2013年8月31日 星期六

王榮文、沈登恩、鄧維楨、張天立


 80-90年代我是遠流出版公司的讀者幫手等. 
自從他決定不出版張戎夫婦寫的毛澤東傳
我決定盡可能遠離該出版社.
-----
我也買過鄧維楨先生出的獨立評論翻版等書
 ----
約1998年  張天立先生等人到我公司開過一次會....




 《服貿研討會》張天立:如果博客來變中資 你還敢買書嗎

博客來網路書店及TAAZE讀冊生活創辦人張天立。(記者劉信德攝)
掌控通路 將影響言論自由
〔記 者陳慧萍/台北報導〕兩岸服貿協議引發出版業者強烈反彈,讀冊生活(TAAZE)、博客來網路書店創辦人張天立昨天表示,服貿協議對台灣「百害無一利」, 連文化部官員都認為不妥,只是不敢公開反對;中資若掌控台灣書店通路,將直接影響台灣言論自由,造成寒蟬效應,「如果博客來變成中資,你還敢放心買書 嗎?」
台大經濟系、台大社科院公共經濟研究中心昨天共同舉辦「如何簽定服貿協議,共創兩岸雙贏」系列研討會,張天立出席指出,政府一再強調 服貿協議沒有開放出版業,只開放印刷業和發行通路,但是通路就等於是出版業的媒體,會直接左右消費者接觸的出版品,「如果中資實質控制台灣書店通路,討論 民主、法輪功書籍還有可能上架嗎?」
張天立強調,看待兩岸服貿協議不能單純以商業邏輯思考,中國大陸沒有言論自由,不是正常國家,全國五、六百家出版社全都是國營,台灣的業者完全不可能與這樣的國家資本對抗;如果台灣是和紐西蘭、澳洲等其他國家簽服貿協議,相信民眾不會這麼擔心。
他指出,許多台灣出版社背後股東是印刷廠,就算出版業不開放,也會被對岸印刷、通路業者影響甚至夾擊;台灣開放唯一籌碼讓大陸進來,百害無一利,「想起來就毛骨悚然」。
消費者購書資料 落入北京
投入網路書店十八年的張天立提出警告,若台灣網路書店被中資攻佔,台灣人在網站上瀏覽的頁面、書籍評論,都將會被對岸政府掌控,這是很可怕的事情;尤其是博客來擁有五百萬個會員,如果變成中資單位,消費者購書資料全被大陸官方掌握得一清二楚,「你還能放心買書嗎?」
張天立並說,政府和對岸簽署服貿協議輕忽草率,不僅沒有和業者溝通,連文化部都是簽署後才被告知,據他私下了解,包括部長龍應台在內,文化部各級主管其實都是反對的,只是不敢公然表態,足見政府決策過程有多不透明,令人擔憂。


遠景出版事業有限公司沈登恩



http://www.vistaread.com/aboutshen.php
文/葉麗晴


沈登 恩(1949─2004)嘉義人,成長於靜瑟優美的蘭潭附近俯養天地的靈氣,造就不凡的思想;從小酷愛閱讀的他笑言學校的圖書館藏書早已不敷閱讀,遂常利 用投稿《國語日報》所得稿費購買自己喜愛的圖書,及至就讀嘉義高商後編輯《嘉義青年》初試啼聲即得到文壇眾多知名作家的賞識,漸漸嶄露頭角始與文壇結下不 解之緣,這一路的冥冥安排也註定一段足堪玩味的人生。

沈登恩於嘉義高商畢業後先後在明山書局及晨鐘出版社短暫任職旋於一九七四年與鄧維楨、王榮文三人共同創辦遠景出版社,出版台灣、香港作家作品及有計畫的大 規模邀請名家譯筆,翻譯外國知名作品出版《世界文學全集》共一百三十冊是青年學子提升心靈之美最佳讀物,當時旗下擁有鹿橋、黃春明、陳映真、宋澤萊、吳 晟、鍾肇政、李喬、陳若曦、七等生、白先勇、李敖、高陽、林語堂等重量級作家,至此沈登恩引領出版風騷開創其創立的遠景出版社進入一段輝煌歷史,更在台灣 出版史上留下一頁令人懷念的篇章。

辭後鄧維楨和王榮文相繼退出遠景出版社由沈登恩獨掌大局,致力發揚台灣文學陸續推出由張良澤主導整理出版《鍾理和全集》、《吳濁流全集》、《吳新榮全集》 及由鍾肇政、葉石濤主編出版之《光復前台灣文學》共十二冊。同時引進多位香港作家,是早期出版界與香港文化圈互動最頻繁的出版社之一,最為讀者熟悉且津津 樂道的是開啟國人閱讀《金庸武俠小說》的大門,其後的《倪匡科幻小說》也不遑多讓,擁有廣大的讀者至今熱情不滅,另外令學術界所稱道的是不計盈虧的大手筆 出版素有香江第一健筆之稱的《林行止作品集》,十幾年來已印行九十餘冊蔚然成林。





沈登恩一生的重大轉折點是始於一九八三年出版《諾貝爾文學獎全 集》,這雖是將「遠景」的文化地位和形象帶入另一個高峰的壯舉,但也是讓遠景從巔峰墜入不可救藥的財務窘境的開端,這一役是沈登恩的奮力一搏還是孤注一擲 恐怕很難論斷,所謂成者為王、敗者為寇誰能預言未來呢?誰敢斷言此投資會成功或失敗呢?也許這重重的一擊對沈登恩及遠景有著不可抹滅的深遠影響,但時至今 日如用不以成敗論英雄的宏觀角度看待此事的話,仍不免讓人對沈登恩的獨到眼光及恢宏魄力給予讚賞;但終究時空是改變了,跟隨著讀者的閱讀品味亦不同了,沈 登恩任性的堅持出自己喜歡的好書,似乎也逐漸的失去對市場敏銳的嗅覺,這是一位出版人的悲歌或更甚者是讀者的損失,因為好書和暢銷書不全然是劃上等號,沈 登恩當然也意識到時代的轉變,但或許是時不我予吧!往後諸多出版品幾乎是叫好不叫座,屬於他的那個盡情揮灑的年代似乎已漸行漸遠了……

沈登恩一生熱愛出版,用生命燃燒理想,擘劃他的出版版圖,也可以說是個何其幸運的人,在知識匱乏的七○年代懷抱著興趣,出版好書滋養無數當代的讀者也完成 自己的夢想闖出一片天,是在警總耳目密佈的時代敢於挑戰威權的人,是將台灣圖書封面由黑白變彩色的人,是第一位參加國建會的出版人,張愛玲曾說「成名要趁 早。」對照沈登恩的發跡算是早了!然而隨著他的去世也宣告沈登恩的時代已結束,縱使後人對他的評價褒貶不一,但我們從他過去的種種事蹟或許可以肯定他是一 個出版的先行者,我不禁要問:到底是時代拋棄了他,還是他鄙視這個時代?這位寂寞的先行者在他閤眼的最後一刻,據說在嘴角揚起一抹微笑;或許這答案他早已 了然於胸……

2013年8月30日 星期五

Sir Howard Panter, Rosemary Squire



大使劇院集團的創始人夫婦


幾個月前,霍華德•潘特爵士(Sir Howard Panter)在英國女王生日榮譽授勛時被授予騎士頭銜,以獎勵他在戲劇方面做出的貢獻。他的夫人、大使劇院集團(Ambassador Theatre Group)聯合首席執行官、聯合創始人羅斯瑪麗•斯誇爾(Rosemary Squire)卻一無所獲。大使劇院擁有和經營著倫敦西區的數家劇院、一些英國地方性劇院,以及一家百老匯劇院。
她生氣嗎?“生氣。誰不想 (被封為女爵士)啊。”不過,向前看的心態還是占據了上風。斯誇爾說,和丈夫不同的是,她不需要外界的認可,盡管她確實因在戲劇方面的貢獻獲得過一枚大英 帝國官佐勛章(OBE)。在兩人共同擁有的董事會會議室里,她看著坐在身旁的丈夫說:“他以前得過的唯一獎項就是剋服閱讀障礙努力獎。我上學的時候成績一 直很好。”會議室中擺放著在他們的作品中合作過的各路明星的照片,包括《恨世者》(The Misanthrope)中的戴米恩•劉易斯(Damian Lewis)和凱拉•奈特利(Keira Knightley),以及《三姐妹》(Three Sisters)中的克裡斯汀•斯科特•托馬斯(Kristin Scott Thomas)。斯誇爾說:“你數學得過幾次A?四次還是五次?真不少。虧你還是個生意人……”

丈夫辯解道:“我只是有點閱讀障礙。”
斯誇爾不敢苟同:“你讓他說說自己家郵編多少。”
霍華德只好認輸。他口袋里總是裝著一張小紙條,上面寫著自家郵編,因為在銀行辦事的時候有時需要用到。

夫妻倆發生分歧時,霍華德爵士往往會讓步,聽從妻子的意見。斯誇爾務實、直爽而且精力充沛,這正適合她作為企業運營負責人的角色,而霍華德則負責創意方面。 兩人都不承認自己是“戲子”。兩人似乎都沒有表現出戲劇化的做作,除非把吐字清晰以及控制發聲的能力算上——兩人在這兩方面都做得很好。

過 去20年裡,這對夫婦打造了英國最大的劇院集團之一。集團在英國全國擁有和經營著39家劇院,包括Lyceum劇院等許多著名的倫敦西區劇院。今年5月他 們收購了百老匯劇院Foxwoods,目前這家劇院正在上演音樂劇《蜘蛛俠:關閉黑暗》(Spider-Man: Turn Off the Dark)。他們還有擴張到亞太地區的雄心壯志。該集團製作和參與聯合製作的作品包括,獲得過英國電影和電視藝術學院(Bafta)頒發獎項的詹姆斯•麥 卡沃伊(James McAvoy)主演的《麥克白》(Macbeth),《律政俏佳人》(Legally Blonde),大衛•哈塞爾霍夫(David Michael Hasselhoff,曾出演電視劇《護灘使者》(Baywatch))等明星主演的默劇。他們還經營一項在線訂票業務——ATG Tickets。在藝術機構補貼遭削減之際,他們的集團去年的銷售額從上一年的9240萬英鎊增長到1.088億英鎊,並實現營業利潤1500萬英鎊 (2011年的這個數字是830萬英鎊)。

夫婦倆的劇院集團每周有40萬席次等待觀眾光臨,他們堅持的一個原則是:必須提供“最優秀”的內 容,並迎合多元化人群。每一部作品、每一家劇院都是一個成本中心。霍華德爵士表示:“你得不停地思考,‘這是一部好戲嗎’?同時還得不停地權衡,‘我們能 讓這部戲賺錢嗎?這是部能在全球演出的戲嗎’?”

