, was perhaps the least surprised by this unexpected and unpleasant turn of events. The announcement galvanized everyone in a forty-mile radius. Even supporters of the Seabrook power plant found ways to oppose having its radioactive garbage under their homes. Some argued that our opposition should be polite, dignified, and respectful. Others proposed creative measures that were anything but. True to form, the editor published a short-lived magazine called The New Hampshire Home Defender. Its editorial position supported the full spectrum of non-felonious resistance. After threatening a years-long selection process, in which scientific facts would be the sole criteria, and local public sentiment would count for naught, the DOE caved after six months of resistance that ranged from official politesse to raucus rallies and a convoy to the state capitol. The right’s raw material—aside from money—is people who are susceptible to the lure of authoritarianism. Those on the left, for the most part, are not. They’re going to do their own thing, whatever that might be. Anyone acting non-feloniously against authoritarianism is on our side. Thin-Skinned Republicans Dear Editor: In a recent letter in Seacoastonline, the author was very critical of a letter that he claimed painted “today’s Republican Party with a very broad brush, and in doing so misses what continues to inspire many young people to get involved with the Republican party and organizations like TP USA. College Republicans are motivated by ideas of individual liberty, limited government, strong national defense, traditional values such as marriage and raising families and economic opportunity.” While I agree that most groups are not monoliths that represent a single ideology, today’s Republican party seems to be controlled by the ideology and policies of Donald Trump and his followers. There is little room, if any, for dissent or criticism of Trump’s policies and actions. Unfortunately, Trump’s policies of retribution, hate, anger, abuse of power and unconstitutional acts seem to be admired by many young Republicans. Today, Politico reported on 2,900 pages of messages exchanged on the messaging app Telegram between leaders of pro-Trump Young Republican groups in New York, Kansas, Arizona and Vermont. In the messages, the leaders used racist themes and epithets freely and cheered slavery, rape, gas chambers, and torturing their opponents. They referred to black people as monkeys and “the watermelon people.” And the “n” word appeared in the message thread more than 251 times. They also expressed admiration for Adolf Hitler. I hope that these messages from a fairly broad spectrum of young Republicans is not “what continues to inspire many young people to get involved with the Republican party.” Hopefully, the author will speak out as forcefully against these young Republicans as he did against Democrats. Rich DiPentima Portsmouth, N.H. Don’t be holding your breath waiting for Republicans to scold the racists and nazis in their party, you’ll turn blue in the face. Was it Dayan? Does it Matter? To the Editor: I’m sorry this is so late, but I wanted to defend Moshe Dayan against the Gazette’s charge that he ordered the attack on the [USS] Liberty. According to Jay Cristol’s book The Liberty Incident, on the day of the attack, Dayan was driving from Jerusalem to Hebron in a car that didn’t have a radio (Hebron had no telephones at the time). A photo of the party when they were near Hebron shows (by the men’s wristwatches) that it was seventeen minutes before the attack on the Liberty. While Dayan could conceivably have given an order for the attack before leaving Jerusalem; it’s unlikely—I think very unlikely—that there would have been so much delay between the order and the attack. My bet is that the order came from a regional commander. On another matter; I’d ask W.D. Earhart to clarify what he means when he says Israel is “illegal” and “has no right to exist.” What criteria does a state have to meet to be legal, and would a Palestinian state meet the criteria better than a Jewish state? If a requirement is that the state respect human rights, neither Israel or Palestine would qualify. People who deny Israel’s right to exist are usually advocating the destruction of the state and the expulsion or punishment of the state’s Jewish population, which Noam Chomsky said “would be intolerable to civilized opinion.” I hope Prof. Earhart has something else in mind. Aaron Carine Dover, N.H. Late indeed. You seem to be referring to comments we made back in June of 2023. You’ve got us thinking about establishing a statute of limitations here. Our opinion, then and now, based on a fair amount of reading at the USS Liberty Document Archive, online at www.usslibertydocuments.info, is that Moshe Dayan probably ordered the attack. It was clearly intended to put the Liberty on the bottom. Exactly where was Dayan at the time? We doubt it matters. The attack was no spur-of-the-moment thing. Is it so hard to imagine that an alibi might have been included in the planning? Perhaps Dayan presented his Israeli higher-ups with a fait almost-accompli. Perhaps they approved the operation beforehand. Either way, it would have made no difference to the sailors aboard Liberty. Whoever holds the moral responsibility for the attack, the blame for the cover-up falls on President Johnson and his admirals. Pardon us if we don’t give much weight to Cristol’s apologia. His book was published by the Naval Institute Press, and it was obviously intended to buttress the official line—which was clearly intended to whitewash the whole mess. As for other matter you raise, we’ll let Mr. Ehrhart speak for himself if he cares to. On his behalf, though, we’ll note that you spelled his name wrong. Reclaiming Armistice Day To the Editor: November 11, 2025, will mark the 107th anniversary