So is today's Supreme Court ruling a victory for Obama? I think it is more of a blessing in disguise for Romney. As I wrote before, whichever side loses in this ruling will be galvanized for the November election. Romney already has seen contributions to his campaign jumped today. He now can complain about Obama care for the rest of the campaign whereas if the law was struck down it will not be an issue for him at all. He says he will repeal the law the day he takes office. Of course it won't be that easy even if Republicans win the senate also. Remember filibuster? Of course there is the little problem that Romney care was the blueprint of Obama care even to the letter of individual mandate. Now Romney says that he may keep provisions like no turning people away for preexisting conditions while doing away with individual mandate. It is obvious that won't work because of there is no individual mandate but you can get insurance even if you have preexisting conditions, then you would not get insurance until you are sick!

Obama care is not a great piece of legislation. But due to pull from both sides it was the only thing that could have passed. There was no upside politically for Obama. Most people have insurance so it is hard to get a majority of people to understand that reform of healthcare is absolutely necessary. Given the main goal of Republicans is to defeat Obama, this big legislation is certainly a target for the Republicans to shoot at. Of course if they have no ideas of their own that is politically viable so they don't even try. Witness Paul Ryan's idea of trying to reform Medicare, Democrats didn't even have to attack it. The Republicans' idea to improve the insurance situation is to let people buy insurance out of state! Yeah, that is really going to make a difference.

With all the Republican arguing about government interference in health care, did they not remember their roles in increasing government's role? It was Reagan who signed into law that mandate hospitals to treat people walking into ER even if they can't pay. You know somebody has to pay for that care or hospitals would go out of business. So hospitals charge people who have money more and try to get more out of private insurance. Government also has to subsidized hospitals with lots of uninsured patients or many would have gone out of business. This mandate for hospitals was supported by both Republicans and Democrats. George Bush also enacted the prescription drug law which caused billions of taxpayers money and which enriched the drug companies and insurance companies that run the program. So Republicans are like the old people who put up signs like "Keep the government out of my Medicare." It is laughable.

I don't know if health care if a right. After all if you have no water or food you will die quicker than if you don't have a doctor but water and food are not free. But if the majority say that health care is a right then we can't have these patch work of insurances and mandates. We have the best trained doctors and best technologies in the world but we are mediocre in life expectancy and infant mortality. So even if you have insurance right now you know the system is broke and needs major overhaul. So it is time to stop the bickering and try to improve Obama care instead.

By the way, even though John Robert's decisions was a complete surprise, LA Times had predicted that it was a possibility because one of his friends who sits on the Appeals Court in Washington had upheld the law with the same tax reasoning. That judge was also a Bush appointee.

The news from last week that Asians are the most educated and have the highest income among ethnic groups would appear to be good news. Sure, we can take pride in our accomplishments in this country. But if the economy continues to sour and competition in getting to elite universities increases, will Asians be scapegoats for these problems? Asians had been called the new Jews before. Most believe that Jews are targeted for their faith but I believe that most of the time they are targets of discrimination because of envy. Rather than applauding the Jewish people for their successes, there are many people who believe there is something sinister about what the Jews had accomplished. So far Asians are not so dominant in businesses and other areas as the Jews are in this country. But it is worth noting that in places like Southeast Asia where the Chinese are dominant in wealth, there have been many incidences of violence against them.

I do not believe there is imminent trouble for Asian Americans yet. But last week was the 30th anniversary of the Vincent Chin case. Chin was killed by 2 lay off auto workers in Detroit because they thought he was Japanese. At that time there was fear that Japan was going to destroy the American auto industry. The question I have is: what happens if China continues to rise and Asian Americans continue to do better than the average Americans in education and wealth? I don't think America is southeast Asia or Germany. But Americans are human beings and humans have done violent acts throughout history. This is why Asian Americans should always be vigilant.

Obama announced his new policy regarding illegal immigrants who came to the U.S. as children. This follows his endorsing gay marriages a few weeks ago. The timing of these two things at the end of his term, just before election, makes it look like a political move. I think these announcements are going to hurt rather than help his campaign. Illegal immigration and gay marriage advocates were going to vote for him anyway. There maybe a little more enthusiasm from these two groups now and maybe more monetary contributions. But there will be some independents who will be abhorred by these events. A blue collar worker in the swing states of Ohio, for example, may have been leaning toward Obama because he now has a job might now vote for Romney instead. The funny thing is Romney probably thinks similar to Obama and would not have done anything different on this issue if he is elected.

The unions overreached in Wisconsin, failing in their effort to recall governor Scott Walker. Walker had taken away much of the bargaining rights of most public unions since he took office. The Democrats were able to recall some of the legislators who sided with Walker. But by now the people are tired of recalls and with the big money coming from out of state, Walker was able to win. I think by failing to oust Walker, the unions lost more credibility. They would have been better off and waited for the next election, when the out of staters are worried about other parts of the country. Obama would not have helped and he rightly did not want to be strongly associated with a losing cause. Now he will have to decide how much to spend on Wisconsin whereas before he could have counted it in his pocket and focused resources in other states.

In California, San Jose and San Diego voted to decrease public pensions. As I have said before, I agree with decreasing the power of public unions because they can help politicians who are in charge of the union members' compensations. There is nobody representing the tax payers in that bargaining situation. But I strongly disagree with the conservatives that overpaying public employees are the main economic problem facing America today. Certainly if salaries and benefits of public employees are not reigned in, we will eventually go bankrupt. But that will be a long time down the line and not in every place in the country. Compare to the greed and gambling tendencies of the bank and Wall Street, the public employees are relatively good guys. I mean, I can understand a guy making $50,000 a year wanting to improve to $100,000. But I don't understand somebody making $10 million wanting to use unethical means to make $100 million or more. The actions of the rich, crooked people will bring down this country a lot faster than the policemen, firemen and teachers of the nation.