用一部賺錢的音樂劇來補貼另一部有創意但虧本的戲劇對於集團品牌沒有什麽好處。但規模經濟意味著,集團承擔得起製作新作品的風險,也有錢去投資。音樂劇《人鬼情未了》(Ghost)就是一例。

霍華德爵士表示:“在地方性劇院會出現這樣的情況,有一年曼徹斯特市場會異常火爆,但下一年就不行了,不過或許布裡斯托爾又會突然火爆起來,就這樣此起彼伏。組合效應意味著,這對我們不是生死攸關的問題。”

盡管作品推動著業務發展,但製作只是集團業務的一部分。ATG Tickets為ATG管理的所有英國劇院提供訂票服務,也為英國許多劇場、藝術家和演出打理訂票事務和電子商務。零售和營銷也是集團的重要業務。他們已 經投入了數百萬元,用於編制600萬家庭的數據。這就意味著,他們能夠實施精準營銷,而不是購買昂貴的電視和印刷廣告。霍華德爵士表示:“(我們事先就知 道)你喜歡什麽樣的戲,(也)知道你是否喜歡白葡萄酒。”
他們在悉尼設立了辦事處,作為進軍亞太地區的先頭部隊。進軍亞太地區的先鋒者是, 製作人、作曲家勞埃德•韋伯男爵(Lord Lloyd Webber)旗下的製作公司Tim McFarlane(前身是Really Useful Group)。進軍中國市場目前只是個夢想,還沒有可行的計劃。斯誇爾表示:“在中國市場站穩腳跟要耗費很長時間。”

向全球擴張的雄心壯志 已經大大超越了夫婦倆最初的起點。兩人在1979年的倫敦女王劇院(Queen’s Theatre)相識。當時,斯誇爾在售票處工作,而霍華德正在製作《夜鶯在歌唱》(And A Nightingale Sang)。1986年,斯誇爾有了第二個孩子,正在休產假時被裁掉了。
“霍華德給我打電話說,‘他們瘋了’。”霍華德讓斯誇爾來自己的製作公司當總經理。從此,兩人成為同事。這種工作關系後來發展成私人關系——兩人與各自的伴侶離婚後走到了一起。他們在1994年結婚,如今共同育有一女。

作 為獨立製片商,他們夢想著能買下一家劇院,來演出自己的作品。1992年,在兩個朋友的幫助下,他們以305萬英鎊買下了約克公爵劇院(Duke of York’s Theatre)。這兩個朋友分別是房地產企業家朋友彼得•貝克威思(Peter Beckwith)和希臘船運巨子、慈善家埃迪•庫盧昆季斯爵士(Sir Eddie Kulukundis)。很多原始投資者如今依然是股東。

2009年,他們用9000萬英鎊買下了Live Nation的16家劇院,其中大部分資金由私募股權基金Exponent提供。他們說,投資者(也是最大的股東)一直贊同他們在創意方面的雄心壯志。

斯誇爾表示:“他們認為,如果你有了好內容,就能賣出更多啤酒、更多門票、以及更多周邊商品。”但她不喜歡這種對社會活動非常男性化的看法。她要求他們轉移到威尼斯欣賞藝術,而不是喝酒和裝備黑色級別滑雪道,但這個要求遭到了拒絕。
這對夫妻否認了Exponent近期將出售持有的股份的傳言,但承認這在未來某個時候是必然會發生的。

外部投資者會打探他們的婚姻情況嗎?
霍華德笑道:“(如果我們離婚),投資者肯定會感到關切,這是人之常情。幸運的是,據我所知,我們的婚姻目前還是穩固的。”他緊接著看了一眼妻子,尋求保證。妻子卻說:“沒有誰是不可取代的。”
他們如何把私人生活與工作分開?
霍華德爵士表示:“在這方面我們做得很糟。”妻子也同意他的說法:“問問我們的孩子。他們說,回到家裡還要工作太可怕了。他們不喜歡我們把工作帶回家,但這很難做到。”
譯者/倪衛國

2013年8月28日 星期三

Barack Obama (2) 危機: 敘利亞用化學武器之後考驗總統


基於歐美人道基本價值  敘利亞用化學武器之後  歐美必須與予處罰.
但是這牽涉到他本人價值國內壓力  蘇-中-伊朗-阿拉伯諸國等的反對和報復
所以動武之後  各方可能都不感激美國
Barack  Obama 總統陷入多難局面   考驗他的領導能力
這些是版主私見

-----
洛杉磯時報

Syria chemical weapons response poses major test for Obama

Obama, who before taking office vowed to end the foreign policies of Bush, is now wrestling with some of the same moral and legal realities.



WASHINGTON — The apparent poison gas attack that killed hundreds of Syrian civilians last week is testing President Obama's views on military intervention, international law and the United Nations as no previous crisis has done.
The former constitutional law professor, who came to office determined to end what critics called the cowboy foreign policy of George W. Bush, now is wrestling with some of the same moral and legal realities that led Bush to invade Iraq without clear U.N. consent in 2003.
As U.S. officials discussed diplomatic and military options with allies in Europe and the Middle East, White House advisors indicated Tuesday that they were unlikely to seek either a vote in Congress or at the U.N. Security Council to authorize use of force. Last week, Obama said he had concerns about launching an attack on Syrian President Bashar Assad's government without a U.N. mandate.
Russia and China would almost certainly veto or delay any U.N. resolution condemning Syria or sanctioning reprisal. Top British and French officials, who are likely to support U.S. military action, have signaled they don't think a detour to the U.N. would be worthwhile.
White House Press Secretary Jay Carney said Tuesday that virtually no one doubted that Assad's government had carried out a chemical attack last week. But the Obama administration has yet to reveal the intelligence that led to that conclusion.
Syria's foreign minister, Walid Moallem, denied that government forces had used chemical weapons. "I dare them to produce any single piece of evidence," he said at a news conference in Damascus, the Syrian capital.
White House officials cautioned that Obama was still considering the options, but the administration appeared positioned to act quickly once he chooses a course. Defense Secretary Chuck Hagel said during a visit to Brunei that the Pentagon was prepared to strike targets in Syria and hinted that such a move could come within days.
Some experts said U.S. warships and submarines in the eastern Mediterranean could fire cruise missiles at Syrian targets as early as Thursday night, beginning a campaign that could last two or three nights. Obama leaves next Tuesday for a four day trip to Sweden and Russia, which strongly supports Assad's government, for the G-20 economic summit.
One U.S. official who has been briefed on the options on Syria said he believed the White House would seek a level of intensity "just muscular enough not to get mocked" but not so devastating that it would prompt a response from Syrian allies Iran and Russia.
"They are looking at what is just enough to mean something, just enough to be more than symbolic," he said.
Obama and his top aides have shared intelligence with key members of Congress. But White House aides made it clear Tuesday that Obama would not wait for Congress to return from its monthlong recess on Sept. 9, and House and Senate leaders signaled no plans to call members back for an emergency session.
"I can't imagine the president is going to do much more than the outreach he's already doing," said Jim Manley, former aide to Sen. Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nev.).
Sen. Carl Levin (D-Mich.), chairman of the Senate Armed Services Committee, said after a briefing that the administration was "proceeding cautiously." Obama is "considering a broad range of options that have been presented by our military leaders," he said.
Still, a growing number of lawmakers in both parties pressed the White House to seek authorization from Congress.
Rep. Scott Rigell (R-Va.) collected nearly three dozen signatures of House members on a letter he intended to send to the White House. It states that military action without a congressional vote "would violate the separation of powers that is clearly delineated in the Constitution." Congress stood ready to return for a debate on the issue, the letter says.
Other lawmakers worried that a few days of missile strikes might be counterproductive.
Sen. Christopher S. Murphy (D-Conn.), a member of the Foreign Relations Committee, said it would be "little more than a slap on the wrist" to the Syrian government, but could provoke retaliation from Assad that could draw America into "a much wider and much longer-term conflict that could mean an even greater loss of life within Syria."
Because of safety concerns, the team of U.N. inspectors in Damascus was forced to scrub a planned visit Tuesday to one of the suburbs allegedly hit by poison gas. They are to leave Syria on Sunday, but they probably will be withdrawn earlier if Washington warns that missile strikes are imminent.
"I would doubt" the United States or its allies would attack while the U.N. team was still in Syria, said Jean Pascal Zanders, a Belgian scientist and author of a blog that focuses on chemical weapons issues.
The U.N. team includes experts from the Organization for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons and the World Health Organization. Led by a Swedish scientist, Ake Sellstrom, the investigators are seeking to determine if sarin nerve gas or other toxic agents were used in Syria, though not who used them.

【周一專欄】王健壯:總統像個過路人


歐巴馬最近陷入了「馬英九困境」:他的政府團隊連續發生三件重大醜聞,但他對這些醜聞卻事前一無所知,事後又疏離以對,有媒體因此諷刺他是個「過路人總統」。
這三件醜聞是:白宮隱瞞美國駐利比亞大使館被恐怖份子攻擊真相的「班加西門」;辛辛那提國稅居刁難支持茶黨組織申請免稅的「國稅門」;以及司法部非法調閱「美聯社」(Associated Press)通聯紀錄的「AP門」。
醜聞之所以都被冠上一個「門」,源自尼克森時代的水門案。美國共和黨這次一舉逮到歐巴馬政府三項醜聞後,全黨士氣大振,他們把這三件醜聞一律與水門醜聞等量齊觀,歐巴馬也被形容為今之尼克森。
醜聞即是危機,但即使是支持歐巴馬的自由派,也對他的危機處理方式不敢領教。對這三項醜聞,白宮的回應祇有兩招:其一,強調總統事前毫不知情,也是閱報得知;其二,總統絕不介入正在進行中的個案犯罪調查。
但 也就是因為這樣的回應模式,讓歐巴馬陷入了「馬英九困境」。《華盛頓郵報》專欄作家梅班克(Dana Milbank)在小布希當總統時,曾經被人形容為「最敢也最懂得質疑總統的記者」,也是「讓總統最頭痛的記者」,但他最近卻連寫幾篇專欄痛批歐巴馬,並 把歐巴馬形容為「他好像是個站在吧台邊喝酒的傢伙,每天看晚間電視新聞才得知天下事」。
在梅班克筆下,歐巴馬是個「漠不關心的總統」、「過 路人總統」以及「旁觀者總統」,好像所有錯誤都與他無關。但梅班克卻質疑:總統即使不可能盡知他的團隊所為之事,但政府是他的,他要扛起責任,他可以撤換 官員,也可以對官員愚蠢錯誤的政策叫停;但歐巴馬在這三項醜聞中卻表現得像個局外人。
以「AP門」為例。AP在去年曾獨家報導,CIA在葉 門成功阻止了一項基地組織想以人肉炸彈炸毀美國班機的陰謀行動,但司法部卻認為AP洩露軍機,並且未經告知AP,即非法向電訊公司調閱AP通聯紀錄,其中 包括:五位記者與一位編輯,二十條包括手機與市話的線路,五個包括記者住家與辦公室的場所,以及長達兩個月的所有通話紀錄。
依照法律以及依 照慣例,政府調閱媒體通聯紀錄前,必須以傳票事前告知媒體或記者,可讓媒體有尋求法律抗爭的機會。但司法部這次卻是在調閱近一年後才通知AP。而且為了保 障非當事人的隱私與通訊自由,通聯紀錄的調閱範圍依法應該能小則小,而非能大則大,但司法部這次調閱範圍之大卻是前所未見;也難怪有人說:「班加西門」是 欲加之罪,「國稅門」是政治鬥爭,但「AP門」卻是不折不扣的濫權醜聞。
但對濫權事實如此明顯的「AP門」,歐巴馬卻堅持「我不會道歉」。 事實上,歐巴馬雖然曾在大學教過憲法,但他任內打擊媒體洩密卻始終不遺餘力,不論起訴洩密官員或洩密記者,人數之多都遠遠超過他的前任,目前至少有六位官 員與六位記者都有案在身。其中最知名的案件是:無人飛機參與刺殺賓拉登行動的洩密案,美國與以色列以電腦病毒攻擊伊朗核武設備的洩密案,以及《維基解密》 的洩密案。對這幾項以洩密為由而侵犯新聞自由的濫權行為,歐巴馬也從未道歉過,好像他根本沒讀過或教過憲法一樣。
把歐巴馬無限上綱比擬成尼克森,或許是共和黨的鬥爭策略;但就像梅班克所說,尼克森是個控制狂,歐巴馬卻正好相反,對政府作為毫不控制;但權力真空卻讓他的部屬認為無事不可為,濫權醜聞一再發生當然也是必然之事。
如果總統像個過路人,第二任魔咒當然很快就會應驗,甚至會讓第二個任期變成「垂死的總統任期」;歐巴馬與馬英九都是中了魔咒的總統,但能救他們的祇有他們自己。