of the signing of the World War I armistice that ceased hostilities on the Western Front, which took effect on the “eleventh hour of the eleventh day of the eleventh month” of 1918. With this ceasefire, nations still recovering from the horrible nightmare of WWI, one of the deadliest conflicts in human history, collectively embraced peace as a universal principle and called for an end to all wars. That appalling event led to Armistice Day which was initially designated as “a day to be dedicated to the cause of world peace and to be thereafter celebrated.” But in 1954 during the Cold War, the U.S. Congress passed a bill that changed “Armistice Day” to Veterans Day. Stripped of its original intention, November 11th became a day identified with war instead of peace—a day for remembering yet more war dead, honoring all veterans, and glorifying militarism. Veterans for Peace believes that a day that celebrates peace, not war, is the best way to honor the sacrifices of those who have served in war. We know the destruction and sorrow that war has caused and continues to cause, and we understand its senseless futility. In reclaiming November 11th as Armistice Day, Veterans for Peace calls for an end to armed conflict and asks that as Americans, we dedicate ourselves to the hard work of building real and lasting peace globally. Will Thomas N.H. Veterans for Peace Auburn, N.H. Thank you for this clear, concise, historically-informed, and, we believe, indisputable argument in favor of reclaiming November 11th as “Armistice Day.” Trump’s Latest Low Dear Editor: In what is a new low, even for Donald Trump, Mr. Trump in a late Saturday post, shared a bizarre AI-generated video of himself wearing a crown and piloting a fighter jet with “King Trump” written on it. In the clip Trump then dropped a whopping load of what appeared to be feces on No Kings protesters down below in the streets of Times Square in New York City. In another AI-generated post, Trump, wearing a crown and robe, pulls out a sword as the words “hail to the king” play in the background. A slew of his left-wing political foes, including former Democratic House Speaker Nancy Pelosi then bow to him. The video was shared in a BlueSky post by Vice President JD Vance Saturday. Both Trump and Vance display a level of disgraceful behavior so lacking in any class, maturity, intellect, dignity, decorum, or basic decency, it is impossible to imagine that they are the leaders of our nation. Their behavior reflects that of a spoiled, immature, petulant adolescent who was just reprimanded by an adult for their bad behavior. In doing so, they have not only embarrassed America and the American people in the eyes of the world, they have also desecrated the institution of the offices of President and Vice President. Shame on Trump and Vance and those who find this level of depravity entertaining and funny. It is a true reflection of their souls. Rich DiPentima Portsmouth, N.H. Thanks for noting this—we didn’t want to go near it. Look at the bright side, though: now we know what some people have for brains. America Last To the Editor: Argentina has defaulted on its loans multiple times since 2000, yet Donald Trump is going to give it a $20 billion loan because he wants to prop up its president. This is a president that has cut billions in funds for school lunch programs, food pantries and Medicaid. He cut billions in foreign aid that fed the starving and funded health programs in poor countries. He has only asked for $10 billion to help our farmers after China stopped buying our soybeans and switched to beans from Argentina and Brazil. Trump is flushing $20 billion of taxpayers’ money down the toilet to prop up a foreign government that will not pay back the loan. This is waste and abuse by a fraudulent president. So much for America First. Walter Hamilton Portsmouth N.H. You have to wonder just how much misery this bum can foist on his own followers before they wise up. Will Trump Get a Hat Trick? Dear Editor, His good health and the “Trump 2028” hats are signs the President does not plan to leave the White House in 2028. Also, he is building a ballroom much bigger than the one in Mar-a-Lago that will not be finished until near the end of his term, if then. Why do this, if he won’t get to use it? In addition, he has said his “government shutdown” program closings will be permanent. They are “never going to open again.” How can he guarantee this unless he plans to stay in office for a lifetime and then hand over power to a chosen successor, like kings do? Speaking of Mar-a-Lago, did you know that the election law of the world’s greatest democracy before America, ancient Rome, required candidates for high public office to provide security for good behavior during their terms? They had to turn over deeds to important property, which could not be redeemed until after leaving office on good terms. Would things be different in America today if President Trump had been required to turn over ownership of major properties to the safe-keeping of the people? Kimball Shinkoskey Woods Cross, Utah “Good health”? That corpulent cretin looks like a walking myocardial infarction to us. Unfortunately, the rest of your letter rings true. Trump’s pardoned felonious pal Steve Bannon has been talking up a third term lately. One hopes that the public at large has gotten over the phase of thinking “Oh, they’d never dare… .” Will We Survive? Dear Editor: The term “equal justice under law” is the main principle of the United States judicial system. Engraved above the entrance of the Supreme Court building, it means that every person in the United States is entitled to receive equal and fair treatment from the law. These words express the ultimate responsibility of the Supreme Court, which, as the nation’s highest tribunal, hears cases and controversies arising under