While watching Jeopardy College championship finals last night, it occurs to me how wrong Trump and the GOP are on immigration.

First, it is widely reported that Trump and ICE are deporting lots of immigrants in this early stage of the administration.  I think it is a way for Trump to show how tough he is on immigration and that he is serious about his promise to build a wall paid by Mexico and so called putting Americans first.  I think that by putting fear out there, he thinks Mexicans will actually self deport as Romney said they would do.  Some may actually do that.  In fact, since the recession of 2008, more Mexicans have left the country than have came in.  So the trend may continue under Trump but not necessary be because how tough he is.  I would say most of the people who are scarred and decide to leave are good people.  The criminals are going to stay regardless of the policy.  In fact, if people are scarred of going to police in fear of getting deported, the criminals will be more free to operate.

Beyond the threat of deporting illegal immigrants. there are also threats to legal immigrants.  Senators Tom Cotton of Ark. and David Perdue of Georgia have proposed to decrease legal immigration and refugees by half of the 1.1 million.  They say immigrants take away jobs of Americans.  That is absurd.  I have never seen a white or black guy working in the fields here in California.  There are engineering and science jobs and graduate schools positions that cannot be filled by qualified Americans.  So by restricting immigration, our economy will shrink and the country suffers.  Also the age of Americans is rising, without young immigrants, soon we will not have enough of all kinds of workers.  And with not enough workers to pay the taxes to fund social security and medicare.

So how have all these got to do with Jeopardy?  The three finalists last night consist of an Asian woman from MIT, an Asian man from the Naval Academy, and a south Asian man from Stanford.  (The woman won).  Jeopardy has been a game show that has been dominated by white male contestants in the past.  This year the 9 semi-finalists consisted of one white male.  I think as the second and third generations immigrant Americans become more involved in American culture, they are not just science nerds but are capable of dominating in other fields. 

Trump doesn't want any Syrian refugees.  Did he not know that Steve Jobs' father was from Syria?  Without this Syrian immigrant, there is no Apple.  Other immigrants that are crucial to our country include Sergey Brin, Andrew Grove and Elon Musk.  Who is to say the next Jobs will not be child of an illegal immigrant from Mexico or a refugee from Somalia?  Throughout history, empires fall because the people get complacent.  We have immigrants who come here and push us to continue our excellence.  Instead of blaming immigrants for the ills of this country, we should embrace them and ask those who are born here to step up.  There is no law that say native born Americans can't go to MIT, Stanford or the Naval Academy.

Taking a break from the dramas of Trump, we will put in the final installment of evaluation of Obama's presidency.  We will talk about foreign policies.  I think the worst mistake for Obama occurred with saying that he is drawing the line in the sand if Assad uses chemical weapons.  Assad crossed that line and Obama did not do anything.  You should only draw the line if you know that you can act if that line is crossed.  There was and is no good options in Syria.  So one should never promise big things if one can't deliver.  The second mistake was underestimating ISIS.  ISIS maybe a jv team to him but they are still dangerous and a big headache.  So I think Obama could have done better against these terrorists.

But of course Obama was not the founding father of ISIS as Trump pointed out.  ISIS happened because Bush invaded Iraq.  I think thev history of U.S. foreign policies are poor.  We supported dictators in Vietnam and Iraq and went to war in those countries for no good reason.  We supported the Shah of Iran and then allowed Hussein to use chemical weapons against Iran.  So if I am to grade Obama on his own merits, he would get a B- but if we grade on a curve with other presidents, I give him a B+.

The reason for the relatively high grades if that I agree with him on the Iran deal, opening up Cuba, staying out of ground wars in the middle east.  He also tried to pivot toward Asia which I think in the long run will be more important than the middle east and terrorists.  I also agree with not fighting the Russians over Ukraine.  But interesting enough some of my conservative friends demanded that Obama take action against the Russians over Crimea (never said what action should be taken).  Now we know that Trump was going to lift sanctions.  Really tough actions!   And anyone who doesn't get along with Netanyahu is good in my book.

Michael Flynn was fired for misleading VP Pence regarding his conversation with the Russian ambassador.  Flynn served as director of U.S. Defense Intelligence Agency under Obama.  He was ousted in 2014.  He criticized Obama's strategy on terrorism and implied that that was the reason he was fired.  Obama supporters claim that Flynn was abrasive to others and was not a team player.  The fact that he criticized Obama probably helped him get the job in Trump's administration.  But it looks like he is a liability just as he was with Obama. 