12.12.20: 歐巴馬再膺《時代》風雲人物 被推崇為--新美國的建築師
鉅亨網編輯查淑妝綜合報導  2012-12-20 09:40:21  
美國《時代》雜誌年度風雲人物揭曉,剛成功連任美國總統的歐巴馬再次當選「風雲人物」 (Person of the Year) 。《時代》推崇歐巴馬在充滿挑戰性的 2012 年仍能展現出優越的應變能力,堪稱「新美國的建築師」。
《星島日報》報導,《時代》雜誌周三 (19日) 讚揚歐巴馬於競選連任期間展現出非凡的才能,成為自羅斯福總統以來首位連續兩屆獲得逾 5 成選票的美國總統,也是自 1940 年以來首位美國總統能夠在失業率高於 7.5% 情況下仍能成功連任。
然而,《時代》強調,歐巴馬再度膺選《時代》風雲人物,不但因為連任總統,更重要是他能夠掌握深遠影響美國的人口及社會變化因素。這不僅使他成為國家的象徵,更堪稱「新美國的建築師」。
歐巴馬接受《時代》訪問時表示:「實情是美國正逐步蛻變成更多元化和包容力更強的國家,能夠包容不同人士的差別,並且尊重社會上跟我們不同的人。」
歐巴馬在 2008 年當選美國首位黑人總統後,《時代》雜誌也曾評選他為當年風雲人物,那年美國經濟正值金融海嘯之後的「陣痛期」。相比之下,今年要面對的挑戰亦不相伯仲。 2012 年 9 月 11 日美國駐利比亞領事館遇襲;曠日持久的阿富汗戰爭無大進展;乾旱侵襲中西部,超級風暴肆虐東北部;經濟持續疲弱,國內生產總值增長緩慢。然而, 51 歲的歐巴馬聲望仍高,證明個人魅力非凡。
《時代》風雲人物選拔活動每年選出對世界影響最大的人物。於本月較早前截止的網上票選活動中,北韓領袖金正恩曾以約 560 萬票稱霸,但最後結果由雜誌編輯決定。
香港《文匯報》報導,《時代》周刊訪問新鮮出爐的年度風雲人物——總統歐巴馬,他除提及美國傳奇前總統林肯、「大政府」主張及對第 2 屆任期的展望等,更大談自己在今屆大選首場電視辯論時的失準。
歐巴馬提及,「重返亞太」是第 2 任期的外交重點之一。他表示,「中國將繼續崛起,我們樂見中國成功。一個穩定且邁向更民主開放的中國,對美國經濟、政治及安全均有利。」
被問及美國人對「大政府」的疑問時,奧巴馬強調問題不在於政府是否插手太多,而在於所作之事是否正確。奧巴馬稱,林肯是自己最喜歡的總統,因林肯令他明白,追求遠大目標及道德事業時,須親力親為,並作出許多妥協及犧牲。
《時代》記者在訪問尾聲提及,奧巴馬在今屆首場大選直播辯論表現失準,有奧營幕僚笑稱,他當時沉浸在「夏威夷時光」(Hawaii moment)。奧巴馬解釋,2008年上任之初面對眾多難題,他不禁跟幕僚打趣說,「不如帶家人一走了之,到夏威夷賣襯衫或沙冰為生。」


兩次當選《時代》風雲人物名單
  
■美國總統奧巴馬
■美國前總統克林頓
■美國前總統艾森豪威爾
■美國前總統羅斯福
■美國將軍馬歇爾
■美國前總統布希
■美國前總統杜魯門
■前蘇聯領袖斯大林
■美國前總統詹森
■前蘇聯領導人戈爾巴喬夫
■美國前總統尼克遜
■美國前總統里根
■英國前首相邱吉爾

資料來源:香港文匯報



 2012.11.7
昨天日本的小浜(Obama)居民鬆口氣
 ---

 國總統奧巴馬(Barack Obama)週二晚勝選後在芝加哥發表演講﹐演講文字稿由Roll Call記錄。

非常感謝你們。

今夜﹐在當年的殖民地贏得了決定自己命運的權利200多年以後﹐讓美利堅合眾國更加完美的任務又向前推進了一步。

這一進程是因為你們而向前推進的﹐因為你們再次確認了那種使美國勝利克服了戰爭和蕭條的精神﹐那種使美國擺脫絕望的深淵並走向希望的最高點的精神﹐以及那種雖然我們每個人都在追求自己的個人夢想、但我們同屬一個美國大家庭、並作為一個國家和民族共同進退的信仰。

今夜﹐在此次選舉中﹐你們這些美國人民提醒我們﹐雖然我們的道路一直艱難﹐雖然我們的旅程一直漫長﹐但我們已經讓自己振作起來﹐我們已經發起反擊﹐我們在自己內心深處知道﹐對美利堅合眾國來說﹐最美好一切屬於未來。


我想感謝所有參加此次選舉的美國人﹐無論你是首次參加選舉還是為投票曾長時間排隊等候。順便說一句﹐我們需要解決這些問題。無論你是到投票站投票還是發傳真投票﹐無論你選的是奧巴馬還是羅姆尼﹐你都讓別人聽到了自己的聲音﹐你都讓美國因你而不同。

我 要對羅姆尼州長說幾句話﹐我對他和保羅•萊恩在這次競爭激烈的選舉中的表現表示祝賀。我們可能爭奪得很激烈﹐但這僅僅是因為我們深愛著這個國家以及我們如 此強烈地關心著它的未來。從喬治到勒諾到他們的兒子米特﹐羅姆尼家族選擇了通過公共服務來回報美國﹐那是一種我們今夜表示敬重和讚許的遺產。我期待著今後 幾週能與羅姆尼州長坐下來討論一下我們可以從何處著手一起努力將美國推向前進。

我想對我在過去四年中的朋友和伙伴表示感謝。他就是美國的快樂戰士、無出其右的最佳副總統喬•拜登。

如 果不是那位20年前同意嫁給我的女性﹐我不會成為今天的我。請讓我公開說出下面這段話:米切爾﹐我對你的愛無以復加﹐我無比驕傲地看到其他美國人也愛上了 你這位我們國家的第一夫人。薩沙和瑪利亞﹐在我們所有人的見證下你們正成長為兩個堅強、聰明和美麗的年輕女性﹐就像你們的媽媽一樣。我十分以你們為榮。不 過我要說的是﹐眼下家裡養一條狗或許已經夠了。

在這個有史以來的最佳競選團隊和有史以來的最佳志願者隊伍中﹐你們有些人是這次新加入進來 的﹐有些人則是一開始就在我身邊。但你們所有人都屬於一個大家庭。無論你的工作是什麼﹐無論你從哪裡來﹐你們都將獲得我們共同創造的歷史記憶﹐你們都將被 一位充滿感激之情的總統終生感激。感謝你們始終充滿信心﹐無論是在高峰還是在低谷。你們鼓舞著我走完整個選舉過程﹐我對你們所做的每件事、你們所做的每項 不可思議的工作將一直充滿感激。

我知道政治角力有時會顯得小家子氣甚至愚蠢。它為憤世嫉俗者提供了足夠的口實﹐他們告訴我們政治不過是自 負者之間的競爭﹐是特殊利益集團的地盤。但如果你曾經有機會與參加我們集會的那些人以及高中體育館內擠在隔離繩外的那些人攀談﹐或者看到那些在遠離家鄉的 偏遠小縣的競選辦公室內加班工作的人﹐你會發現一些別的東西。

你將從一位年輕的活動現場組織者的聲音里聽到他的決心﹐他邊在大學里學習邊 從事助選工作﹐他希望確保每個孩子都能擁有同樣的機會。你將從一位志願者的聲音里聽到她的驕傲﹐她挨門動員選民是因為她哥哥終因當地一家汽車製造廠增加了 一個班次而有了工作。你將從一對軍人夫婦的聲音里聽到深深的愛國情懷。他們深夜時還在接聽選舉電話﹐以確保那些曾經為這個國家作戰的人不會返回家園時還要 為得到一份工作或棲身之所而苦苦爭鬥。


Jason Reed/Reuters
圖片:美國大選精彩瞬間回顧
正 因為如此﹐我們要進行選舉。這是政治所能夠實現的。正因為如此﹐選舉很重要。這不是小事﹐而是大事﹐是至關重要的事。在一個有三億人口的國家實行民主制度 可能嘈雜不堪、一團混亂、情況複雜。我們有自己的觀點。我們每個人都有自己深信的信仰。當我們經歷艱難時期﹐當我們作為一個國家做出重大決定時﹐這必然會 激發熱情﹐也必然會引發爭議。

今晚過後﹐這都不會改變﹐也不應該改變。我們進行的這些爭論恰恰體現了我們的自由。我們永遠不應忘記﹐就在我們講話之際﹐遙遠國度的人們現在正冒著生命危險﹐僅僅是為了獲得一個能夠對重要問題進行爭論、像我們今天這樣投票的機會。

不過﹐儘管我們存在這樣那樣的分歧﹐我們大多數人都對美國的未來有著某些共同的希望。我們希望我們的孩子成長的國家能夠讓他們上最好的學校、接受最好老師的教導。一個無愧於全球技術、探索和創新領袖光輝歷史的國家﹐倘能如此﹐各種好工作和新企業將隨之而來。

我 們希望我們的孩子能夠生活在一個沒有債務之累、沒有不公之苦、沒有全球變暖帶來的破壞之虞的美國。我們希望留給後代一個安全、受到全球尊重和讚賞的國家﹐ 一個由全球有史以來最強大的軍事力量和最好的部隊保衛的國家﹐一個滿懷信心走過戰爭、在人人享有自由和尊嚴的承諾之上構建和平的國家。

我 們堅信一個慷慨的美國、一個富有同情心的美國、一個寬容的美國。美國向一位移民的女兒的夢想打開了大門﹐讓她有機會在我們的學校學習、對著我們的國旗宣誓 ﹔美國向芝加哥南部地區的一個小男孩打開了大門﹐讓有機會他看到一個最近街角以外的遠大人生﹔美國向北卡羅來納州的一位家具工人的孩子打開了大門﹐讓他有 機會實現自己當醫生或科學家、工程師或企業家、外交官甚至是總統的夢想﹐這是我們希望的未來。這是我們共同的願景。這是我們奔赴的方向﹐向前的方向。這是 我們需要實現的目標。

現在﹐我們對如何實現這一目標存在分歧﹐有時分歧還很嚴重。正如兩個多世紀以來一樣﹐進展的取得將是斷斷續續﹐並非總是一條直線﹐並非總是一帆風順。

承認我們擁有共同的希望和夢想﹐僅憑這一點不會結束所有的僵局﹐或解決我們所有的問題﹐或代替推動這個國家向前所需的達成共識和做出艱難讓步的辛苦努力。不過﹐這一共同的紐帶是我們必須開始的地方。

我 們的經濟正在好轉。長達10年的戰爭即將結束。一場漫長的競選現已落幕。無論我是否贏得了你們的選票﹐我一直在傾聽你們的故事﹐向你們學習﹐是你們使我成 為一位更好的總統。聽過你們的故事和困難經歷﹐我在重返白宮時對今後需要做的工作和未來將懷著比以往更堅定的決心和更大的熱情。

今晚你們 把票投給了行動﹐而不是像以往投給了政治。你們選舉我們來專注於你們的工作﹐而不是我們的工作。在未來的幾週和幾個月內﹐我將期待與兩黨領袖接觸並合作﹐ 以便麵對我們團結一致才能解決的問題。減少赤字﹐改革稅法﹐修改移民制度﹐擺脫對外國石油的依賴。我們還很更多工作要做。

但這並不意味著你們的工作就此結束。民主國家公民的角色並不隨著投票完結而結束。美國看重的從來都不是能夠為我們個人做些什麼﹐而是我們團結一致通過自治這一艱難、令人倍感挫折但必要的工作能夠實現什麼。這正是我們的立國之本。

美國的財富多於世界上任何其他國家﹐但真正讓我們富有的並非金錢﹔我們擁有有史以來最強大的軍力﹐但真正讓我們充滿力量的並非軍隊﹔我們的大學和文化為全世界所艷羨﹐但美國真正吸引各國人踏上這片土地的魅力也不在於此。

