(The following are comments on various issues of the day. They offer a fresh and objective view, although opinionated, of today's news stories.)

Donald Trump came out and commented on the 9th circuit court by implying it was biased, and that the judge that struck down his Amnesty Executive Order was an Obama Judge.  John Roberts immediately attacked Trump saying there are no Obama or any other “president” judges, just independent-minded judges. Trump then counter-punched Roberts as being naive.

Notice that Trump did not attack Roberts or the Supreme Court. He attacked biased judges that put the national security at risk. So why did Roberts get involved? It was he who initiated the attack. Trump simply countered. In my opinion it was Roberts’ attack that was unprecedented, not Trump’s. The Supreme Court rarely talks about current events or political statements. They stick to interpreting the Constitution.

Everyone with a pulse nowadays knows that there are liberal judges and conservative judges. That's what all those 5 to 4 votes were all about. We also have liberal economists and conservative economists. Milton Friedman once said that there is no such thing as a liberal or conservative science. Economics is simply a science, neither conservative nor liberal.

This is true, but all too often the interpretation can be liberal or conservative. I give you the media as as an excellent example of bias on both sides. I would like to see an impartial and objective judicial system. I would like to see unbiased economists. And I'd like to see an unbiased media, and unbiased teachers. But that's not the world we are living in and President Trump knows it. Evidently, Chief Justice Roberts does not.


The Crown Prince of Saudi Arabia is being accused of ordering the murder of a Saudi reporter that resided here in America. The CIA says they think he ordered the murder. Trump claims the report says he might have, but there is no evidence he did it for sure.

In this entire debate since we heard about this issue, not once have I heard anyone on either side say that a person is innocent until proven guilty. On the contrary, some of the top Republicans like Rand Paul and Lindsey Graham that pleaded for due process during the Kavanah hearings have declared MBS guilty, along with just about everyone else in this country.

But let's say he is. Is it the right decision to continue relations with Saudi Arabia? I say yes. The reason is, you cannot hold an entire nation responsible for one man’s act. This was not a national decision. Going to war is a national decision.

What if our CIA Director did something similar? Should we all be held responsible by the world? Should all Americans be punished? The alliance we have with the Saudis is much more important than declaring the entire nation guilty and then taking action against an entire people.There is no such thing as "collective guilt".

And let me remind everyone that we had an alliance with the Soviet Union during WWll, a communist nation which indulged in mass murder of its people. At the end of WWII, Roosevelt sat down with Churchill and Stalin and divided up Europe, delivering half of Europe into slavery.

To this day liberals revere Roosevelt as one of the greatest Presidents of all time.


Mark Twain famously said, "Everyone always talks about the weather, but no one ever does anything about it". Climate Change immediately comes to mind. Do we have climate change? Of course...we always have, and always will. We have gone from the Ice Age to the recent record highs of today. The most recent report of the kind of change we can expect in the next hundred years is amazing to me, since we cannot predict the weather with any accuracy for more than 10 days...let alone a hundred years. But assuming that the forecast is right on, what do we do about it?

I suggest we adapt. It makes no sense to have a national plan. The problems affecting our nation are regional not national. We have fires and earthquakes in the west, hurricanes and floods in the south, and tornadoes in the mid-west.

As a species, we have adapted to heat by inventing air conditioning. We adapted to cold by inventing heaters. We will need to adapt to natural disasters by changing our behavior, depending on where we live. Living on the coast, in forest areas, and other affected areas may be challenging in the future if present trends continue. But adapt we must because we aren't going to change the weather.

Man has survived due to his brains and his ability to adapt. Today we are headed toward the Moon, Mars, and Venus looking at them as possible new areas to colonize. It is 250 degrees below zero on the Moon and Mars, and hotter than hell on the surface of Venus. Yet we are moving fast to figure out how to live on those worlds.

Now that's dealing with climate change!


The onslaught of caravans that are at our border and others on the way is an attempted invasion of our country. But however you want to characterize it, it is among other things a violation and an insult to all the potential immigrants waiting to be legally processed.

These people that demand to enter the US regardless of our rules and laws are saying to those waiting in line patiently, "legal immigration be damned! That's for suckers". And of course once they are inside America, over 90% of them disappear into society, and the single mothers with children end up becoming wards of the state. In other words, they become a burden on taxpayers -- and the bill is huge.

America takes in more immigrants per year than any other country in the world. But it is by invitation. And there is a process we require to be accepted. What gets me about the illegals is, they don't give a damn about our process, our laws, or the other immigrants waiting in line. They want to live in America, and they want it now!

However, the real issue is not just immigration; it's border security. Eighty percent of Americans are in favor of border security. It is a national defense issue. It is also a public safety issue, and I'm not just referring to potential crime. If people from other countries enter this country illegally, they can potentially spread diseases that put all Americans at risk. There are new types of diseases such as the recent outbreak of a new form of polio that is spreading among children. As another example, new forms of flu and pneumonia are being reported that result in higher mortality rates. 

I think a simple agreement to trade DACA for border security is doable, and doable now.

No Administration or Congress has ever solved the immigration problem, although many have tried. Reality is now forcing a solution. I suggest this Congress get to work fast! And I also suggest Mexico get to work fast, because it's fast become their problem, more than ours.


And finally I want to talk about gun violence. Year after year we see mass shootings in schools, churches, workplaces, and wherever people congregate. Yet, nothing has been done to prevent them. I have a suggestion.

We are on the brink of the kind of technology that can end mass gun violence as we know it. We already have face recognition technology . We have the new "Ring" technology that allows us to monitor and communicate with trespassers from any location. We have laser technology that is so precise we use it for intricate medical procedures. And we have made huge strides in robotics.

Why can't we bring all these known technologies together and come up with a device that would spot an intruder, spot a gun, and either disarm or kill anyone that fires the first bullet in an instant?

Given artificial intelligence today, plus robotics, plus laser technology and all the other tools at our disposal, it doesn't seem like a stretch to me that a robot or device installed on a wall could be our first responder.

If this were possible, an attempted mass shooting would be met with certain failure, thus eliminating mass shooting in public places. 

So get to work America. Produce a new high tech defensive weapon!

Paul Nathan