Letters to the Editor, Jan. 11

New Year's Resolutions For Trump


Some modest but important 2018 New Year’s Resolutions for Mr. Trump:

Reveal your 2015/2016 taxes publicly in the press immediately.

Stop seeking and accepting public adulation from your cabinet members.

Listen more to Average Americans, not just to millionaires.

Give Mr. Pence some real work to do, like fix Puerto Rico.

Have dinner with your family each night at the White House like your predecessor did.

Hire some active or retired Jesuits to advise you about how to include ethics into your decisions.

Stop insulting others in your Tweets. Mrs. Clinton lost the election to you. That has been humiliating enough. No need to spew more vile at her.

Take care in what you tweet about the FBI – they may have to frog walk you out of the White House soon.

Plan and host a huge White House celebration for Martin Luther King Day this Jan. 15.

Act like a man. Own up to your past peccadilloes. Americans like to see a man of courage and integrity as their president.

Good luck with these goal for the New Year.

Tom Johnson

Harwich Port


Look Under The Hair, Too


On Jan. 12, President Trump will undergo a physical exam at the Walter Reed National Military Medical Center. I'm thinking, forget the physical; how about a psychiatric workup instead?

Mike Rice

South Wellfleet


Advertiser, Identify Yourself


As parishioners of Holy Redeemer Church, we support Father John Sullivan's efforts and guidance in leading our parish to bright and blessed new horizons as we enter 2018.  What a puzzlement that the person placing and paying for their request for performance review letters to Bishop da Cunha would choose The Chronicle rather than the church bulletin? Bold enough to place a full-page ad, please be bold enough to identify yourself!

Drs. Jean-Paul and Joan Aucoin


<Headline>Takes Issue With Church Ad


I take issue with The Chronicle allowing a full-page ad without attribution that requests parishioners contact the cardinal regarding the new pastor. It is obvious this ad was taken out by someone not happy with the pastor and is a personal attack. Although not a political ad, this should have been treated by The Chronicle as a political ad since it was a personal viewpoint and inferentially attacked someone. It is very reminiscent of the “dark money” of anonymous donors infecting our political system.

The ad’s author also reveals an ignorance or blind spot regarding parishioners. We know how to let our

concerns be known and don’t need to be advised to do so. In the future, The Chronicle should require the author’s name on ads that can be construed of a personal nature and the author should not be afraid to state their name as required in the letter to editor’s page.

Mark Kelleher

West Harwich


Meet Basic Needs First

In response to the ad placed in last week's Chronicle about Holy Redeemer's new pastor, I agree with many of our parishioners that his priorities and manner of addressing people that are expected to pay for his “list of material things” reflect poor judgment.
From his first sermon it was apparent to me that he is the personification of the “money changer on the Temple.” We remember how Christ reacted in that event. There has been a constant barrage of pressure each week to increase the level of collections to provide his listed items. Instead, there has become an obvious comparison to early Church practice of buying indulgences. This was a concept not viewed favorably in history.
The Christmastime tradition of The Giving Tree became a money possibility where your name could be displayed for a stated amount. I would argue that this is not in agreement with the concept of the “widow's mite.”
Until every member of this parish and every person on this town has their basic needs met, then new stained glass, matching candlesticks and other desirable appointments have nothing to do with our principles of faith. And when he uses the derogatory “Chatham Chuck” name in insulting stereotyping we do not feel that he advances the worth of his interests.
What should be a source of comfort and positive feeling has become an exercise in contention and fulfillment in attendance in church.

John Rossetti



Displeased With Church Ad


As full time residents of Chatham and active members of Holy Redeemer Parish, we would like to express our displeasure in The Chronicle for publishing a full page ad soliciting opinions on Father John Sullivan’s performance.
The fact that the person responsible for the ad did not have the courage to identify themselves is embarrassing and speaks volumes to its intent.
We feel that your readers in general and Father Sullivan in particular are owed an apology.

John and Leslie Gillis

Editor's note: The person who took out the ad in question has agree to include her name in subsequent ads.

Selectmen Avoid Skydiving Safety Issue

Federal Aviation Regulation 105-21 prohibits skydiving “over or into a congested area” of a town.  The recent FAA Safety Risk Assessment and the town’s expert’s report both avoided specifically addressing this key issue. The town had no problem challenging a federal agency on the Monomoy shoreline issue?  Shouldn’t protecting our airspace receive the same level of support?  Do the selectmen not see the risks to student pilots and other airmen of free-falling tandem skydivers in our airspace in the summer when Chatham is undeniably congested?  In conducting its latest Safety Assessment here at our airport, why would the FAA confer with a skydive operator who has repeatedly violated Federal Aviation regulations?  This company twice operated their plane with insufficient fuel to make a safe landing – once crashing into a home, and once into Lover’s Lake.  According to court records in a personal injury lawsuit, this company was discharged from Marstons Mills for unsafe practices like skydiving in cloudy, foggy conditions.  This operator’s input on safety clearly calls into question the FAA’s approach to assessing skydiving risks.  Any attempt at permitting this company to return to our airport is unconscionable. The safety of our airspace and community suggests the selectmen rethink their position, and address the “congested area” issue.  Protect our airspace, it’s just as important as our shoreline.

Tom Wilson


Editor's note: The writer is a member of the Chatham Airport Commission writing as a private citizen.

Skydiving Issues Are Not Going Away


The Chatham Board of Selectmen’s recent statements about Chatham’s skydiving blight are at best puzzling— statements that, among other things, urge putting the whole controversial issue behind, a standard PR avoidance technique.

Let’s talk turkey here: The primary complaint against skydivers’ dangerous thrill-seeking is that — by the FAA’s and town’s own admission — Chatham is too dense for such risky activity. It threatens the town’s safety and, therefore, by law cannot be allowed. However, when the FAA finally visited Chatham, it suspiciously avoided addressing that major prohibition, a central reason for denying skydiving!

The selectmen asserted that they had met with numerous agencies and have hired experts. But their top “expert” was a Washington aviation lobbyist! Huh? And how many times have the selectmen met congenially and collegially with the Citizens for a Safe Chatham Airport, their own constituents? The selectmen also claim they are open and transparent. Why then have they gone into so many secret sessions and repeatedly and doggedly fought to block the CSCA from allowing the facts to be heard in court—even to the puzzlement of one Superior Court judge?

Folks, this issue isn’t going away until a fair and open hearing is held (maybe not even then) — and until peace and safety are guaranteed for our town!

J. Denis Glover