While lamenting Pacquiao's loss to Mayweather, I was thinking how he would have ranked among Asian male athletes in my life time.  I think if Pacquiao had won I would have ranked him number one.  Even with the loss, Pacquiao would still be in the top ten.  So I am going to put up my list of the top ten Asian male athletes during my life time up to this point.  I am only doing a male list because frankly, Asian females have done a lot better than males in international sports.  Just look at golf where the Asian females are dominating whereas males have just made some progress in being competitive.  The lone exception being Tiger Woods whom I am putting on the list even though most people consider him to be black.  The truth is that Tiger is 50% Asian so he qualifies to be on my list.

The same reasoning that I am doing only a male list means that I am not going to put up names of table tennis players, badminton players, gymnasts, figure skaters, divers, and short track skaters.  All of these sports have way too many great Asian male athletes so it is not unusual for an Asian male to succeed in these sports.  So that is why Apollo Anton Ono is not listed since there are many Koreans, Japanese and Chinese short track skaters who have done well.  So in no particular order (too difficult to rank from 1-10 since each sports are so different) here is the list:

Sadaharu Oh--all time home run hitter.  Question of whether he would have been a star in the MLB.  But he did well against American pitching in exhibition games and given that Japanese players have done well in MLB in recent years, I believe Oh would have had a Hall of Fame career in MLB.

Ichiro--He makes my point for Oh easy.  He is a certain Hall of Famer.

Yao Ming--A pioneer in the NBA for Chinese basketball player.  His career was cut short but he is a certain Hall of Famer.

Michael Chang--Won a grand slam and rose to as high as umber 2 in the world.  A Hall of Famer.

Tiger Woods--Nothing needs to be said.

Liu Xiang--Won Olympic gold in 110 hurdles.  First Asian to win in track and field sprints.  Also held world record in the event.

C.K. Yang--Silver in Olympic decathlon to Rafer Johnson.  He actually beat Johnson in 7 out of 10 events but lost because Johnson, with his powerful body, trounced Yang in the three throwing events.  Yang held the world record for the decathlon as well as the indoor pole vault world record.

Sun Yang--Won Olympic gold in 400, 1500 freestyle and silver in 200.  There have been Asian male swimmers who have done well in swimming but Sun's feat is incomparable.  It is almost like a record holder in the mile beats Michael Johnson in the 400 and finish a close second to Johnson in the 200.  Nobody has done that in swimming, Asian or not.

Jeremy Lin--Not quite the accomplishments of some of the others on the list since he is not even an all star in the NBA.  But he plays a position that is the most difficult and most athletic in his sport.  Also consider that China, which is the best in Asian basketball, has only produced big men to the NBA, I think it is safe to say that Lin has done something worth of being on this list.

Many Pacquiao--Despite the loss, he is a sure Hall of Famer and the second best pound for pound figher of his generation.

So this is my list.  I am sure there can be argument for inclusion and exclusion on this list.  So bring it on!  If I had to pick the number one I would pick Liu Xiang.  I know it is an event that takes less than 13 seconds to run.  But it is also an event that no Asian male or female had come close to be world class before Liu. Even Tiger has lost to Asian males in the PGA tour.  When he won in Athens, Liu famously said that he won not only for China but for the Asian race.  It maybe stereotype, but it is the truth for whatever reason.  So with the risk of offending all great Asian male athletes, I pick Liu Xiang as my all time great.

Interesting program on Sixty Minutes tonight about the possibility of space war.  Many important things in our daily lives depend on satellites in outer space.  Much of our high tech military power also depend on satellites.  So the possibility of other countries shooting down our satellites is a real concern.  Obviously China and Russia can do this but even North Korea and Iran maybe able to do it in the near future.  So obviously we must be able to detect such attacks and be able to evade in coming missiles.  Short of an international agreement that space wars are illegal, this vast space cannot possibly be defended forever.

This brings to mind two things.  The first is that the world is going to be run by nerds.  Space war and computer hacking are the new war fares of the 21st century.  I think we should start thinking about alternate system of communications so that we are not so dependent of satellites and the internet.  This is particular important in military, electric grid, water supply and the financial system.  I hope there are people way smarter than me who are working on this.  I am not smart enough to figure how we do this but we have to have alternate systems since every country have science nerds who are capable of doing great harm.