There is also the question of why he sat next to Putin at a dinner for RT, the Russian propaganda network.  Given that Trump's admiration and defense of Putin, I wonder if there is more problems and conflicts besides Flynn in the administration.  Now it appears that the DOJ had warned Trump about Flynn 18 days ago.  So is Trump also trying to hide something from his own VP?

From the previous blog:  I know I am being dramatic when I say 20,00 people killed by people with guns.  I know that even if guns are totally banned, there will be people killed by illegally obtain guns and other weapons.  But even if we discount all the killings by criminals and gangs, we still have a lot more killings by guns than most other countries that have strict gun laws.  Guns make it easier for mass killings, road rage killings, killings of passion, killings by accidents etc.  I don't think Zimmerman would approach Martin if he was not carrying a gun.  To believe that guns are not the major reasons for killings in this country, one would have to believe that we are a country of higher percentage of criminals and people with mental problems than other countries.

Unbelievable, two guys walk into Dearborn police station in armour and carrying guns.  Supposedly they were trying to see if the Dearborn police are going to protect their rights under the open carry law in Michigan.  See, this is why such laws are stupid.  It seems to me by the letter of the law, these guys cannot be arrested and shouldn't have to give up their guns.  Of course, does anyone blame the cops for not wanting to have people walk into their station with guns?  Obviously they can't tell if these guys are going to shoot them.  So by the same token, how would they know if they come across them in the streets  they would not shoot the cops or anyone else?  By the same token, how do you or I know that the guy walking down the street with a gun in a holster will not start shooting at me or you ?   If this guy cuts in line in front of me, can I complain without fearing for my life?  So this about carrying guns make us safer is absurd.

By the way, I wonder if two black guys walk into a police station with guns would they be shot before given the same opportunity to surrender as these two guys were?

Seems surreal that last week we were just talking about the Red Wings moving into a new arena.  Now the news come out that Mike Ilitch has died.  Rest in peace Mike, I thank you for all the good that you did for Detroit.

Great game!  Brady just cemented himself to be the best qb ever!   There isn't much else to say.  Regardless of what I think of him now, I will have to salute his greatness on the field. 

The new "24" is off to a good start.  It is weird without Jack Bauer and the main female actress was on  previous season of "Homeland"!  I will watch it and see if the new chapter lives up to the "legacy".

I have finally calm myself down over Trump's executive order to ban people from certain countries from entering the U.S. and stop accepting refugees to write about this.  This is the worst decision since Bush sent troops to Iraq.  The similarity is that Bush didn't know anything and trusted Cheney and the neocons.  Now Trump doesn't understand the world at all and trusts Bannon and the alt right to make decisions for him. 

I can't think of any attacks on U.S. soil being perpetrated by a citizen from any of those countries that are banned.  So how is this going to make us safer?  San Bernardino, Boston, Miami all those attacks are by home grown terrorists.  Just this week, Quebec experienced a terrorist attack so maybe Trump should stop French Canadian nationalists from coming here!  As was the war in Iraq, this action will help ISIS and other terrorist groups recruit.  We will be in more danger than ever. 

I can see the bad guys are going to be able to recruit more people within the U.S. to attack.  It won't matter that we prevent people from coming in.  There are plenty of people who can be radicalized here and Trump is helping to make this happen.  A vicious cycle may happen:  A few Muslim Americans became Jihadists, American public became even more scared, Trump doubles down and order internment of Muslims, the world becomes angry at the U.S. as a whole and attacks against American businesses abroad occurs, the world economy tanks and people become more fearful etc.

It is not just terrorism, but the average American view of immigrant issues are wrong.  I am tired of immigrants being made scapegoats for the ills of America.  The truth is that the intellectual immigrants outshine the intellectual Americans.  Look at the high percentage of immigrants working in Silicon Valley.  Will we still be at the top of tech world if not for immigrants.  At the other end of the scale, immigrant workers do the dirty work Americans don't want to do.  They work harder for lower wages making the products from this country more competitive.  Trump says immigrants are rapists and criminals but I bet immigrants have lower crime rate than Americans in the same socioeconomic class.  Every dynasty and empire in history of the world have died off.  Our only chance is that we get new blood from other countries to keep pushing us to improve.  Without immigrants, this country will lose its empire just like all those before it.