our Constitution of laws. As the final reviewer and judge, the Court is charged with ensuring all Americans received equal justice under law, thereby functioning as guardian and interpreter of the Constitution. Can the Roberts Court be relied upon to fulfill the immense responsibility of protecting and guarding the American people? I think not. In his swearing-in ceremony in 2005, Chief Justice John Roberts (nominated by George W. Bush) stated: “Every generation in its turn must accept the responsibility of supporting and defending the Constitution, and bearing true faith and allegiance to it. That is the oath I just took.” Unfortunately, time and space negates a complete listing of the Roberts Court’s most egregious decisions. One stands out. Despite the Constitution’s clarity, the unambiguous intent of the framers, over two centuries of judicial precedent and the combined understanding of every other American president, the Roberts Court seems determined to place Trump beyond the reach of criminal law. Trump takes that to mean (and has stated): “I have the right to do whatever I want as president. In addition to weakening Congress, the Roberts Court knowingly laid the groundwork for an authoritarian presidency. By creating a doctrine of “presidential immunity” out of thin air, presidents can commit a wide range of crimes without fear of prosecution. The dangers inherent in this attack on the core of our judicial system cannot be overstated. Members of Congress or federal judges can be prosecuted for taking bribes. Trump, by the same token, can issue pardons in exchange for $1 million and still fall within the immunity ruling’s boundary. Justice Sonia Sotomayor made clear in her dissent that, in accord with the ruling’s own conditions, a president could lawfully order SEAL Team Six to assassinate his political rivals and retain immunity. In true Trump fashion, Roberts replied that his colleague was “fear mongering on the basis of extreme hypertheticals.” Beyond the scolding; however, the Chief Justice noticeably neglected to dispute Justice Sotomayor’s razor-sharp and accurate interpretation. Whatever our political leanings, Americans must (at all costs) acknowledge that truth exists and facts matter. The Roberts Court’s rulings are not (as sometimes stated) mere “safeguards against overenthusiastic prosecutors.” They are blank checks for corruption and abuses of power, the dominant parentheses of Trump’s lifetime of lawlessness, and his legacy. Sound thinking demands that Americans concede we no longer possess a functioning representative form of democratic government. Additionally, we should at least consider whether or not our rules of law, our Constitution, even the Republic itself, will survive Trump, this Republican Party, and the Roberts Court. David L. Snell Franklin, N.C. Reading your letter, we came to a realization: this country needs an anti-Mount Rushmore—a sort of grand, outdoor, Post Office Bulletin Board for mugshots of the people most responsible for wrecking this country. If we had such a thing, Roberts’ bland mug would certainly belong … Wait a minute—we’ve already got one! Fifteen miles east of Atlanta, at Stone Mountain, Georgia, a great, grey rock rises 850 feet above the surrounding terrain. It currently bears carved likenesses of Jefferson Davis, Robert E. Lee, and Stonewall Jackson. Let’s just add Roberts to it. A Call to Reform Capitalism To the editor; In a previous letter, I noted that although modern Capitalism has generated great wealth, it has concentrated that wealth within a global elite (the top one percent owns more wealth than the bottom 95 percent). Moreover, instead of providing economic mobility, the system has enabled a rigid class structure based on wealth that makes it extremely difficult for the working and lower classes to rise to higher income levels. How did an economic system, originally designed to provide wide-based prosperity based on freedom of choice and property ownership as a natural right become an engine for inequality and restricted social mobility? Modern Capitalism is an ideology derived from the ideas of Enlightenment philosophers such as Smith, Ricardo and J.S. Mill who wrote in the late 18th and early 19th centuries. Their ideas formed what became known as classical economic theory. They believed in the right of individuals to make economic decisions in their own self-interest within free markets. The right of individuals to own and barter property was a fundamental corollary to the idea of a free market. Without clearly defined property ownership, it is impossible to safely sell or trade an asset. Moreover, private property was considered an important driver of economic growth when used as capital to produce goods or services in a business or as collateral for investment in a profit-making enterprise. Profits were considered the exclusive right of the property owners, i.e. holders of capital. All other stakeholders in the business, including labor, had no claim on the profits that capital generated. These ideas along with the belief that government should not intervene in free markets became the foundational doctrine of Capitalism. The model was appropriate for expanding economic opportunity in an 18th century economy comprised of farmers, craftsmen, and small businesses. But by the end of the 19th century, industrial corporations had grown large, generating huge profits that accrued entirely to capitalist owners of the Gilded Age. Labor had become a commodity, a cost that must be minimized to maximize profit. Industrialists prospered while the working class suffered. Today, we live in a second Gilded Age characterized by huge multinational corporations as well as financial institutions and tech firms with a global scope. Neoliberalism has reinforced the Capitalist model and added the maxim that the sole responsibility