ISHIGAKI, Japan — When the flotilla of 21 fishing boats arrived at an island chain at the center of a growing territorial dispute with China, the captains warned the dozens of activists and politicians aboard not to attempt a landing.I personally welcome the dispute --- one, because neither China nor Japan has the slightest interest or inclination toward military conflict; but second, in the case of Japan, a forceful and independent stand will allow it to make the case for its geographic interests independent of the United States. It's time to cut the cord. The U.S. will need Japan to stand up as China's regional balancer in the Pacific. The balance of power is changing, but Japan's a powerful country. Let those two East Asian giants work things out on their own.
Ten of the activists jumped into the shark-infested waters anyway, swimming ashore on Sunday and planting the rising sun flag that evokes painful memories of Imperial Japan’s 20th-century march across Asia.
“We feel that they dragged us into an international incident,” said Masanori Tamashiro, one of the boat captains.
That feeling is widely shared in Japan, where a small number of nationalists has pushed the country to assert itself more boldly to counter China’s and South Korea’s economic rise and China’s quickly evolving territorial ambitions. The conflict with China has raised the specter that the United States, Japan’s longtime defender, could be pulled into the fight.
The nationalists have gained traction for their cause in recent months by taking advantage of the government’s political weakness, forcing the governing party to take a tougher stand on the islands west of here, known as the Senkakus in Japan and the Diaoyu in China.
But the activists are also tapping into a widespread anxiety over China, which intensified two years ago during the last major flare-up over the Senkakus. China retaliated then for Japan’s arrest of a fishing captain by starving Japan of the rare earths needed for its already struggling electronics industry. That anxiety became more pronounced in recent months as China expanded its claims in the nearby South China Sea, challenging Vietnam, the Philippines and others over more than 40 islands in a vast area, and backing its statements with aggressive moves that included sending larger patrol boats to disputed waters.
There is still little appetite in pacifist Japan for a full-blown confrontation with China. But analysts say consensus is growing on the need to stand up to China as power in the region appears to slip further from economically fading Japan and the United States.
“We are all gearing up for an international tug of war in this region,” said Narushige Michishita, an expert on security issues at the National Graduate Institute for Policy Studies in Tokyo. “Whenever the distribution of power changes in a dramatic way, people start to redraw lines.”
Fallout from the video was swift, with Irvine-based In-N-Out Burger announcing Tuesday it had severed its relationship with Central Valley Meat, one of its suppliers.You make a choice when you eat meat. You have to kill the animals. They're going to puke up bile and gunk, their eyes are going to bulge out, they're going to go down ugly, no matter how it's done. So, make a choice. If animals were blessed with "human" rights, then we wouldn't eat them. They're not. But environmentalists are anti-human, so it goes without saying they'll put the welfare of animals over that of humans.
"In-N-Out Burger would never condone the inhumane treatment of animals and all of our suppliers must agree to abide by our strict standards for the humane treatment of cattle," Mark Taylor, In-N-Out's chief operating officer, said in a statement.
@jesseltaylor@dloesch When you've lost Dana Loesch ... well, she's like herpes. So actually she'll probably be back.
— TBogg (@tbogg) August 21, 2012
Even as the Republican establishment continued to call for Representative Todd Akin of Missouri to drop out of his Senate race because of his comments on rape and abortion, Republicans approved platform language on Tuesday calling for a constitutional amendment outlawing abortion with no explicit exceptions for cases of rape or incest.RELATED: At the Los Angeles Times, "Todd Akin touts support from crusader who espoused theories on rape" (via Memeorandum).
The anti-abortion plank, approved by the Republican platform committee Tuesday morning in Tampa, Fla., was similar to the planks Republicans have included in their recent party platforms, which also called for a constitutional ban on abortions. The full convention is set to vote on the party’s platform on Monday.
While Republican officials stressed that the plank did not go into granular details, saying that they were better left to the states, the language of the plank seems to leave little room for exceptions to the abortion ban. It states that “the unborn child has a fundamental individual right to life which cannot be infringed.”
“Faithful to the ‘self-evident’ truths enshrined in the Declaration of Independence, we assert the sanctity of human life and affirm that the unborn child has a fundamental individual right to life which cannot be infringed,” said the draft platform language approved Tuesday, which was first reported by CNN. “We support a human life amendment to the Constitution and endorse legislation to make clear that the Fourteenth Amendment’s protections apply to unborn children.”