真 正讓美國與眾不同的﹐是將這個地球上最多元化的國家的人民團結到一起的那些紐帶。是我們共命運的信念﹐是只有當我們肩負某些對彼此以及對後代的責任美國才 能走下去的信念﹐是無數的美國人前赴後繼為之奮鬥的自由──它既賦予了我們權利﹐也給我們帶來了責任﹔是愛、慈善、義務和愛國。正是這些讓美國變得偉大。

今 晚﹐我滿懷希望﹐因為我已經看到美國精神正在得以發揚。我看到有些家族企業﹐所有者寧可減少自己的薪酬也不願讓鄰居丟掉工作﹔我看到有些工人寧願縮減自己 的工時也不願看到朋友沒有活幹﹔我看到有些士兵在失去一條腿或胳膊之後又選擇再次入伍﹔我看到海豹突擊隊員不避危險沖上樓梯、沖入黑暗﹐因為他們知道有一 個兄弟在做他的後盾。

在新澤西和紐約的海岸﹐我也看到了美國精神。每一個政黨和各級政府的領導者都捐棄分歧﹐為在駭人風暴過後的廢墟上重 建社區各盡己力。就在不久前的一天﹐在俄亥俄的門托﹐我看到一位父親在講述他8歲女兒的故事。這個女孩與白血病進行了長期的鬥爭﹐如果不是因為幾個月前通 過的醫改法案﹐保險公司就會停止支付醫療費用﹐他們的家庭就將失去一切。

我曾有機會與這位父親攀談﹐不僅如此﹐我還見到了他的女兒﹐這個 非常了不起的小姑娘。當這位父親向傾聽他的故事的人講述時﹐每一位在場的父母的眼裡都含著淚水﹐因為我們知道﹐我們自己的孩子也有可能遇到這種狀況。而且 我知道﹐每一位美國人都希望這位小女孩的未來能像所有人的未來一樣光明。這就是美國人﹐這就是美國﹐我為自己能夠成為這個國家的總統、帶領這個國家前行感 到無比光榮。

今晚﹐儘管我們遭遇了很多困難﹐儘管華盛頓有諸多不盡人意之處﹐我仍從未像現在這樣對未來充滿希望。我從未像現在這樣對美國 充滿希望。我請大家也保持這樣的希望。我所說的並非盲目的樂觀主義﹐不是那種看不到眼前的任務有多麼艱巨、看不到前行的路上有什麼樣的障礙的希望﹔我所說 的並非作壁上觀或是臨戰退縮的一廂情願的理想主義。

我一直相信﹐所謂希望就是我們內心倔強地堅持的力量﹐相信不管有多少相反的證據﹐都要相信有更好的東西在等著我們﹐只要我們有勇氣不斷前行、不懈工作、不停戰鬥。

國 民們﹐我相信我們有能力在已經取得的進步的基礎上再進一步﹐繼續為了給中產階級創造新的工作、新的機遇、新的保障而戰鬥。我相信我們有能力信守開國者們許 下的諾言﹐信守這樣一種理念﹐那就是不管你是誰﹐不管你來自哪裡﹐不管你長相如何﹐不管你愛著哪個地方﹐你所需要做的就是努力工作。不管你的膚色是黑是白 ﹐不管你是拉美裔、亞裔還是美國原住民﹐不管你年輕還是年老﹐富有還是貧窮﹐身體健全或是殘障﹐同性戀還是異性戀﹐只要你願意努力﹐就能夠在美國大有作 為。

我相信我們有能力共同握住這樣的未來﹐因為美國人民並不像政界那麼嚴重分歧。美國人民不像某些飽學之士所認為的那樣憤世嫉俗。美國的抱負並不是每一個美國人的抱負的簡單加總﹐美國也不是紅州和藍州的簡單聯合。我們是美利堅合眾國﹐我們將永遠是美利堅合眾國。

有你們的幫助﹐有上帝的仁慈﹐我們將繼續攜手前行﹐讓全世界知道我們生活在全球最偉大的國度的原因到底是什麼。

謝謝你﹐國民們﹐上帝保佑你們﹐上帝保佑美國。
 Transcript: Obama's Victory Speech
 President Barack Obama's speech in Chicago after his re-election Tuesday night, as transcribed by Roll Call:

Thank you so much.

Tonight, more than 200 years after a former colony won the right to determine its own destiny, the task of perfecting our union moves forward.

It moves forward because of you. It moves forward because you reaffirmed the spirit that has triumphed over war and depression, the spirit that has lifted this country from the depths of despair to the great heights of hope, the belief that while each of us will pursue our own individual dreams, we are an American family and we rise or fall together as one nation and as one people.

Tonight, in this election, you, the American people, reminded us that while our road has been hard, while our journey has been long, we have picked ourselves up, we have fought our way back, and we know in our hearts that for the United States of America the best is yet to come.

I want to thank every American who participated in this election, whether you voted for the very first time or waited in line for a very long time. By the way, we have to fix that. Whether you pounded the pavement or picked up the phone, whether you held an Obama sign or a Romney sign, you made your voice heard and you made a difference.

I just spoke with Gov. Romney and I congratulated him and Paul Ryan on a hard-fought campaign. We may have battled fiercely, but it's only because we love this country deeply and we care so strongly about its future. From George to Lenore to their son Mitt, the Romney family has chosen to give back to America through public service and that is the legacy that we honor and applaud tonight. In the weeks ahead, I also look forward to sitting down with Gov. Romney to talk about where we can work together to move this country forward.

I want to thank my friend and partner of the last four years, America's happy warrior, the best vice president anybody could ever hope for, Joe Biden.

And I wouldn't be the man I am today without the woman who agreed to marry me 20 years ago. Let me say this publicly: Michelle, I have never loved you more. I have never been prouder to watch the rest of America fall in love with you, too, as our nation's first lady. Sasha and Malia, before our very eyes you're growing up to become two strong, smart beautiful young women, just like your mom. And I'm so proud of you guys. But I will say that for now one dog's probably enough.

To the best campaign team and volunteers in the history of politics. The best. The best ever. Some of you were new this time around, and some of you have been at my side since the very beginning. But all of you are family. No matter what you do or where you go from here, you will carry the memory of the history we made together and you will have the lifelong appreciation of a grateful president. Thank you for believing all the way, through every hill, through every valley. You lifted me up the whole way and I will always be grateful for everything that you've done and all the incredible work that you put in.

I know that political campaigns can sometimes seem small, even silly. And that provides plenty of fodder for the cynics that tell us that politics is nothing more than a contest of egos or the domain of special interests. But if you ever get the chance to talk to folks who turned out at our rallies and crowded along a rope line in a high school gym, or saw folks working late in a campaign office in some tiny county far away from home, you'll discover something else.

You'll hear the determination in the voice of a young field organizer who's working his way through college and wants to make sure every child has that same opportunity. You'll hear the pride in the voice of a volunteer who's going door to door because her brother was finally hired when the local auto plant added another shift. You'll hear the deep patriotism in the voice of a military spouse who's working the phones late at night to make sure that no one who fights for this country ever has to fight for a job or a roof over their head when they come home.

That's why we do this. That's what politics can be. That's why elections matter. It's not small, it's big. It's important. Democracy in a nation of 300 million can be noisy and messy and complicated. We have our own opinions. Each of us has deeply held beliefs. And when we go through tough times, when we make big decisions as a country, it necessarily stirs passions, stirs up controversy.

That won't change after tonight, and it shouldn't. These arguments we have are a mark of our liberty. We can never forget that as we speak people in distant nations are risking their lives right now just for a chance to argue about the issues that matter, the chance to cast their ballots like we did today.

But despite all our differences, most of us share certain hopes for America's future. We want our kids to grow up in a country where they have access to the best schools and the best teachers. A country that lives up to its legacy as the global leader in technology and discovery and innovation, with all the good jobs and new businesses that follow.

We want our children to live in an America that isn't burdened by debt, that isn't weakened by inequality, that isn't threatened by the destructive power of a warming planet. We want to pass on a country that's safe and respected and admired around the world, a nation that is defended by the strongest military on earth and the best troops this ─ this world has ever known. But also a country that moves with confidence beyond this time of war, to shape a peace that is built on the promise of freedom and dignity for every human being.

We believe in a generous America, in a compassionate America, in a tolerant America, open to the dreams of an immigrant's daughter who studies in our schools and pledges to our flag. To the young boy on the south side of Chicago who sees a life beyond the nearest street corner. To the furniture worker's child in North Carolina who wants to become a doctor or a scientist, an engineer or an entrepreneur, a diplomat or even a president ─ that's the future we hope for. That's the vision we share. That's where we need to go ─ forward. That's where we need to go.

Now, we will disagree, sometimes fiercely, about how to get there. As it has for more than two centuries, progress will come in fits and starts. It's not always a straight line. It's not always a smooth path.

By itself, the recognition that we have common hopes and dreams won't end all the gridlock or solve all our problems or substitute for the painstaking work of building consensus and making the difficult compromises needed to move this country forward. But that common bond is where we must begin.

Our economy is recovering. A decade of war is ending. A long campaign is now over. And whether I earned your vote or not, I have listened to you, I have learned from you, and you've made me a better president. And with your stories and your struggles, I return to the White House more determined and more inspired than ever about the work there is to do and the future that lies ahead.

Tonight you voted for action, not politics as usual. You elected us to focus on your jobs, not ours. And in the coming weeks and months, I am looking forward to reaching out and working with leaders of both parties to meet the challenges we can only solve together. Reducing our deficit. Reforming our tax code. Fixing our immigration system. Freeing ourselves from foreign oil. We've got more work to do.

But that doesn't mean your work is done. The role of citizen in our democracy does not end with your vote. America's never been about what can be done for us. It's about what can be done by us together through the hard and frustrating, but necessary work of self-government. That's the principle we were founded on.

This country has more wealth than any nation, but that’s not what makes us rich. We have the most powerful military in history, but that’s not what makes us strong. Our university, our culture are all the envy of the world, but that’s not what keeps the world coming to our shores.

What makes America exceptional are the bonds that hold together the most diverse nation on earth. The belief that our destiny is shared; that this country only works when we accept certain obligations to one another and to future generations. The freedom which so many Americans have fought for and died for come with responsibilities as well as rights. And among those are love and charity and duty and patriotism. That’s what makes America great.

I am hopeful tonight because I’ve seen the spirit at work in America. I’ve seen it in the family business whose owners would rather cut their own pay than lay off their neighbors, and in the workers who would rather cut back their hours than see a friend lose a job. I’ve seen it in the soldiers who reenlist after losing a limb and in those SEALs who charged up the stairs into darkness and danger because they knew there was a buddy behind them watching their back.

I’ve seen it on the shores of New Jersey and New York, where leaders from every party and level of government have swept aside their differences to help a community rebuild from the wreckage of a terrible storm. And I saw just the other day, in Mentor, Ohio, where a father told the story of his 8-year-old daughter, whose long battle with leukemia nearly cost their family everything had it not been for health care reform passing just a few months before the insurance company was about to stop paying for her care.

I had an opportunity to not just talk to the father, but meet this incredible daughter of his. And when he spoke to the crowd listening to that father’s story, every parent in that room had tears in their eyes, because we knew that little girl could be our own. And I know that every American wants her future to be just as bright. That’s who we are. That’s the country I’m so proud to lead as your president.

And tonight, despite all the hardship we’ve been through, despite all the frustrations of Washington, I’ve never been more hopeful about our future. I have never been more hopeful about America. And I ask you to sustain that hope. I’m not talking about blind optimism, the kind of hope that just ignores the enormity of the tasks ahead or the roadblocks that stand in our path. I’m not talking about the wishful idealism that allows us to just sit on the sidelines or shirk from a fight.

I have always believed that hope is that stubborn thing inside us that insists, despite all the evidence to the contrary, that something better awaits us so long as we have the courage to keep reaching, to keep working, to keep fighting.