of corporate executives is to maximize return to shareholders. The result has been the loss of millions of manufacturing jobs in the industrialized West to globalization and factory automation while the owners of capital reaped the rewards of global operations. Ideologies have consequences. They are a method for social programming, influencing the behavior and beliefs of their followers. Capitalism’s sole focus on the property rights of capital has privileged shareholders while ignoring social costs imposed by corporate activities that damage the rights of not only labor but also individuals and communities beyond the corporate boundary. An obvious example is the environmental damage and contribution to global warming caused by global scale manufacturing. Capitalism, originally conceived to promote economic liberty and private property ownership, has morphed into a tool for creating and sustaining the wealth of a class of privileged elites, the owners of capital. While elites luxuriate, a subordinated working class increasingly finds that they cannot afford the cost of housing, healthcare or higher education. A new economic ideology is necessary, based on ensuring the welfare of all stakeholders in the economic system rather than catering to an elite plutocracy. Here are a few suggestions. Employees should be given a share of corporate governance through membership on Boards of Directors. They add value to a company’s product and should have a say in how that value is distributed. The rights of shareholders should not take precedence over the rights of consumers. Anti-trust laws need to be enforced and strengthened to preserve transparency as well as to avoid price gouging. Healthcare providers and utilities should be operated in the public interest with community participation, and, finally, billionaires should be taxed at the level that reflects their obligation to a society that has provided them with so much opportunity. The Founding Fathers created a democracy. It’s about time that we acted like they meant it. Robert D. Russell, Ph.D. Harrisburg, Pa. Thanks for laying this out in a clear and dispassionate manner. We envy your ability not to foam at the mouth. Portsmouth Needs a New City Council To the Editor: It is a healthy thing for our democracy to regularly elect new candidates so that new ideas and perspectives are considered. Even though I know many of the councilors, and they are good people, I will not be voting for most incumbents. My primary disagreement with most has to do with unsustainable development and their treatment of Jim Hewitt. In my opinion, this council has been the most pro-development in recent city history. Using the excuse of affordable housing, they continue to support more unaffordable residential housing allowing one variance after another of our ordinances. A developer (our McIntire selected developer) has sued the city and received a payment of $2 million for unspecified expenses, but quickly sued Portsmouth again. This time he received rezoning of property that he wished to develop in exchange for dropping his lawsuit. We need councilors who put residents ahead of developers. That is why I’ll be voting for Rick Becksted, Peter Whelan and Petra Huda, along with some of the new candidates. I cannot vote for any currently serving councilor who voted to accuse Mr. Hewitt (a volunteer on the Planning Board) of “malfeasance,” and supported a trial in which city officials served as prosecutor, judge, and jury, forcing Mr. Hewitt to hire his own defense lawyer. That was an embarrassment. Even though the final 8-1 vote found Mr. Hewitt not guilty of all charges, the city refuses to reimburse his legal costs. Only Andrew Bagley, JoAnna Kelly and Josh Denton voted not to have such a trial, and I intend to vote for them. Other candidates I’ll be endorsing are for School Board: Nancy Clayburgh, Steven Adler, G. Becksted Muske, Esther Kennedy, and for Police Commission: Buzz Scherr and Jay Lieberman. Peter Somssich Former State Representative Portsmouth, N.H. Thank you for this thoughtful assessment of the choices we face. Watching Democracy Crumble Dear Editor: In an interview on MSNBC Senator Chris Murphy (D-Conn.) was asked about his feelings about the demolition of the East Wing of the White House. His response is worth repeating: “There’s a lot of history that has taken place in the East Wing, and it was just destroyed without any conversation in the American public, without any consent of Congress. It was absolutely illegal. That visual is powerful because you are essentially watching the destruction of the rule of law happen as those walls come down. It is just a symbol about how cavalier he is, about every single day acting in new and illegal ways. “That’s the story with the killings in the Caribbean, as well. The president just doesn’t believe that any law applies to him, that he can destroy federal property, that he can steal from American citizens, that he can kill with impunity, that he can throw anyone in jail. “We are not living in a functional democracy any longer. It’s not too late to save it, but it is just important to acknowledge that we aren’t on the precipice of losing our democracy. We are losing it every single day. We are not a functional nation with a rule of law any longer, and those toppled walls in the East Wing are a pretty stark reminder of that.” As long as the Republican controlled Congress and the six right-wing Supreme Court members continue to ignore or even support Trump’s actions, he will continue to ramp up his destruction of our Republic. Time is running out. Rich DiPentima Portsmouth, N.H. In addition to the wholesale demolition of American history, this latest offense provides Trump with yet another opportunity for grift: “Hey, Mr. Big Bucks Federal Contractor, how about making a fat donation to Mar-a-Lago North?”