I am rooting for the Falcons.  I have lost respect for Brady for backing up Trump.  This explain deflategate and all other controversies the Patriots have been involved in over the years.  I had rooted for Brady all these years because he was an underdog through out college and was a low draft choice.  Plus he was from Michigan.  But throwing the cell phone away when being investigated?  Refusing to answer why he supported for Trump?  It shows maybe he is similar to Trump--Rules don't apply to him.  If you have been picking against the Falcons, don't change now because you may jinx them.

Back to the Obama years in review.  The most important legislation during the Obama presidency is of course Obamacare.  I think Obama wanted to have a one payer system for health care but he knew it was impossible at this time.  So he promised to decrease the number of uninsured in the country by emulating Romney care.  As much the right wing hated Obamacare, it was not all that radical.  It was less socialistic than the plan put up by the Clintons.  It was not out to get rid of insurance companies.  That is why the insurance industry did not put up a fight against it.  Remember how they attacked Clinton's plan and made it fail?   So by proposing a plan that the insurance companies may actually make more money, Obama was able to get legislation through, barely.  I think he believed that having Obamacare in place, it will be a first step toward a national health system.  Eventually, Obama believed, that he will go down in history as the president who started the road to universal health care.

As expected Obamacare was under attack before the ink was dry on the bill.  It also got a rocky start as the internet site crashed for a prolonged period.  That is a big mistake on the Obama team especially given that they won elections with superior internet skills.  Obamacare is far from perfect.  But it was meant as a start.  I don't think health care is a right.  But if the majority of the country think it is, then the only way to achieve it is by having a one payer system.  I give Obama credit for starting down that road as he promised in his campaign.

So now that Trump is in office and promises to get rid of Obamacare, and with majority on both houses of Congress, it would seem that Obamacare will be gone.  The problem for the GOP is that they have no alternative.  Now the GOP is split between those who want to get rid of all subsidies and thus mean all those who got covered under Obamacare will now be uninsured, and those who want to tweet Obamacare but retain subsidies, keep no preexisting conditions, and no life time limits in coverage.  The House wants to get rid of all subsidies because Congressmen are usually in safe districts.  Governors and senators want to keep most of Obamacare because they are afraid lots of  people losing insurance in their states and thus vote them out. 

I think Obamacare will lose in the short run with some part of it destroyed.  It may even get repealed.  But I think eventually people will realize that the GOP alternative, whatever they come up with, is not better.  In fact you may turn back on the road for a while but eventually I think the country will go back on the road to universal care as Obama had envisioned.  The reality is that if you believe that people have the right to health care, then we will all have to pay.  Obamacare or anything else that will cover people who can't afford it will mean higher costs for everybody else.  It is either higher premium for those who are not sick or higher taxes for those who pay taxes.  There is no way around that. 

So I think history will be kind to Obama about his signature legislation.  It may take 30 years but eventually people will give Obama an A for his effort in health care.  The original implementation was a C as he could have come up with a better bill and getting the whole thing started better.

I will step back from analyzing the Obama presidency and talk about Trump since he was just inaugurated.  Trump's speech is one of the most pessimistic I have heard.  He talks about American carnage and how America is in the dumps, the country mired in poverty and being ripped off by foreign countries.  Apparently he does not know about crime statistics are falling, the stock market is at all time high and unemployment is low.  That is not to say we don't have a lot of problems.  But compared to the Depression and even eight years ago, we are way better off.  Whatever happened to "we have nothing to fear but fear itself"?

Trump said that he will unite the civilized world against radical Islam terrorists.  Yet he said that NATO and the UN are irrelevant.  He is now moving the U.S. embassy from Tel Aviv to Jerusalem.  So he is angering NATO, UN and the Arabs.  What countries are then in his coalition against the terrorists?  As America looks inward and Trump is applauding nationalism in western Europe, the world will become more dangerous.  I think rise of nationalism has been one of the greatest causes of wars throughout history.  Will our allies trust the U.S. if Trump constantly talk about other countries have to defend themselves?  Will Japan and South Korea build nuclear weapons?  Will Southeast Asian countries and Australia turn more to China?

I find it shocking that Trump's administration is saying that this is the biggest inaugural when there are pictures showing that it is way smaller than recent inaugurals, particular those of Obama.  I guess he thinks that if you say it long enough people will believe it.  I see why he likes Putin.  They are the same, they just keep lying.  Just like most of the world don't believe Putin, soon the rest of the world won't believe the U.S. either.  Trump and Putin have no credibility in the world stage.  Did you see Putin scored bunch of goals in a hockey game?  The defense was worse than one at an NHL all star game.  Nobody will believe that Putin is a skilled player watching that tape.  Almost as bad as Kim Jong Un scoring a hole in one for 18 straight holes.