The timing of the approval of the Republican anti-abortion plank was awkward for Mitt Romney, who has denounced Mr. Akin’s comments about rape and abortion and who has said that he supports exceptions to allow abortions in cases of rape. And it comes as his selection of his running mate, Representative Paul D. Ryan of Wisconsin, was already drawing scrutiny for his support for a more absolute ban on abortions, even in cases of rape or incest.
Heading into next week's Republican convention, Mitt Romney remains within striking distance of President Barack Obama but faces steep challenges in inducing voters to warm up to him as a candidate, a new Wall Street Journal/NBC News poll has found.The full results are here. Looks like a good sample, although it's a little heavy on Democrat respondents (34 percent). That said, the findings are in line with what we know already, and swing state polling shows Romney very competitive.
Mr. Romney's choice of Rep. Paul Ryan as his running mate has stirred excitement within the GOP that he can defeat the president. But the poll found little evidence the pick will affect the election, beyond helping unify Mr. Romney's conservative base.
Mr. Obama's lead over Mr. Romney was 48% to 44% in the new poll, about the same as a month earlier and within the poll's margin of error of plus or minus 3 points.
The survey of 1,000 registered voters, taken Aug. 16-20, showed that significant swaths of the electorate harbor reservations about the former Massachusetts governor, concerns that have budged little since the general-election fight began in earnest four months ago.
At the same time, Mr. Obama continues to receive low marks for his handling of the economy, particularly among undecided voters, who are more pessimistic than are voters overall about the country's economic future. The dour outlook among undecided voters could hamper Mr. Obama's ability to turn his current lead into a winning majority.
Mr. Romney outscored the president on leadership qualities. He polled higher when those participating were asked which man has better executive skills, ideas to improve the economy and ability to change "business as usual'' in Washington.
But since the spring, Mr. Romney has made scant headway in persuading the public that he understands the concerns of average Americans.
Barely a third of those polled gave him better marks than the president on caring about average people, dealing with the concerns of women or seniors, or being a calm and steady leader.
More than half said Mr. Romney was "out of step with most Americans' thinking," compared with 44% who said that of Mr. Obama.
"Mitt Romney heads into his convention with a lot of repair work to do with his image," said Democratic pollster Peter Hart, who conducted the poll along with Republican Bill McInturff.
Unfortunately I can no longer go forward with confidence believing that Akin can win this race.#mosen
— Dana Loesch (@DLoesch) August 21, 2012
After Akin attacked party ticket I'm not sure how he can walk it back. It's his decision to withdraw , I hope he makes right one.#MOsen
— Dana Loesch (@DLoesch) August 21, 2012
I have been on the front lines of this battle for a long while. Akin is a good person, has a good record. He and the party hurt his chance.
— Dana Loesch (@DLoesch) August 21, 2012
And the golden rule: as a GOP candidate, you DO NOT attack the ticket. Period, period, period, period, period. THE END.
— Dana Loesch (@DLoesch) August 21, 2012
Defiant Senate candidate Todd Akin said in a pair of radio appearances Tuesday that he will not drop out of his race against Sen. Claire McCaskill, promising to “rush to the gunfire” rather than away from it, following his controversial remarks about rape and abortion.More at the link. And follow all the action at Dana's Twitter feed.
Despite urgings from much of the Republican Party hierarchy to drop his candidacy before a deadline this evening, Akin told radio hosts Mike Huckabee and Dana Loesch that he still believes he can beat McCaskill.
Akin, 65, portrayed himself as a man of principle, unwilling to give up his fight just because of comments that he portrayed as a minor misstep. “One word, one sentence, [on] one day out of place and all of a sudden the entire establishment turns on you,” Akin told Loesch, whose syndicated show is broadcast from KFTK-FM in St. Louis.
Barack Obama, who made history when he was elected president four years, would make a different kind of history if he wins re-election in November: claiming a second term when most Americans say they aren't better off than they were when he moved into the Oval Office.Romney will close the deal in the remaining months of the campaign.
Since Ronald Reagan challenged President Carter nearly three decades ago, the rhetorical debate question has become an iconic one for voters. Are you better off than you were four years ago? Now, in USA TODAY/Gallup polls nationwide and in the 12 top battleground states, most voters say the situation for them and their families hasn't improved over the past four years -- the most downbeat response of the electorate in elections since then.
Even so, President Obama, who in 2008 became the first African American elected president, maintains a lead over challenger Mitt Romney in the battleground states likely to decide the election, 47%-44%. That's better than his standing in the non-battleground states, where Romney leads 47%-45%.