America, I believe we can build on the progress we’ve made and continue to fight for new jobs and new opportunity and new security for the middle class. I believe we can keep the promise of our founders, the idea that if you’re willing to work hard, it doesn’t matter who you are or where you come from or what you look like or where you love. It doesn’t matter whether you’re black or white or Hispanic or Asian or Native American or young or old or rich or poor, able, disabled, gay or straight, you can make it here in America if you’re willing to try.

I believe we can seize this future together because we are not as divided as our politics suggests. We’re not as cynical as the pundits believe. We are greater than the sum of our individual ambitions, and we remain more than a collection of red states and blue states. We are and forever will be the United States of America.

And together with your help and God’s grace we will continue our journey forward and remind the world just why it is that we live in the greatest nation on Earth.

Thank you, America. God bless you. God bless these United States.

---

國現任總統奧巴馬(Barack Obama)週二在競爭激烈的大選中獲得連任﹐戰勝了人們對飽受持續經濟低迷之苦的美國的懷疑﹐他將面臨的一項考驗是:在一個由兩黨分別掌控部分機構的政治體系﹐他是否能夠實現富有成果的連任。

奧 巴馬贏得了這場競爭激烈的大選﹐這可謂是現代選舉歷史上的一個里程碑。自1940年羅斯福(Franklin D. Roosevelt)總統以來﹐還沒有哪位現任總統在失業率更高(目前為7.9%)的情況下贏得連任。這也是1816年以來﹐美國連續第三位獲得連任的總 統。此外﹐特拉華州的拜登(Joe Biden)連任副總統。


REUTERS
2012年10月5日,弗吉尼亞州費爾法克斯市的一次大選集會上,奧巴馬在發表演說時露出微笑。
將奧巴馬推上勝利之路的是一個獨特的聯盟﹐這個聯盟反映出美國選民不斷變化的特點──尤其是白人選民的影響減小﹐拉美裔選民影響不斷增大。

奧巴馬將面對的是一個兩院分別由民主黨和共和黨控制的國會。民主黨將繼續在參議院保持多數席位﹐而共和黨將繼續控制眾議院。大選後﹐華盛頓的局面仍與週二早間一樣﹐儘管兩位候選人的競選活動花費了60億美元﹐政治廣告花了120萬美元。

美國人交給奧巴馬的工作是駕馭存在於華盛頓和美國的互相矛盾的目標﹐國會兩院分別由民主黨和共和黨掌控的局面是奧巴馬此前一直難以控制的。

現 年51歲的奧巴馬擊敗65歲的前馬薩諸塞州州長羅姆尼(Mitt Romney)連任總統。羅姆尼力爭當選總統已有六年時間。儘管羅姆尼的競選主題是經濟﹐並將自己標榜為有能力解決美國問題的前商人﹐但羅姆尼無法克服一 些失誤以及民主黨對其在私募股權行業擔任高管經歷的攻擊。


兩人對政府角色及如何實現經濟復蘇有著截然不同的願景。羅姆尼主張減稅、放寬監管﹐他說這樣做將啟動經濟增長。

奧巴馬則提出要加大在新型能源和教育領域的公共投資﹐同時對較富裕的家庭增稅以便減少赤字。他還提出了尋求改革美國移民法的計劃。

奧巴馬的競選陣營對連任期間的任務細節說的較少﹐這令任何宣示權力的努力變得更加困難。相比之下﹐2008年他入主白宮時帶去了宏大的任務單。

在美聯社(Associated Press)預測他將拿下俄亥俄州後﹐奧巴馬確保了勝利。俄亥俄是此次大選中的關鍵州。奧巴馬拿下了很多爭奪激烈的搖擺州﹐表明奧巴馬競選陣營很好地爭取到支持者投票﹐儘管今年選民投票熱情較低。

在最重要州之一佛羅里達﹐兩人的得票數難分伯仲。週二深夜近800萬張選票裡面﹐兩位候選人的差距只有大約4萬張。


Jason Reed/Reuters
圖片:美國大選精彩瞬間回顧
從 這次選舉可以看到美國在近幾年發生了多麼劇烈的變化。選後民調顯示羅姆尼贏得了60%的白人選票﹐而奧巴馬只贏得38%﹐比2008年低五個百分點。從 1984年蒙代爾(Walter Mondale)被共和黨人里根(Ronald Reagan)以壓倒性優勢擊敗以來﹐還沒有哪位民主黨人在白人中的得票率比奧巴馬更低。

不過奧巴馬沒有多少時間來享受獲勝的喜悅。“財政懸崖”幾乎馬上就要到來﹐即一系列增稅、減支措施在12月31日自動生效。如果總統與國會的領導者達不成妥協﹐這種情況就有可能令美國經濟的脆弱復蘇功虧一簣。

美國還將在未來幾個月觸及債務上限﹐使2011年夏季導致美國債務評級下調的那種爭鬥更有可能再度上演。

奧巴馬希望達成一項影響深遠的協議﹐就像去年他未能達成、將包含對富人增稅內容的那種“大買賣”。共和黨人說過﹐他們將反對任何增稅措施。

奧巴馬其他需要做的事情還包括尋找現任財政部長和國務卿的替代人選。預計這兩人都將卸任。

競選期間的大多數時候﹐奧巴馬都被看好﹐但在三場競選辯論中的第一場﹐他表現得無精打採﹐之後兩位候選人的差距逐步縮小。民調顯示羅姆尼奮起直追﹐增加了美國首任非裔總統剛任滿一屆就被選下台的可能性。

奧巴馬通過攻勢猛烈、資金充足的選戰取得了勝利。他主張中產階級利益﹐同時把羅姆尼描繪成一位冷漠的商人﹐說他的經濟政策偏袒美國最富裕的一批人。

選戰期間不乏惡語傷人。奧巴馬基本上已經放棄他在2008年選戰中給人希望的信息﹐轉而相信他必須把羅姆尼描繪成一個討厭的替代人選才能獲勝。

如 果沒有實現連任﹐奧巴馬當總統可能就會被貶低為撞了大運。他的履歷完全不像之前的幾位總統。他由單身母親和外祖父母養大。父親來自肯尼亞﹐母親一家人來自 堪薩斯﹐童年大部分時候在夏威夷度過﹐並在那裡就讀於名牌私立學校。從哥倫比亞大學(Columbia University)畢業後﹐奧巴馬進入哈佛大學(Harvard)法學院求學﹐並成為《哈佛法律評論》(Harvard Law Review)首位非裔主編。最後他搬到芝加哥﹐成為社區組織者﹐並遇到他的妻子、第一夫人米歇爾•奧巴馬(Michelle Obama)。

奧巴馬從政經歷較短。他曾在伊利諾伊州參議院任職﹐直到2004年在民主黨全國代表大會上發表主旨演講時引起全國關注。同年他被選進聯邦參議院﹐還沒有任滿一屆﹐就在2008年贏得總統選舉。

第一個任期期間﹐奧巴馬通過了醫改法案、金融監管法案﹐並採取一系列重大干預行動讓銀行業擺脫了大蕭條以來的最嚴重衰退。

2010年中期選舉之後﹐共和黨掌控了眾議院﹐奧巴馬不得不抑制自己的雄心。他放棄了改革美國移民制度的計劃。2011年為了提高美國債務上限﹐他還向堅持削減開支的共和黨人讓步。

奧巴馬曾預測自己在第二屆任期內會做得更好。白宮高級顧問普拉夫(David Plouffe)說﹐因大選而起的任何惡意都會很快消散。他說﹐總統競選就是艱難的過程。

奧巴馬曾說﹐他會推動第一屆任期時未能完成的幾項任務。他希望通過移民改革法案﹐為在美國非法居住的110萬人提供申請合法地位的途徑。

共和黨人可能會得出結論:合作對他們有好處。在週二選舉中﹐共和黨在疏遠拉丁裔移民的危險方面得到了教訓。許多共和黨戰略專家說﹐該黨必須軟化在非法移民問題上的立場。拉丁裔目前約佔美國人口的16%﹐到2030年預計將增加到22%。

颶 風“桑迪”在美國東海岸肆虐之際﹐奧巴馬得以有机會撫慰颶風災民﹐並向被摧毀的居民區佈置政府資源。新澤西州州長、共和黨人克里斯蒂(Chris Christie)向來都是奧巴馬的批評者﹐他曾在羅姆尼的提名大會上發表主旨演講﹐然而此次也極力稱讚奧巴馬的表現。《華爾街日報》/NBC News的調查顯示﹐大約三分之二的公眾對奧巴馬處理颶風“桑迪”感到滿意。

對羅姆尼來說更糟糕的是﹐正當他開始積聚勢頭、減少奧巴馬的領先優勢之際﹐颶風令競選活動陷入停頓。在那幾天寶貴的日子裡﹐“桑迪”轉移了全國的注意力﹐迫使羅姆尼取消了一些競選活動﹐並兼顧對奧巴馬的攻擊和對災民的安慰。

然而在2010年秋季、奧巴馬的總統生涯處於最低點時﹐他似乎不太可能再次當選﹐當時的中期選舉令共和黨人獲得了眾議院的控制權。奧巴馬說那次選舉是“徹底失敗”。白宮顧問們知道他處於艱難境地﹐將注意力轉到了他的政治復興上。

失業率接近10%。助手們擔心獨立選民已經拋棄了奧巴馬。內部小組座談顯示﹐選民們並不認為經濟刺激計劃是奧巴馬的功勞﹐雖然許多經濟學家得出結論說﹐刺激計劃阻止了更為嚴重的經濟低迷。

助手們拿出了一項戰略﹐將重點放在穩步提高就業率上﹐同時將奧巴馬定位成中產階級的保護人。

奧巴馬競選陣營沒有把資金留著用於勞動節(9月5日)之後的競選活動﹐而是花了數百萬美元打電視廣告﹐攻擊羅姆尼在私募股權公司貝恩資本(Bain Capital)的經歷。他們將羅姆尼描繪成掠奪性資本家﹐為了尋求快速利潤而收購公司並大肆裁員。

奧巴馬花掉了一大堆競選資金﹐令一些民主黨人不安。但他讓羅姆尼在選民中變得不受歡迎。最終奧巴馬也並無資金匱乏之虞。僅9月一個月﹐他就收到了1.81億美元的競選捐款。整個競選過程中﹐奧巴馬和聯盟團體總計籌集了近10億美元。

Peter Nicholas / Carol E. Lee


Obama Wins a Second Term
President Barack Obama won re-election Tuesday in a closely fought race, overcoming the doubts of a nation ravaged by a prolonged economic downturn and setting up a test of whether he can forge a productive second term within a divided political system.

Mr. Obama's victory in the bruising campaign marks a landmark in modern election history. No sitting president since Franklin D. Roosevelt in 1940 has won re-election with a higher unemployment rate, which stands at 7.9%. It is also the first time since 1816 the U.S. has had three consecutive two-term presidents. Also re-elected was Joe Biden of Delaware as vice president.

Propelling Mr. Obama to victory was a unique coalition reflecting the changing nature of the U.S. electorate -- notably, the diminished influence of white Americans and the rising clout of Latino voters.

Greeting Mr. Obama will be a divided Congress. Democrats were set to retain their Senate majority while Republicans kept control of the House of Representatives. After the election, Washington remained aligned exactly as it was Tuesday morning, despite $6 billion in spending and 1.2 million political ads.

Americans handed Mr. Obama the job of navigating conflicting impulses in both Washington and the nation, a partisan divide the president has previously struggled to master.

In retaining the presidency, Mr. Obama, 51 years old, defeated former Massachusetts Gov. Mitt Romney, age 65, who had been seeking the office for six years. Despite a focus on the economy, pitching himself as a one-time businessman capable of fixing what ails the U.S., Mr. Romney couldn't overcome some missteps and attacks from Democrats over his work as a private-equity executive.

