It was, of course, great news that Captain Phillips was rescued. The captain, his crew, and the navy SEALS all did their job heroically. What I don't understand is why people are saying that Obama passed his first crisis as president. Just like when people questioned before if Obama had the strength to lead the military, I am confused. I asked then: what strength do you need to send the best trained and best equipped military to fight? It is not as if the president has to pick up a gun and fight the bad guys himself. In this case, he did what he and any other reasonably intelligent person would have done: give the authority to the people on the scene to make the judgment to kill if necessary. It is like going to Afghanistan after 9/11, anyone could have made that call. It is making stupid calls like going to Iraq that really separate the dumb ones from the smart ones.

Obama did what he was supposed to and got lucky. If the captain had been harmed during the rescue, he would have been blamed even though he had given the same order. Luck plays a big role, just ask Jimmy Carter whose rescue attempt of the Iranian hostages ended miserably through no fault of his.

Now what do we do about the pirates. Obviously the navy can't protect all of our ships not to mention those of other countries. Going to Somalia would be a risky proposition even though some have suggested that it would not be like going into Mogudishu during the Clinton years because the pirates are located on the coast. But if we are to attack their position, wouldn't they try to hide among the civilians inland like Hamas do in Gaza? Certainly we cannot go in without support of other countries. In the short term, the commercial companies will have to hire mercenaries to protect the ships. In the long term only by helping Somalia estabish a stable government will these acts of piracy become extinct. Good luck with that!

Two stories in the LA Times touch on subjects that I talked about in earlier blogs. I really have nothing new to say on the subjects, but I am mad again reading about them.

The first is about hospitals having to settle with the city of LA for dumping patients onto streets of skid row after they were discharged. The city uses some obscure law about false imprisonment to extort from the hospitals. As I said before, these people were homeless BEFORE they were hospitalized. The hospitals may have acted on behalf of their bottom line and sent these patients back to the streets, but where were they supposed to sent them? They were from the streets! If the argument is that nobody should be homeless then it is the responsibility of the government to provide a place for them. The hospitals are already giving these people free or only partially compensated care and who do you think will have to absorb the added cost of finding a place for these people to go? The result of this and other mandates on hospitals will be shutting down of ERs which will lead to health crisis for the whole population. Shame on the government for extorting the hospitals.

The next subject is John Yoo, the law professor at Berkeley who wrote all kinds of legal opinions supporting the actions of the Bush administration. In an opinion in LA Times today there were arguments about whether Yoo should be fired as a law professor. As I said before, I don't agree with Yoo's opinions. But crazy liberals can teach at Berkeley, but crazy conservatives can't? He is not flunking his students for going against his opinions nor is he stiffling debate in his class. So what is the big deal? As I said before, if someone admitted to Berkeley's law school can be brainwashed by a professor, then he/she should not have been admitted in the first place.

Watched most of a story on CNN about the violence in Mexico due to the drug war. The violence is spreading to America and despite Obama saying that we are going to help Mexico fight this, I don't think we will succeed. As I have said many times before: where there is a demand, there will be a supply. Our demand for illegal drugs have made the cartels rich. There is a 2 way traffic with drugs coming in and money and weapons going to Mexico. With these money and weapons, the Mexican police are outgunned and government officials are bribed. Illegal drugs are a national security problem and no amount of border control will stopped it.

I say go the way of alcohol and tobacco. Legalize drugs! I hate drugs and I am proud to say that I have never even smoke a joint. But the reality is rich free nations don't seem to be able to curb their appetite for drugs. I am under no illusion that legalizing drugs will decrease the addiction rates. I don't think the Netherland's drug addiction rates has decreased. But I don't think it has increased with legalization either. But by legalizing, we can at least take the profits away from the mob. I am also under no illusion that taxes from drugs will help in prevention and treatment as the politicians will funnel the money to elsewhere. But right now we are not getting anything and we are spending tons of money to police drugs not only here but abroad as well. So legalize now before our streets turn bloody like those in Mexico.

Just returned from Hilton Head, South Carolina, where I watched my daughter's college tennis team played 5 matches during spring break. I was pleasantly surprised by how I enjoyed the trip. I was looking forward to seeing my daughter of course, but I did not think that I would like to watch college tennis so much. I have not played tennis for a while because of my shoulder injury and with only one more child still competing, I had not thought much of tennis lately. But at Hilton Head I saw some incredible matches involving athletes who will not be going pro after graduation. They were playing for the love of the game with genuine joy, something I don't see often in pro or high level div. 1 sports. It makes me want to start playing tennis again!

In contrast to this, I saw an article about this guy started a "rock, scissors, paper" tournament for college students. It is going to on cable tv with bikini clad women and beer kegs. So we are trying to sell a kids' game with sex and alcohol. So this is how low our intellectual level has sunk to? People are actually going to watch this and think these "competitors" are athletes or geniuses who can out think their opponents? And I thought college poker tournaments was the lowest we would get!