The other thing is that why are Russia and the U.S. still engaged in spy planes activities near each others' coast.  With satellites and computers, is there any secrets that these planes flying in international water can possibly pick up?  Recently Russia planes have come close to the U.S. and the U.K.    Of course each time fighter jets are scrambled from the other country that is being monitored.  This brings to mind a few years ago when an American spy plane crashed with a Chinese fighter jet causing an international incidence.  There is bound to be accidents in the future as a result of these worthless exercise of power.  I don't think it is worth the money or obviously the risk to military personal on any side when there is no secrets that can possibly learn from these actions.  I mean if the other side knows you are there and can scramble a fighter jet, how much secrets is going to be sitting there for your spy plane to collect?

China is developing a new international bank called Asia Infrastructure Investment Bank (AIIB).  It is China's answer to the World Bank, the IMF, and the Asian Development Bank.  The first two are controlled by the U.S. with European input.  The third is controlled by Japan with U.S. input.  By controlling money lending internationally the U.S. and its allies have soft power over the rest of the world.  Now China is trying to do the same.

The U.S. is against the founding of this bank.  But it made the decision for China to go ahead with it easier when Congress voted to not allow increase of voting power for China in the World Bank.  This made it difficult for Obama to try to convince our allies to not join the AIIB.  To say that AIIB is going to be a political wing of China seems absurd when the U.S. refuse to recognize China's status in the world.  I mean if the World Bank is nonpolitical then the U.S. Congress should not be able to keep China's voting power below those of the U.K or France.  Also World Bank presidents have included former U.S. Sec. of State Robert Mcnamara and former Bush adviser and proponent of the Iraq war Paul Wolfowitz.  When the U.S. appoints politicians to the post instead of financial experts, it is hard to say the World Bank is not a political wing of the U.S.

So Obama failed miserably to convince allies not to join.  Almost all Asian nations except Japan applied to join as have most U.S. allies.  The UK is joining because it wants to be the center of yuan trading as China's currency gains more world acceptance.  South Korea is joining because its companies want to be in on the infrastructure building of Asia.  Same with Australia.  One bit of good news is that China rejected the North Korea application, further isolating the rouge regime.  So for Obama, the train has left the station.  We should work with this new financial institution even if we are not joining it.  After all, if we want China to take a more responsible position in the world as a global power, it would be counter productive to tell China it cannot help Asia improve its infrastructure.

Max who?  Verlander?  Hey if Greene and company keep pitching like this, we may not even need Nathan.  It is early, of course, but the Tigers look good.  Now those pesky Royals are on their tail and given what they did in October last year, this looks like a great race.  And I didn't know Julio Iglesias can play baseball as well as he sings.

Golden State over Cleveland in the NBA final.  This is against Charles Barkley who says a three point shooting team can't win the championship.  I think the Splash Brothers will do it!

Hillary Clinton announced today, as expected for a long time, that she is running for president.  It is assumed that she will win the Democratic nomination in a walk away.  But there are potential traps along the way.  For one thing, she was the favorite to win in 2008 but a relative novice name Barack Obama chased her down.  This time there does not appear to be an Obama out there especially if Elizabeth Warren does not change her mind and stay out.  But still, Clinton cannot take things for granted.

Clinton did not do as well as expected in Iowa and New Hampshire in 2008.  Those states are relatively small where personal appearances can make a big difference.  In a state like California, media blitz trumps walking door to door because it is impossible to cover even a small part of the state.  In 2008, Clinton did not do the ground work necessary to confirm her status as the front runner.  Here lies the problem:  If you are expected to win, you better win or else you look vulnerable or worse, not viable.  Clinton is 40% point ahead of any possible Democratic candidate at this point so if she wins by say 20% or less, then there maybe doubts.  Already with Benghazi and e-mail gate, another possible scandal may cause people to think that she is just not trustworthy enough.  So it is important that Clinton goes to Iowa and win so convincingly that others may not challenge her.

If there is a legitimate challenge from the left wing then Clinton will have to move left to shore support, then she will be vulnerable in the general election if she gets nominated.  That is of course the problem of whoever wins the Republican nomination:  he would have to move so far to the right to win the nomination that he will have problem from the center in the general election.  If Clinton has no challenger, then it will be much easier for her in the general election.  So it is imperative that she wins a knockout early in Iowa and New Hampshire.

On the Republican side, I still think Scott Walker is their best candidate.  Jeb Bush may win the nomination but another Bush vs Clinton will be political fatigue.  Assuming no scandal from either side, I believe another Clinton will beat another Bush.  Walker is more of a fresh face.  Assuming he can handle the national stage, he will be a formidable foe for Clinton.

Now we are into the coin toss of the sports season known as the Stanley Cup playoff.  Last season, the LA Kings came out of nowhere to win.  With almost the same club, the Kins did not make the playoff this season.  This shows how much winning has to do with luck in hockey.  I think the post season in hockey and baseball are almost mostly luck, unlike the NBA and NFL.  So I don't even try to predict the NHL playoff anymore with the exception that neither of the top seeds in each conference will be in the Stanley Cup final!  So forget about it for the Rangers and Ducks.