At stake were two starkly different visions of the role of government and the recipe for economic revival. Mr. Romney called for reducing taxes and scaling back regulations, which he said would trigger economic growth.

Mr. Obama laid out a model of public investment in alternative energy and education, along with tax increases on wealthier families to help cut deficits. He has also voiced plans to pursue a revamp of U.S. immigration laws.

The president's re-election campaign was light on details of what a second term would comprise, in contrast to the ambitious list he brought to the White House in 2008, complicating any effort to claim a mandate.

Mr. Obama sealed his win after the Associated Press projected he would win Ohio, which loomed as the contest's pivotal state. The president won many swing states in contention, an indication that the Obama campaign's machine for turning out its supporters, even in a year of lower enthusiasm, was sound.

One of the major prizes in the race, Florida, was too close to call. Out of nearly eight million votes cast late Tuesday night, the candidates were separated by only about 40,000 votes.

The contest showed how dramatically the U.S. has changed in recent years. According to exit polls, Mr. Romney won 60% of the white vote, compared with 38% for Mr. Obama. That is five points less than his 2008 showing. Not since Walter Mondale, who was swept aside by Ronald Reagan in the 1984 presidential race, has a Democrat recorded a smaller share of the white vote.

Mr. Obama will have little time to savor his victory. Looming almost immediately is the so-called fiscal cliff, a series of tax increase and spending cuts that come into force Dec. 31, and which could unravel the economy's fragile gains, unless the president and congressional leaders engineer a compromise.

The U.S. will also hit its borrowing limit in coming months, raising the prospect of a battle like the one in summer 2011 that led to a downgrade in the U.S.'s debt rating.

Mr. Obama hopes to broker a far-reaching agreement, the kind of 'grand bargain' that eluded him last year, which would include raising taxes on wealthier Americans. Republicans have said they would oppose any tax increase.

Other to-do list items: Replacing his current Treasury Secretary and Secretary of State, both of whom are expected to step aside.

Mr. Obama was favored to win for most of the campaign, but the race narrowed in the final month after he turned in a lackluster performance in the first of three presidential debates. Mr. Romney closed the gap in the polls, raising the possibility that the nation's first African-American president might be voted from office at the end of a single term.

Mr. Obama prevailed through an aggressive and well-funded campaign. He championed middle-class interests while depicting Mr. Romney as an uncaring businessman whose economic policies would favor the wealthiest Americans.

The campaign's tone was coarse. Mr. Obama largely jettisoned the hopeful message of his 2008 campaign, convinced that to win he needed to paint Mr. Romney as an unpalatable alternative.

Mr. Obama's rise to power might have been dismissed as a fluke had he not secured a second term. His biography is nothing like that of recent predecessors. Mr. Obama was raised by a single mother and his grandparents. His father was from Kenya and his mother's family from Kansas and he spent most of his childhood in Hawaii, where he attended a prestigious private school. After graduating from Columbia University, Mr. Obama attended Harvard Law School, becoming the first African-American editor of the Harvard Law Review. He eventually moved to Chicago, where he became a community organizer and met his wife, first lady Michelle Obama.

His political resume is short. He served in the Illinois State Senate until 2004, when he captivated the nation with a keynote address at the 2004 Democratic National Convention. He was elected to the U.S. Senate that same year and hadn't served a full term before he won the White House in 2008.

His first term included passage of the health-care law, the financial regulation bill and a series of dramatic interventions to save the banking system from a the worst downturn since the Great Depression.

er the midterm elections in 2010, Republicans took charge of the House and Mr. Obama was forced to curb his ambitions. He backed off plans to revamp the nation's immigration system. And he capitulated to Republicans who insisted on spending cuts as the price of raising the U.S. debt ceiling in 2011.

The president has predicted that he would have better results in a second term. David Plouffe, a senior White House adviser, said any ill will from the election would quickly vanish. 'Presidential campaigns are tough,' he said.

Mr. Obama has said he would push several pieces of unfinished business left over the first term. He wants to pass an immigration overhaul that would provide a path to legal status for the 11 million people living in the U.S. illegally.

Republicans might conclude it is in their interest to cooperate. In Tuesday's elections, the GOP got a lesson in the dangers of alienating Latinos. Many Republicans strategists have said the party must soften its stance on illegal immigration. Latinos now account for 16% of the population, and that figure is expected to jump to 22% by 2030.

With Hurricane Sandy ravaging the east coast, Mr. Obama had a chance to show compassion to storm victims and deploy government resources to neighborhoods left in ruins. No less a critic than New Jersey Gov. Chris Christie, a Republican who gave the keynote speech at Mr. Romney's nominating convention, went out of his way to praise Mr. Obama's performance. About two-thirds of the public approved of the president's handling of Hurricane Sandy, a Wall Street Journal-NBC News poll showed.

Worse for Mr. Romney, the storm froze the race at a moment when he had been gaining momentum and cutting into Mr. Obama's lead. Sandy diverted the nation's attention for precious days, forcing Mr. Romney to cancel some events and juggle attacks on Obama with expressions of sympathy for storm victims.

Still, Mr. Obama's re-election would have seemed unlikely in the nadir of his presidency, the fall of 2010, when voters in the midterm election gave Republicans control of the House. Mr. Obama termed that election, 'a shellacking.' White House advisers turned their attention to his political revival, knowing he was in a tough spot.

Unemployment hovered near 10%. Aides worried that independent voters had abandoned the president. And internal focus groups showed that voters didn't give credit to Mr. Obama for the stimulus program, even though many economists concluded the stimulus staved off an even more serious downturn.

Aides settled on a strategy that emphasized steady improvement in the jobless rate while positioning Mr. Obama as a champion of the middle class.

Rather than save their money for the post-Labor Day race to November, the Obama campaign spent millions of dollars in TV ads attacking Mr. Romney for his record at the private-equity firm, Bain Capital. They painted him as a predatory capitalist who bought companies and laid people off in search of a quick profit.

Mr. Obama burned through a good chunk of his campaign cash, making some Democrats uneasy. But he made Mr. Romney unpopular among voters. In the end, Mr. Obama suffered no shortage of funds. In September alone, he took in $181 million in campaign donations. All together, the president and allied groups will have raised nearly $1 billion over the course of the campaign.

2013年8月26日 星期一

蔡忠銘、郭毓龍,何江忠、范佐憲、徐信正




〔本報訊〕陸軍下士洪仲丘枉死案,被收押的前陸軍542旅副旅長何江忠、連長徐信正及上士范佐憲等3人,委任律師對桃園地方法院羈押裁定提出抗告。今(28)日晚間最新消息,抗告被高等法院駁回。

 洪仲丘虐死一案改由桃園地檢署偵辦後,何江忠、范佐憲、徐信正等3名被告,23日遭桃園地方法院裁定羈押。

 據了解,范佐憲與何江忠的妻兒,今日上午分別到看守所會客,范佐憲甚至在與妻小會面時放聲哭泣,表示不想再關在看守所裡面。

 不過高院認為,范佐憲等3人罪嫌重大,除了懲處洪仲丘的士評會有程序瑕疵,且3名被告曾經試圖影響證人證詞,若是交保在外,恐有串證之嫌,因此駁回抗告。

蘋論:正義憲兵官


更多專欄文章
向對方提出相反的意見,需要勇氣;向朋友提出相反的意見,更需要勇氣。這是句名言。其實,在嚴格遵守階級服從的軍中,向長官提出相反的意見,需要更大更強的勇氣!

阻送禁閉遭清算

在 洪仲丘案件中,兩位憲兵中尉軍官蔡忠銘與郭毓龍,就體現了這種正義和嚴守軍紀的勇氣。蔡、郭兩位發現要將洪關入禁閉室的程序和既有法規相牴觸,力排眾議拒 絕讓洪關禁閉。但在長官的強大壓力下無法阻止悲劇的發生,還遭部隊記過及起訴,甚至將可能被調往馬祖做為懲罰。洪案律師說,兩位憲兵官的證詞將造成542 及269旅的「血崩效應」。

不應該懲罰正義

邱 吉爾曾說過,在所有的美德中勇氣最重要,它是實踐其他美德的動力來源。當一個組織懲罰主持正義的成員時,就預告這個組織的腐爛與破敗。我們將繼續盯著這兩 位憲兵官的後續,防止他們遭到黑道式的報復。不嘉獎他們已是國防部的錯誤,若還懲處,軍中就完全沒有正義、軍紀與士氣可言。

Jonathan Winters/ A Madman, but Angelic By ROBIN WILLIAMS

Jonathan Harshman Winters III (November 11, 1925 – April 11, 2013) was an American comedian, actor, author, and artist.

Jonathan Winters - publicity.jpg

Jonathan Winters in the 1960s
 
 喬納森·溫特斯英語Jonathan Winters,1925年11月11日-2013年4月11日),美國知名喜劇大師和影視演員。

生平

喬納森·溫特斯1925年生於俄亥俄州代頓,高中時輟學加入美國海軍陸戰隊,並參加了第二次世界大戰[1],在太平洋戰區服役兩年半時間,戰爭結束後他返回家鄉進入凱尼恩學院(Kenyon College)學習,後進入代頓藝術學院(Dayton Art Institute)學習動畫專業,並在此遇到了艾利(Eileen Schauder),兩人於1948年9月11日結婚。
2013年4月11日,喬納森·溫特斯於加利福尼亞州聖巴巴拉縣Montecito的家中因自然原因逝世。[2]

參考資料

  1. ^ STEPHEN M. SILVERMAN. Jonathan Winters Dies at 87. 人物. 2013-04-12 [2013-04-17查閱].
  2. ^ 美國喜劇大師喬納森·溫特斯去世. 新華網. 2013-04-13 [2013-04-17查閱].

外部連結



An Appraisal

A Madman, but Angelic

隨筆

羅賓·威廉姆斯憶一個瘋子般的良師益友

My father’s laughter introduced me to the comedy of Jonathan Winters. My dad was a sweet man, but not an easy laugh. We were watching Jack Paar on “The Tonight Show” on our black-and-white television, and on came Jonathan in a pith helmet.
是父親的笑聲把我帶入喬納森·溫特斯(Jonathan Winters)的喜劇世界。我爸爸和藹可親,但不輕易大笑。我們當時在黑白電視上觀看傑克·帕爾(Jack Paar)的《今夜秀》(The Tonight Show),喬納森戴着遮陽帽登場了。
“Who are you?” Paar asked.
「你是誰?」帕爾問。
“I’m a great white hunter,” Jonathan said in an effete voice. “I hunt mainly squirrels.”
「我是個偉大的白人獵手,」喬納森用疲憊的語氣說,「我主要是捕獵松鼠。」
喬納森·溫特斯(坐着的那位)和羅賓·威廉姆斯以及帕姆·道伯(Pam Dawber)在喜劇《莫克和明迪》中。
ABC, via Photofest
喬納森·溫特斯(坐着的那位)和羅賓·威廉姆斯以及帕姆·道伯(Pam Dawber)在喜劇《莫克和明迪》中。
“How do you do that?”
「你是怎麼捕獵的?」
“I aim for their little nuts.”
「我瞄準他們的小果子(這個單詞既有堅果的意思,也有睾丸的意思——譯註)。」
My dad and I lost it. Seeing my father laugh like that made me think, “Who is this guy and what’s he on?”
爸爸和我笑噴了。看着爸爸笑成那樣,我在想:「這個傢伙是誰,是幹什麼的?」
A short time later, Jonathan was on Paar again. This time Jack handed him a stick, and what happened next was extraordinary. Jon did a four-minute freestyle riff in which that stick became a fishing rod, a spear, a giant beetle antenna, even Bing Crosby’s golf club complete with song. Each transformation was a cameo with characters and sound effects. He was performing comedic alchemy. The world was his laboratory. I was hooked.
不久之後,喬納森又上了帕爾的節目。這一 次傑克遞給他一根棍子,下面發生的事精彩極了。喬進行了四分鐘的即興表演,這根棍子跟着音樂一會兒變成了釣竿,一會兒變成了長矛,一會兒又變成了巨大的甲 蟲觸角,甚至還變成了平·克勞斯貝(Bing Crosby)的高爾夫球杆。每一段表演都是對角色和音效的精彩演繹。他表演的是喜劇鍊金術。這個世界就是他的實驗室。我迷上了他。