Then words came out that Trump is not planning on releasing his tax return when the audit is finished.  His mouthpieces go on tv and said that the American people elected him even though he did not release his returns so that means people don't care about it.  Of course when he was campaigning he said he will release them.  Those who took him at his words are also the ones who believe that he will build the wall with Mexican money.  And I am sure Putin does not release his tax return either.

Unlike Mitch McConnelll who said his first priority is to make Obama a one term president, I will give Trump a chance to prove me wrong.  But I am not optimistic about a person who has kinder words for Putin than our European allies, Canada, Mexico and Japan.  One last note:  he says that D.C.  has been a boon not for the American people but for small group of rich people.  Yet his cabinet are full of those kind of people.  I guess they are the ones who will build the wall and get the Mexicans to pay for it.

As Obama is about to finish his presidency, I am going to look back at how he did.  Today I am going to look at the economy.  I do not believe that a president has a great deal of control over the economy.  With globalization, what happens in the rest of the world has more influence on the pocket book of Americans than the president.  But most Americans don't believe that.  That is why Clinton beat Bush even though Bush had won a war.  But if the economy is so important and Americans think that the president has great influence, then I don't see how the GOP can claim that they can do a better job than the Democrats.  Clinton presided over prosperity with a budget surplus.  Bush the second presided over a disastrous economy.  Obama brought back stability and the economy is doing way better than 8 years ago with the stock market at an all time high after crashing in 2008.  So it seems that Obama has done a great job.

The GOP will say that after any recession, there is bound to be a recovery and that this recovery is not that great and been slow in coming.  A Bush advisor recently faulted Obama for the slow recovery.  But this is from a guy who was part of the administration when the economy collapsed.  How dare he make this argument?  I personally don't fault Bush for the economy.  I don't think his tax cut led to the down fall. But I don't see where you can argue that a tax cut is going to be the solution for our problems.  If a manager led a team to last place, and then someone else led them to the middle of the standing, you can't argue that the first guy was a better manager.  That makes no sense whatsoever. 

There were very little choice when Obama took over.  He had to save the big banks and GM.  Those who argued against that are just wrong.  If he did not do that and more banks, insurance companies and auto makers fail, we would be in dire strait today and Obama would have been blamed for it.  So I think he did what he had to do and given that the U.S. economy has recovered better than those of Europe and Japan, I think he did well.  Let's face it, most manufacturing jobs will not come back no matter what the president does.  For those who want to drill more oil, mine more coal, you are wrong.  Clean energy is the future and Obama tried to help that industry.  There were mistakes made but to continue depend on the old industries will make our economy and environment worse in the future.  Overall I give Obama an A for effort in economy and B for results.

I see that Trump has nominated Betsy DeVos for sec. of education.  She is from Michigan and is perhaps the biggest advocate for charter schools and vouchers to be used by families at any school, public or private.  Since she is basically the mother of charter schools in Michigan, I try to find out how successful these school have been in Michigan.  It seems there are a lot of back and forth between the critics and supporters of these schools.  Some have called them total failures and that some advocates of charter schools have stayed away from supporting the Michigan schools.  Some say that these schools improved the reading and math results of students by two to three months per year, especially in Detroit students.  It seems these reports are conflicted and I wonder if anyone living in Michigan can shed some light on the success or failure of these schools.

I see reason to support and criticize both sides of this debate.  I think that the public schools in large urban areas in this country are doing a poor job.  The teacher unions in these districts are not helpful to the students.  They serve mostly to protect the teachers.  On the other hand, I don't think vouchers or charter schools are the panacea that their supporters paint them to be.  For example, most private schools have admission standards so they are taking in better students.  The parents and students who take vouchers and go to these schools are putting in more effort in their education than most of those who stayed behind.  The private schools can also expel students who are disruptive but it is much more difficult for public schools to do so.  So to me in order to say that a private school is better than the neighborhood school, it will have to produce graduates that are way better than the neighborhood public school.

In many countries, including my native Hong Kong, the public schools are better than private schools because its tuition is way lower and you have to pass exams to get in.  So again, whoever is able to pick the students, is going to produce better graduates.  Some countries, like Sweden, abandoned the voucher system after finding it did not do better than regular public school.  So there are no easy solutions.  I don't know if Betsy DeVos is competent for this job.  But I hope she will try to get a lot of opinions from different sources and not just go ahead and dismantle public school education.