Is Obama spreading himself too thin? Obviously, whether his presidency will be judged to be successful over the next couple of years depend on how fast the economy recovers. Many people are criticizing him for not focusing on the economy at this time. Obama is trying to put new policies in healthcare, energy, education, stem cell research, war in Iraq and Afghanistan, and foreign relations. These are ambitious programs and many people think that he should just concentrate on the economy for now. I disagree. It is not like he can spend 24 hours a day on the economy and things will turn around in a month. He promised changes and he is trying to achieve them. I don't agree with all of his ideas but I give him credit for trying to improve the country beyond the next couple of years.

The problem with trying to do all these things is that you make enemies with each program. No matter what you propose there will be people who oppose it. Today, for example, he spoke about changes he want to make in education. You know that things like merit pay and charter schools will get the teachers unions all upset. And they are among the strongest supporters of the Democrats. So you are making an enemy of an ally, never mind what he proposes make sense to most Americans. The truth is most of us are selfish, so our politicians are selfish and try to protect the interest of his district or state even though it is not for the best interest of the country.

Obama has assembled an intelligent group in his cabinet. But so far he has been the only spokesman. He is trying to sell all the programs by himself. About the only one who has been helpful in public has been Hillary. She is carrying out the foreign policies well. Tim Geithner has been of no help with trying to sell the stimulus program. Stephen Chu needs to speak out more about the importance of the energy program not only in the future but also on the economy today. Where was Obama's education secretary today? Where has Joe Biden been? Obama can't do it by himself. He needs his cabinet members to step up. He needs the Congress to be less selfish. Well, that last part we probably will never get.

A few days ago the LA Times had an editorial which supported the release of 17 Uighurs detained at Guantanamo Bay. The Uighurs are Chinese Muslims of Turkic origin from western China. They were detained while they were in Pakistan in 2002 after having received firearm training in Afghanistan. It is obvious that they were not enemy combatants against the U.S. as the Bush administration had claimed. I have advocated from the beginning that we should not detain people who are not our enemy lest they and the family they had left behind will become our enemies in the future. Now the cases are going through the courts with civil rights group demanding that the government let these detainees be released into the U.S. and receive political asylum. I don't think this is a good idea even though I admit that I see no good way of solving this problem myself. I just wished that the Bush administration would not have detained these people in the first place!

The Uighurs would obviously face harsh treatment if they are returned to China. They were training to be potential terrorists in Afghanistan. No other country wants to take them in now because nobody wants to anger China. If we give them political asylum we certainly would anger China. I mean if China had caught someone training to attack the U.S., would we not want to have him extradicted to the U.S.? The fact that the Uighurs are an oppressed minority in China does not excuse them from training to attack China. Someone's freedom fighter is someone else's terrorist.

Besides angering China, which may mean they will not cooperate with us against terrorism in the future, we have to consider whether these Uighurs are dangerous if released into our society. They were obviously ready to use force against China for whatever injustice they faced in China. Were those injustices worse than spending 7 years in jail? They had no reason to attack the U.S. in 2002 but what about now after we deprived them of their freedom for 7 years? So if we release them into our country, we anger China and we have to watch our back for 17 trained foreigners who spent 7 years in our prison. If we sent them back to China they will be punished severely for crimes that they have yet to committ, after we had imprisoned them for 7 years. What a mess!

Two things about racism I found disturbing last week. The first one was not actually racism in itself. It was about lack of discussion about racial relations. Eric Holder, the new attorney general, called the U.S. a nation of cowards. I thought the attorney general is supposed to be an expert on law and not on people's feelings. Calling us the nation of cowards goes way too far. The people who are not afraid to speak their mind about race usually have their own agenda. Some maybe racists, like the KKK. Some maybe extreme liberals, like Al Sharpton, who looks at every perceived injustice through racism. Certainly the majority of the country are not in these two groups. Most people are afraid to offend others and avoid sensitive subjects. This does not make them cowards, just normal people. For example most non-blacks would be afraid to stand up and say that black men need to step up and take care of the children. Can you imagine Bill Clinton, a friend of blacks, saying that? Only a black leader like Obama can say that. This does not mean Clinton is a coward.

The other item was the cartoon of a two policmen shooting a chimp with the inscription: "now they have to find someone else to write the next stimulus bill". This was an obvious reference to Obama as a chimp. The writer and the editor tried to deny this saying it was just a parody. They said Obama did not write the stimulus bill so if anything the chimp was Pelosi or Reid, which they claim was not either. That is an absurd explanation. Given the long history of racists referring blacks to monkeys, the inference here is obvious. Nobody would think the cartoonist meant Pelosi or Reid as a monkey. In any case, whoever the chimp is supposed to represent, the cartoonist thinks that the person responsible for the stimulus bill should be shot. Regardless whether you like the stimulus bill or not this crosses the line.