 http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wwWDa1xPTPA




Not only was Jonathan funny on TV, but his comedy albums are also auditory bliss. One of my favorite routines involved a mad scientist who sounded like Boris Karloff. But instead of creating a Frankenstein, he made thousands of little men that he unleashed on the world. His shocked assistant cried out, “What are they looking for?”
喬納森不僅在電視上很有趣,他的喜劇錄音 專輯也是聽覺盛宴。我最喜歡聽的其中一個節目是關於一個瘋狂科學家的,他聽起來像鮑里斯·卡洛夫(Boris Karloff)。他沒有製造出一個弗蘭肯斯坦式的怪物,而是製造了成千上萬個小男人,他把他們放到了人世間。他的助手驚呼道:「他們在尋找什麼?」
The professor replied, “Little women, you fool.”
教授回答說:「當然是小女人了,傻瓜。」
He also created comic characters like Maude Frickert and the overgrown child Chester Honeyhugger. In one classic pre-P.C.-era routine, he had Maude being molested by a huge farmhand. She protested, “Stop, I’m church people.” After he had his way, he was off to do his chores, and she called out, “Don’t be long.”
他還創作出了一些喜劇人物,比如莫德·弗 里克特(Maude Frickert),以及老小孩切斯特·哈尼哈格(Chester Honeyhugger)。像電腦誕生之前的經典故事套路一樣,他讓一個高大的農場工人調戲莫德。她反抗道:「住手,我可是信教的人。」他得手之後,離開 去幹活,她喊道:「不要離開太久。」
Mort Sahl said Jonathan was seen as a great improviser, but to him he was just being himself. He was a rebel without a pause, whether he was portraying the WASP who couldn’t get a decent martini in Mombasa or the cowboy who couldn’t ride a horse and backed out of frame. Jonathan’s wife, Eileen, maybe had the best quote. She said that Jonathan went through his terrible 2’s but that they lasted 20 years.
莫特·薩爾(Mort Sahl)說喬納森是個偉大的即興表演者,但是在他本人看來,他只是在做自己。他一直都很叛逆,不管是扮演一位在蒙巴薩(Mombasa,肯雅第二大城 市)找不到像樣的馬提尼酒的盎格魯撒克遜白人新教徒,還是扮演不能騎上馬揚塵而去的牛仔。也許還是喬納森的妻子艾琳(Eileen)說得最準確,她說喬納 森艱難地度過了他兩歲那一年,不過那一年持續了20年。
In 1981, my sitcom “Mork & Mindy” was about to enter its fourth and final season. The show had run its course and we wanted to go out swinging. The producers suggested hiring Jonathan to play my son, who ages backward. That woke me out of a two-year slump. The cavalry was on the way.
1981年,我的情景喜劇《莫克和明迪》(Mork & Mindy)即將開拍第4季,那也是最後一季。這部劇即將走完它的旅程,我們打算全力以赴。製作人們建議邀請喬納森扮演我的兒子,這個人物是越長越年輕。那個建議把我從兩年的消沉中拉了出來。騎兵登場了。
Jonathan’s improvs on “Mork & Mindy” were legendary. People on the Paramount lot would pack the soundstage on the nights we filmed him. He once did a World War I parody in which he portrayed upper-class English generals, Cockney infantrymen, a Scottish sergeant no one could understand and a Zulu who was in the wrong war. The bit went on so long that all three cameras ran out of film. Sometimes I would join in, but I felt like a kazoo player sitting in with Coltrane.
喬納森在《莫克和明迪》中的即興表演堪稱 經典。有他出場的夜晚,派拉蒙片場的人擠滿了我們的攝影棚。其中有一段關於「一戰」的諷刺片段,他在其中扮演英國上流社會的將軍們;操着倫敦腔的步兵們; 一個蘇格拉中士,他的口音沒人能聽懂;一個祖魯人,他打仗找錯地方了。那場戲演了很長時間,所有三個攝影師的膠捲都用完了。有時我也會加入,但我像是班門 弄斧。
On one of his first days on the show, a young man asked Jonathan how to get into show business. He said: “You know how movie studios have a front gate? You get a Camaro with a steel grill, drive it through the gate, and once you’re on the lot, you’re in showbiz.”
喬納森來劇組沒幾天,有個年輕人問他怎樣才能進入演藝圈。他說:「你知道電影公司都有個大門吧?你就開着你的帶鋼擋泥板的大黃蜂轎車,從大門進來。能開進片場,你就算進了演藝圈。」
No audience was too small for Jonathan. I once saw him do a hissing cat for a lone beagle.
喬納森從不在乎觀眾的多少。有一次我看見他在一隻孤獨的小獵犬面前扮演一隻嘶嘶叫的貓。
His comedy sometimes had an edge. Once, at a gun show, Jon was looking at antique pistols and a man asked if he was a gun proponent. He said: “No, I prefer grenades. They’re more effective.”
他的幽默有時也很犀利。有一次,喬在一個槍支展覽上看古董手槍,一個男人問他是否是私人持槍支持者。他說:「不,我更喜歡手榴彈。它們更有效。」
Earlier in his life, he had a breakdown and spent some time in a mental institution. He joked that the head doctor told him: “You can get out of here. All you need is 57 keys.” He also hinted that Eileen wanted him to stay there at least until Christmas because he made great ornaments.
他早年精神崩潰過,曾在精神病院住過一段時間。他開玩笑說,主治醫師跟他說:「你能離開這兒。你所需要的就是57把鑰匙。」他還暗示說,艾琳想讓他在那裡至少待到聖誕節,因為他能把那裡裝扮得很漂亮。
Even in his later years, he exorcised his demons in public. His car had handicap plates. He once parked in a blue lane and a woman approached him and said, “You don’t look handicapped to me.”
甚至到後來,他還在公開場合驅除內心的惡魔。他的車有殘疾人牌照。有一次他停在殘疾人車位上,一個女人走向他說:「我覺得你沒有殘疾。」
Jonathan said, “Madam, can you see inside my mind?”
喬納森說:「夫人,你能看到我的內心嗎?」
If you wanted a visual representation of Jonathan’s mind, you’d have to go to his house. It is awe-inspiring. There are his paintings (a combination of Miró and Navajo); baseball memorabilia; Civil War pistols and swords; model airplanes, trains, and tin trucks from the ’20s; miniature cowboys and Indians; and toys of all kinds.
如果你想看到喬納森內心的畫面,你得去他的家裡看看。那裡令人驚嘆。裡面有他的畫(融合了米羅[Miró]和納瓦霍[Navajo]的風格);棒球紀念品;內戰時的手槍和劍;20年代的飛機、火車和錫制卡車模型;微型牛仔和印第安人模型;各種各樣的玩具。
We shared a love of painted military miniatures. He once sent me four tiny Napoleonic hookers in various states of undress with a note that read, “For zee troops!”
我們都喜歡彩色的微型軍事模型。有一次他送給我4個小小的拿破崙時期的妓女模型,她們都沒穿衣服,擺着各種姿勢。還隨附了一張紙條,上面寫道:「為了你的軍隊!」
But the toys were a manifestation of a dark time in his life. Jonathan was a Marine who fought in the Pacific in World War II. When he came home from the war, he went to his old bedroom and discovered that his prized tin trucks were gone.
但是這些玩具展示出了他人生中的一段黑暗的時期。喬納森曾是一名海軍陸戰隊員,「二戰」時在太平洋戰場服役。當他從戰場回到家中,走進他原來的卧室時,發現他鐘愛的錫制卡車不見了。
He asked his mother what she did with his stuff.
他問母親把他的東西弄哪兒去了。
“I gave them to the mission,” she said.
「我捐給教堂了,」她說。
“Why did you do that?”
「你為什麼要那樣做呢?」
“I didn’t think you were coming back,” she replied.
「我以為你不回來了,」她回答說。
Jonathan has shuffled off this mortal coil. So here’s to Jonny Winters, the cherubic madman with a stick who touched so many. Damn, am I going to miss you!
喬納森已經擺脫了這種劇烈的痛楚。此致喬尼·溫特斯,那個天使般的瘋子,他的魔法棒打動了那麼多的人。真是的,我會想念你的!
Robin Williams is an Oscar-, Emmy-  and Grammy-winning actor and comedian.  He recently completed filming “The Angriest Man in Brooklyn” and is in production on “A Friggin’ Christmas Miracle.”
 
本文作者羅賓·威廉姆斯(Robin Williams)是一名喜劇演員,曾獲得奧斯卡獎、艾美獎和格萊美獎。他最近剛完成《布魯克林最憤怒的男人》(The Angriest Man in Brooklyn)的拍攝,正在製作《該死的聖誕節奇蹟》(A Friggin』 Christmas Miracle)。
本文最初發表於2013年4月16日。
翻譯:王艷
 
 
 

2013年8月25日 星期日

習,薄,全中國地方官商,朱夏蓮

中國政經觀察:習,薄,全中國地方官商,朱夏蓮




我覺得各地方言越來越嚴重,我昨天上香港看一則華碩代製Google公司的新產品行貨到港……要和電信單位夾一夾”……都要查資料才可以。同樣一般人讀中國網頁,障礙豈只是繁簡字的認識而已。舉個例,近日習近平講許多毛的語言,除了毛的大日子近了,或許跟薄案背景等有密切關係---薄案的審理必須讓被告這樣唱作俱佳當英雄。

Political Stagecraft in China’s Trial of Fallen Official
Analysts say the spectacle is an effort by China’s leaders to convince allies of Bo Xilai that he had his say in court, and that the long sentence he is expected to get is based on evidence, not political payback.

-----
我每周總要跟山外書店的老闆,大談我對中國的觀察與推論”---- 前一陣子有一則消息是,中國維安費用超過國防費用……上周某報系訪問余英時教授,也提到奧運北京就有數萬(6-8)維安人員,又舉他的某親戚是天安門媽媽,經常有維安人員陪他/她出城旅遊十來天,我說他們還可能拿假發票向政府報帳……這種共用國家資產的情形一定很多啦。

其實,中國現在最大的問題是,如何將全國各地的泡沫建設煞車,去/前年的溫州崩盤其實是先聲,這種崩盤,當然不只是與政府合建的單位等,許多人都將積蓄借給這些單位…….從改革開放起,他們開始吃到發展/成長的甜頭,還是頭一次必須面臨斷頭”/失敗/泡沫的現實……..