The 6 world powers including the U.S. have made a preliminary agreement with Iran.  Can Obama sell this to the Republican led Congress.  It is unlikely.  Then can he go at it alone?  I don't know.  Is this a good deal?  I don't know.  All I know is that there is no good alternatives.  Continue sanction is not going stop Iran from building the bomb.  And as I said before, if it appears that it is the U.S. who stop the agreement, then the international sanctions will fall apart.  Any sanctions voted by the Congress will be meaningless without other countries involved since the trade between Iran and the U.S. is not much to begin with.  The other alternative of the U.S. attacking Iran would be wrong.  We are not bombing North Korea for the benefit of a nonnuclear South Korea.  So why would we bomb Iran for the benefit of a nuclear armed Israel?  In any case, to stop Iran you would need a full scale war since bombing a few possible nuclear sites would not stop Iran's program.

There are even neocons who think that a bombing combine with effort to aid rebels for a regime change in Iran is the way to go.  These people have no understanding of the world.  Any time you attack a country, especially a preemptive attack, automatically invoke nationalism in that country.  There will back lash against the U.S. even among people who are against the current leadership.  It is very easy for the bad guys to recruit people world wide for terrorist attack when they can simply show that the U.S. is attacking a country even though it has not attacked the U.S. So not only will the plan for regime change fail miserably, it will lead to more terrorist attacks in the future.

MSU did very well to get into Final Four.  They didn't play well against Duke.  But I think the better team won anyway.  I am rooting for Wisconsin to win on Monday.  I like the idea of a team with players who stay for four years beating teams that have super one and done players.

Ted Cruz announced his candidacy for president. I am waiting for people like Donald Trump who demanded Obama verify that he was born in the U.S., to come out and say that Cruz is not eligible.  If people like Trump would not say that Cruz is ineligible, then why all the fuss about where Obama was born?  If being born in the U.S. is needed to be president, then Cruz is not eligible since he was born in Canada.  I personally think that if someone is an offspring of an American citizen and lived in the U.S. most of his life then he is eligible.  I think the original intention of the founding father was to prevent someone born in England become president and possibly undermine our independence.  In any case, I am still waiting for Trump and others who demanded proof even when proof was already given, say what they think since there is proof that Cruz is not born in the U.S.

I didn't see the comment from LBOAYM from the last blog till today.  The article of the artist is very interesting.  Our family, like many immigrant families from China, are from Taishan of Guandong province.  We were considered poor uneducated hillbillies in China.  Yet many immigrants from that area have flourished, not only in the U.S. but also Canada, Europe and Southeast Asia.  Lee Kuan Yew would be an example of descendants from Guandong province who went on to do great things.  By the way, Fareed Zakaria, the host of CNN's GPS program, said today that Lee was the most interesting man in the world.  Very few people in the U.S. know about him and it is too bad.  Most people in the U.S. probably think the most interesting man in the world is that guy in the Dos equis beer commercial!

The Chinese Exclusion Act was all to real.  We are a country of immigrants but our treatment of immigrants is no where near the ideal that we were taught in school.  The quote on the Statue of Liberty:  Give me your tired, your poor, your huddled masses...."  is well known to school children but the Chinese Exclusion Act?  I would bet 95% of college educated Americans had no idea of its existence.  What native born Americans don't realize is that the people who are willing to make a horrible journey, face discrimination and still work very hard are the people who push this country forward.  Without the drives of immigrants, we will lose our world leading status in a very short time.  We, the Chinese immigrants, have to remember those who came before us, our Jackie Robinsons.  It was their dedication and suffering that made it so much easier for us today.

Lee Kuan Yew, the founding father of Singapore has died.  I consider Lee the greatest leader of a country in the last 50 years.  Although Lee has many critics, Singapore is celebrating its 50 years of independence as a thriving economic powerhouse.  I don't think that in 1965, Lee or anyone else in the world could have predicted that Singapore would survive 50 years let alone be a rich nation.  There was problem with its much larger Muslim neighbor Malaysia.  There was also a restless native population that did not like the idea of being ruled by people of Chinese ancestry.  Lee had to act to protect the country and unify it at the same time.  Given all that and take the country from the third world to be one of the tigers of Asia in less than three decades is a great accomplishment. 