Despite airing millions of dollars in TV ads and taking a high-profile trip abroad, Romney has failed to budge in the swing states, stuck at 44% or 45% since April. In that time, Obama has maintained a steady 47% despite a string of disappointing monthly jobs reports and an 8.3% unemployment rate.
The president's vulnerabilities on the economy have opened the door to a re-election rebuke, analysts of all stripes agree, but so far Romney has failed to walk through that opening. In the survey and follow-up interviews, voters say they have lost much of their faith that Obama can fix the economy but aren't convinced they can trust Romney to watch out for them and their interests.
Romney's biggest opportunities to do so lie ahead, at the Republican National Convention that opens Monday in Tampa and in the presidential debates in October. "I'm really kind of torn, and I'm glad I don't have to vote today," says Kerry O'Hearn, 55, of Grandville, Mich., who was called in the poll. "There's just something about Romney that I'm not sure I like." She voted for Obama four years ago, but if she had to grade him now on the economy, she would give him a D.
WASHINGTON — They came to town promising something new and different, a fresh reprieve from the antics and proclivities of a “Washington” they disdained.RELATED: At LAT, "FBI not investigating Republican skinny-dipping, drinking in Israel."
But during a trip to Israel last summer, several House Republican freshmen engaged in a late-night swim in the Sea of Galilee, complete with one skinny-dipping congressman whose choice threatened to tarnish the reputation of the House newcomers as superserious number-crunchers who sleep on their office couches and go to bed before midnight.
On a trip billed as a foreign policy fact-finding mission last year, a large group of Republican members of Congress, and some of their staff and family members, decided to take a swim in the sea after a long day.
Several members — including Representative Steve Southerland II of Florida, who jumped into the water holding hands with his 21-year-old daughter — said they were moved to dip for religious reasons. (The sea is believed by Christians to be the location where Jesus walked on water.)
While most of the members remained clothed, or largely so, Representative Kevin Yoder of Kansas decided to disrobe entirely, as reported first by Politico on Sunday. This sent most of the members fleeing for the shore, said a participant, and prompted a harsh rebuke the next day from Representative Eric Cantor, the House majority leader, who was on the trip but did not swim in the sea.
More than 80 members of the House went on the trip, which was arranged by Mr. Cantor, as guests of the American Israel Education Foundation, a charity affiliated with the American Israel Public Affairs Committee, a pro-Israel lobbying group. It was believed to be the largest number of members of Congress to make the trip during a single recess, according to the organizers at the time. Mr. Cantor’s comments were made to the entire traveling group, said one person there, saying that members should not detract from the trip’s mission.
Apple Inc. AAPL surpassed Microsoft Corp. MSFT Monday as the largest U.S. company ever, measured by stock-market value.Continue reading.
Apple hit the new milestone—$623.52 billion—at a time when its influence on the economy, on the stock market and on popular culture rivals that of some of the most powerful companies in U.S. history: General Motors Co., GM whose Corvette and Impala typified a confident postwar manufacturing giant; Microsoft, whose technology heralded the arrival of the personal computer and the early Internet age; and International Business Machines Corp., IBM whose buttoned-down rigor inspired rivals to reach for greatness.
"It is one of those iconic companies," says Richard Sylla, professor of financial history at New York University's Stern School of Business. "When I think about these companies, their products were used by all kinds of people and their leaders were considered geniuses."
FOR all you know, Angela Merkel is even now contemplating how to break up the euro. Surely Germany’s long-suffering chancellor must be tempted, given the endless euro-bickering over rescues that later turn out to be inadequate. How she must tire of fighting her country’s corner, only to be branded weak by critics at home. How she must resent sacrificing German wealth, only to be portrayed as a Nazi in some of the very countries she is trying to rescue.Keep reading.
But for this very practical woman there is also a practical reason to start contingency planning for a break-up: it is looking ever more likely. Greece is buckling (see article). Much of southern Europe is also in pain, while the northern creditor countries are becoming ever less forgiving: in a recent poll a narrow majority of Germans favoured bringing back the Deutschmark. A chaotic disintegration would be a calamity. Even as Mrs Merkel struggles to find a solution, her aides are surely also sensibly drawing up a plan to prepare for the worst.
This week our briefing imagines what such a “Merkel memorandum” might say (see article). It takes a German point of view, but its logic would apply to the other creditor countries. Its conclusions are stark—not least in terms of which euro member it makes sense to keep or drop. But the main message is one of urgency. For the moment, breaking up the euro would be more expensive than trying to hold it together. But if Europe just keeps on arguing, that calculation will change.