 *****

2013年 08月 23日 11:06

中國債務問題明星分析師朱夏蓮


美 國聯邦儲備委員會(Federal Reserve, 簡稱:美聯儲)高層希望瞭解中國金融系統時,他們會找到朱夏蓮(Charlene Chu)。不乏中國問題專家的高盛(Goldman Sachs)也會與她會談,並將對話稿發給客戶。全球最具影響力的投資公司之一GMO有限責任公司(GMO LLC)將她稱為“搖滾巨星”。

互動圖:中國上升中的風險
朱夏蓮效力於惠譽國際評級(Fitch Ratings),目前已成為最受追捧的研究中國金融系統的專家之一;現在這個系統的風險正逐日上升。

朱夏蓮表示,發生在中國身上的是企業信貸過量的經典故事,但非常極端。根據惠譽的測算,截至6月底,中國私人部門債務與經濟規模之比從2008年的129%升至214%,這數字比政府數據要高。

當中國央行在6月份製造的流動性緊張狀況令國內銀行系統癱瘓時,朱夏蓮的支持者表示,她在兩年多之前就已預言了這種狀況的發生。

GMO策略師Edward Chancellor表示,逐一翻閱她的報告,你會發現這個故事越發深奧,驚心動魄。他說,隨著中國銀行業陷入困境,朱夏蓮的知名度得到提升,他們戲言她成為了搖滾巨星。GMO管理的資產達1,080億美元。

朱夏蓮揭開了中國影子銀行系統的蓋子,使巨量隱藏債務曝光。其他中國問題專家認為,她是促使中國央行在2011年把通過影子銀行發放的貸款也納入債務指標的功臣。但朱夏蓮表示,即便是現在,也不是所有的這類債務都被計入了官方數據之中。

中國央行未回覆記者的置評要求。

作 為最為唱空中國的人士之一,查諾斯(James Chanos)表示,他們非常欣賞朱夏蓮的工作。查諾斯的對沖基金Kynikos Associates從2009年開始做空中國,當時朱夏蓮警告稱,中國為應對全球經濟危機而採取的債務驅動型刺激計劃可能會製造出信貸泡沫。

高盛本月向客戶發送了一份名為《中國信貸問題》(China Credit Concerns)的研究報告,裏面是與朱夏蓮的對話,文末還附有高盛七位中國問題專家撰寫的文章列表。高盛對此不予置評。

美 聯儲副主席珍妮特•耶倫(Janet Yellen)和紐約聯儲(New York Fed)行長William Dudley在去年訪問中國時,與北京頂尖金融界人士舉行了會談;據公開的Dudley行程安排和知情人士表示,他們還擠出時間和朱夏蓮共進早餐。在加入 惠譽之前,朱夏蓮曾在紐約聯儲工作。紐約聯儲發言人對此不予置評。Dudley還曾在2010年與朱夏蓮會面。

Gilles Sabrie for The Wall Street Journal
供職于惠譽國際評級公司的朱夏蓮在她北京的辦公室內,照片攝于本月早些時候。
朱夏蓮對上述會面輕描淡寫。她表示,她不喜歡傍別人的名氣自抬身價。朱夏蓮是負面消息的低調發佈者,這一點與Meredith Whitney和Nouriel Roubini等高調的批評人士不同,後兩人在金融危機之前就做出了尖銳的預測,並且獲得了媒體的大肆報導。

朱夏蓮預計,最糟糕的情況是,危機正在醞釀之中;而最樂觀的情況是,中國有可能經歷長期的、債務壓頂的經濟放緩。

現年42歲的朱夏蓮生於美國丹佛,母親是美國人,父親是中國移民,生於湖南的一個茶商家庭,後成為蔣介石國民黨的一位將領。

1949年中國共產黨建立政權後,她的父親逃到了香港,後來在59歲時移民到了美國,在一家醫院做洗碗工,並在那兒認識了她的母親,一位在百貨商店打零工並兼職電話銷售員的天主教方濟會修女。

朱夏蓮在耶魯大學(Yale University)獲得了國際關係和商務碩士學位,師從頗具影響力的美國對華經濟關係批評家、經濟學家Nicholas Lardy。

2000年她受雇於紐約聯邦儲備銀行負責監測中國金融系統狀況,並研究銀行業。

這 個時機很好。當時中國銀行業還在舔舐上個世紀九十年代信貸狂潮之後留下的傷口,中國政府於2004年對國內銀行業進行了救助,之後各大銀行高調進行了首次 公開募股。朱夏蓮說,她從來不認為政府從銀行手中接管一些不良資產、再注入一些資金,之後推動這些銀行上市,一夜之間情況就能出現根本的轉變。

渴望進一步瞭解中國銀行業以及她父親家族狀況的她在2005年來到了中國,當時她並沒有任何工作,第二年她開始就職於惠譽負責研究銀行業。

兩年後朱夏蓮從一位中型銀行高管口中瞭解到中國影子銀行業的興起。這名高管向她透露,他正在通過打包銀行貸款並出售給客戶,即所謂的理財產品來減少銀行帳面貸款額。朱夏蓮稱這一過程既能夠擺脫政府信貸額度,又能夠隱藏問題貸款,一舉兩得。

當時她懷疑如果這些貸款出現問題是否會出現在銀行資產負債表上,並開始對此進行深入研究。到2010年7月份,影子銀行業務急劇擴張。她在一份當時被廣泛援引的報告中指出,中國上半年信貸增速的低估幅度達到28%,相當於人民幣1.3萬億元(合2,120億美元)。

六個月之後朱夏蓮及另外兩名分析師構成的團隊發現了以貼現和承兌票據形式存在的人民幣1.6萬億元的隱藏信貸。

隨後中國央行在2011年7月份公佈了更廣泛的信貸指標—社會融資總額,這一指標納入了朱夏蓮發現的許多表外信貸。

Alex Frangos

2013年8月24日 星期六

Michel Crozier 1922-2013






Michel Crozier obituary

Leading French sociologist whose breakthrough book was The Bureaucratic Phenomenon
Michel Crozier in 1995
Michel Crozier in 1995. He highlighted the self-defeating nature of large bureaucratic organisations. Photograph: Louis Monier/Gamma-Rapho via Getty Images
Michel Crozier, who has died at the age of 90, was one of the great French sociologists in a remarkable generation that came to prominence in the 1960s and early 70s. Names to be mentioned in the same breath are Pierre Bourdieu, Alain Touraine and Raymond Boudon. These dominant figures, methodologically at war, were propelled into public debate by the interlocked world of publishers based in Paris's intellectual triangle between the boulevards Saint Germain and Raspail and the rue du Bac, a press which took up their ideas and an expanding university system that up till then had not taken sociology seriously.
Crozier's breakthrough book, The Bureaucratic Phenomenon (1963 in French, 1964 in English), is a still wonderful account of how an organisation as a system generates the overlapping vicious circles that then block the system. The voices of his interviewees in two public service organisations, one a clerical agency, the other a state industrial monopoly, explaining their attitudes and their behaviour, are as fresh as if they had been uttered yesterday. This book heralded a consistent theme in Crozier's work that organisational reform is not possible unless its proponents take into account the way that people will interpret it, react to it and subvert it. As Crozier put it in the title of a 1979 book: "You can't change a society by decree."
His findings and his analysis were not only theoretically important, refining the work of one of the founding fathers of sociology, Max Weber, to show what really happens behind the organisation chart. As applied to French public administration and French society as a whole, his work called for a much more sophisticated understanding of the rigidities about which a French elite constantly complains. Crozier pursued these ideas in The Stalled Society (1970 in French, 1973 in English) and in the theoretical classic Actors and Systems (1977), co-written with Erhard Friedberg.
Crozier got into sociology by chance. He was born in north-eastern France, at Sainte-Menehould in the Marne department, into what he described as a happy suburban family. His initial studies were in business and law at the Paris business school Hautes Etudes Commerciales. Then he was given a scholarship to spend 14 months in the US, where he chose to interview American shop stewards.
He was at that time, he wrote in his 2002 autobiography, Mémoires, "something of a poet, vaguely surrealist and even a bit of revolutionary with Trotskyite tendencies". The CIA dogged him. But he came back with a wealth of interviews which gave him a permanent taste for fieldwork, produced a prizewinning thesis in 1949, and gained him entry to the French national research organisation, the Centre National de la Recherche Scientifique (CNRS).
In 1961 he was able to create his own CNRS centre, the Centre de Sociologie des Organisations, to pursue the strategic analysis for which he was becoming famous, and away from what he considered the narrowness of the French university. From 1959 he had a continuing collaboration with American social scientists at the Centre for Advanced Study in the Behavioural Sciences at Palo Alto, California, and later at Harvard. It was a model of the fruits of international academic exchange, though somewhat dampened by his book The Trouble with America (1980 in French, 1984 in English).
In the mid-1970s I was sent to Paris with a Sisyphean task set by the magazine New Society of trying to interview the god figures of French sociology. It was a disaster: I came away feeling I had been eaten for dinner by both Bourdieu and Touraine and had not fully appreciated Boudon. Chastened, I didn't try to see Crozier face to face. It turned out he had long resented Bourdieu's "colonisation" of public opinion, about which he wrote scathingly in Mémoires.
When I did eventually meet him in the 1990s, he was still a stylish, dapper figure and a hopeful social reformer, berating top civil servants for not learning the lessons of his work.
Crozier's first wife predeceased him. Three daughters of that marriage and his second wife survive him.
• Michel Crozier, sociologist, born 6 November 1922; died 24 May 2013

 Wikipedia
Michel Crozier (6 November 1922 in Sainte-Menehould, Marne- 24 May 2013 in Paris) was a French sociologist and member of the Académie des sciences morales et politiques since 1999.[1] He was also an officer of the Légion d'honneur and a commander of the Ordre National du Mérite, as well as a laureate of the Prix Tocqueville.

Biography

Michel Crozier did not become a sociologist by training. He became a sociologist because of a seminal experience in social analysis that was made possible by an American scholarship that he used to study the labor movement in the United States. After his initial training in business (HEC Paris, 1943) and law, he spent fourteen months traveling across the US in the immediate post World War II years, interviewing labor union members and officials, getting to know the American labor movement and American society in general. Back in France, he published a book on this research and joined the French National Center for Scientific Research as a sociologist.
In 1953, he carried out his first research on the white-collar workers in the French Postal Bank. The publication of the results of this research (Petits Fonctionnaires au travail) established his reputation as a sociologist of white-collar work and set off a series of new field studies on insurance companies, a big nationalized bank and, last but not least, on the French tobacco monopoly. In 1959, he was invited to the Center for Advanced Study in the Behavioral Sciences at Palo Alto. There he started the elaboration and writing up of what eventually became The Bureaucratic Phenomenon, published first in English in 1964, and then in French. In this book, which established the sociology of organizations as a discipline in France, Michel Crozier sketched out the bases of what would later on become the “strategic analysis of organizations.”
The international success of The Bureaucratic Phenomenon provided him with the reputation and the resources to found the Center for the Sociology of Organizations, a small research group of young sociologists, with whom he embarked on a new research program on French Administration and Change, and pursued the theoretical and methodological elaboration of his approach to the study of organizations. In 1977, together with Erhard Friedberg, he published L’Acteur et le système (Actors and Systems, 1981, Chicago University Press), a scientific essay that was highly influential in France and continental Europe. In it, the authors put forth an approach to the study of organizations and other less formalized systems of action, detailing the theoretical and methodological assumptions that lie behind it. The way in which organizations and systems function is conceptualized by them as originating from game structures that channel and stabilize power and bargaining relations between a set of strategically interdependent actors.
Professor Crozier never considered sociology and sociological theorizing as an end in itself. He never separated his sociological work from his commitment to administrative and social reform, in the service of which he published seven books and engaged in numerous consultancies and interventions. He recently published his autobiography in two volumes, Ma Belle Epoque (2002), and A Contre-Courant (2004).

 我2005年一篇blog:
其次,要盡可能參考比較可靠的翻譯本,譬如說Allen Bloom著的《走向封閉的美國精神》(缪青、宋麗娜等譯 北京:中國社會科學出版社,1994 好像還沒有人比較過Michel Crozier《被封鎖的社會》(1970巴黎Seuil出版 /1999年北京商務翻譯)......



"一九五一年,年輕的組織社會學學者米榭‧克羅齊埃(Michel Crozier)在由沙特領導的《現代》(Les Temps modernes)雜誌中寫道:「『傳播』的概念是人類工程學(Human engineering)的基本概念(略)。公共關係和人類工程學在美國文明中,並不構成一個孤立的現象。正相反,它們是一個影響所有面向的偉大運動的先趨點。公共關係宗教、藝術、文學、教育、社會和家庭關係、愛和性生活本身,都越來越處於這個假惺惺的微笑標記之下,越來越處於這種虛偽的好心情之下,越來越處於這個對保護社會利益功不可沒的假民主之下。」他繼續窮追猛打:「這種社會技術,幫『美式生活這個口號披上了一層不容辯駁的科學外表』。」〔Crozier, 1951. p. 65, 71〕。"---謬詠華草稿. 此本簡介法國電影的書台灣出版過.

網誌存檔