It used to be the hope of baseball fans that Alex Rodriguez would eventually pass Barry Bonds as the homerun king and thus rid of the asterisk on the biggest record in the sport. Now we learn that A-Rod also cheated. I think the problem is way more wide spread than MLB is ready to admit. If the greatest stars of the game such as Bonds, McGwire, Clemens and Rodriguez used steroids to improve their game, would you be surprised if the borderline players use them too? I mean if the superstars are doing it, I would think almost everyone who is trying to get into the Majors or trying to stay in it will do everything he can to improve his odds.

The problem is going to stay with baseball for a long time. One of the great thing about baseball is that it is so statistically oriented. You can compare players even from different generations, fairly or not. But now we may not be able to trust the records for years to come. Can anyone say with certainty that Albert Pujos is not tainted? Or how about young stars like Ryan Howard? For me personally, it is not the records that I care about. It is that steroid use by the pros have and will continue to have influence on high school and college players. They think that they should do what the pros do. Unfortunately very few of them become pros and they are causing great harm to their bodies. To me this the greatest shame of the steroid usage by the stars.

There was a segment on Sat. Night Live's Weekend Update with Seth Meyer and Amy Poehler where the two of them mock certain people's actions with the word "really?". Some of the actions of Obama and the Democrats lately deserve a few "reallys?" Three nominees by Obama had tax problems? Really? His staff couldn't have vetted these people better? Really? Bill Richardson is well known and they couldn't find all the dirt on him before the nomination? Really?

Are the Congressional Democrats really Obama's friends? They come up with a stimulus plan that include things that are easy targets for the GOP. Money for art and STD education in a economic stimulus plan? Really? You don't think the GOP would jump all over these programs? Really? These programs take up less than 1 percent of the package but distract from the whole thing. As I said before, I don't really know what programs will actually stimulate the economy to a great degree. But I know when you propose building bridges and roads and thus creating jobs, it can bring confidence to the country. When you propose programs that seem like pork, you diminish the confidence of the people.

As the leader, the buck stops with Obama. He has acknowledged mistakes with his nominations. Many presidents had nominations that did not get confirmed. This won't hurt him much. He, however, must take control of the stimulus bill. Do not let his "friends" make him a target of the GOP. Tell Pelosi and Reid to cut out the controversial programs and then dare the GOP to filibuster in the Senate. The only idea the GOP has is tax cuts. So tell the members of Congress who only want tax cuts but not spending programs that they won't get any funds from the proposed programs. Then in a few years we can see if the areas in the country that got the spending stimulus is better or worse than those areas that only got tax cuts. No GOP Congressmen will agree to that! I mean, I think every GOP governor and mayor in the country will be upset if they don't get any funds as a result of their Congressional delegation voting against the plans. In summary, Obama should do the right thing by getting rid of some of the things that seem to be pork. After that he should play hard ball with the GOP.

Obama has been working hard in his first week in office. He has already reversed some of the things Bush did. He has sent George Mitchell on a trip to the Middle East. He has gone to the Capitol to meet with Congressional Republicans to sell his stimulus plan. He has appeared on Arabic television to speak to Muslims. I don't agree with everything he has done but overall he has been much more engaging than Bush ever was. He appears to be very much in charge.

Two things I don't like about the economic effort so far. The stimulus plan spends too little on infrastructure, the one area I am all for spending. There are too many liberal spending plans in it. The Republicans are objecting and despite Obama's effort on Capitol Hill today, I don't think he will get much support from the Republicans on the bill. Of course, the Republicans can only complain as the only plan they have is more tax cuts. So even without bipartisan support, I think most of the country will be on Obama's and the Democrats' side. I don't like Tim Geithner being sec. of treasury. A guy who didn't pay his taxes running the IRS? Common! He maybe brillant but he was part of the Paulson team who worked out the bailout. If he has any great idea why didn't he present any a few months ago? He complained about China's monetary policy. In a time of global economic crisis, starting a war of words is not helpful. I think he was just trying to distract people from his tax questions. He does not seem like a good pick for Obama.

I am impressed by Obama's quick action on the Middle East. George Mitchell is a great pick although I don't know if he will step on Hilary's foot. By giving his first tv interview as president on an Arab network, it shows to the world how serious about the the region. He understands that unless there is peace between Israel and the Arab world, there will be no end on the war on terror. This is something Bush never understood. Instead of trying to be an honest broker between Israel and the Palestinians right away, he invaded Iraq. The road to peace is long and filled with traps but Obama has taken the first right steps.