Of course there is the question of individual freedom in Singapore.  Lee did rule with an iron hand.  But when the country became stable and prosperous, Lee did step down even though his influence continued behind the scene.  Obviously laws such as no chewing gum in public will never be accepted in western countries.  But the type of discipline that Lee brought to Singapore helped it survive and thrive.  Lee is the father of the country, literally.  He is the father handing out tough love and the children do well as a result despite resentment.  The difference between him and other dictators is that he did not do it to benefit himself.  He lived frugally and did not become extremely wealthy while the country stayed in poverty.  With his passing, I am sure the laws will gradually loosen up.  Young people of this generation did not grow up in danger or poverty.  They may not appreciate what Lee had to do.  They will demand more individual freedom.  And that would be the right thing for Singapore.  But we must not forget that without Lee, Singaporeans would be living as Muslims under Malaysia today.  They would not have more freedom under that system and certainly will not be as rich.

Forty seven GOP senators wrote to the ayatollah of Iran telling him that any nuclear deal made by Obama will be cancelled with the election of a new president.  I think it is safe to say that the negotiators from Iran have a very good understanding of how our government works.  I am sure they know the party of the current president may not be in power in 2017.  They also know about the difference between a treaty which needs the approval of the senate and an executive agreement.  So I don't think that Iran will stop negotiating after reading this letter.

But the letter is stupid in that gives the advantage to Iran.  Now if the negotiation breaks down, Iran can blame the Americans because the U.S. government as represented by these senators are going to go back on any deal.  Sure, the agreement may be a bad one and Iran can cheat after making the agreement.  But we can always restart sanctions if Iran does not keep their end of the bargain.  And what is the alternative?  Bomb Iran on behalf of Israel?  Israel is perfectly capable of doing that herself.  But it will only delay and not stop Iran from building the bomb.  If negotiation completely fails, can we count on our allies to continue sanction if it appears people in our own government is sabotaging the effort. 

In two days Israel will have their election.  Netanyahu's speech to Congress at the invitation of GOP was a political move by him and his hosts.  We will see if the citizens of Israel agree with them.

Was away during the weekend.  Trying to catch up with the news today and found about the U. of Oklahoma racist video.  I was a little shock that in 2015 that college educated people would still think nothing of saying these sickening things.  Then I realize that I would be naive if I don't think that this happens behind closed doors in college campuses everywhere.  It just happens that this time somebody who is appalled by this is able to send out a video recording to the public.  I think most people believe that with each succeeding generation, racism decreases.  But despite being more diverse than previous generations, I think the young people of today maybe no better or even worse than last couple of generations when it comes to racism.

I think there is a perception among young people today that economically they will go backward compared to their parents.  White males still make the most money compare to others with the same education.  It is just that a college educated white male have to battle with females and males of other races for a job that would have gone to a white male before.  There is a perception that Asians are getting the top college spots, not realizing that Asians actually get less spots than their credentials would indicate.  (more on that in the future)  There is also the perception that minorities are taking jobs away from whites through affirmative action.  Add to that the rants from conservatives about our black president and you can see why young naive people can become racist.  I don't know if any of this apply to the U.of OK video but I will not be surprised if more of this goes on behind closed doors on campuses today than in the past 20 years.

The GOP blockage of funding for homeland security is totally ridiculous.  They are willing to hold hostage the security of the country in an attempt to stop Obama's immigration policy?  There is no chance that they would succeed because they don't have enough vote to stop filibuster in the senate nor override a veto from Obama.  This is an exercise in futility.  Even most Republicans agree with this.  While this may not cripple the country in the short term, it will have consequences if the department is not funded.  Do you really want the people who are working in security lose their concentration because they are forced to work without a pay check?  Just like the debt default debacle a few years back, the confidence in the U.S. is at stake here.

I don't know why the GOP is wasting time on this and trying to kill Obamacare.  Their best chance in these are in the courts.  They have no chance legislative wise unless they elect a GOP president in 2016.  They can enhance their chances in that if they can show they can govern.  If they put out laws that are moderate, they have the votes to pass both houses.  Then if Obama vetoes then they can use that against the Democratic nominee.  If he signs, then the GOP show that they are reasonable and able to govern.  So if they are smart, they won't waste any more time trying to do things that are impossible and endanger America.

Speaking of presidential election, Rand Paul won a conservative poll this week while Jeb Bush got booed at the gathering.  Don't read too much into this.  Both Rand Paul and his father Ron had won this poll in the past and neither have been close in getting the nomination.  Jeb Bush is not a favorite among conservatives but he has the name and money.  With Romney bowing out, Bush is still viable among the moderates in the party.  I think Scott Walker is in a good position as he has placed himself between the extremists and moderates.  Plus he is from a toss up state that the GOP nominee needs to win to get elected.  So I would place him as the front runner at this time.