克林顿和奥巴马领导力比较

克林顿提名奥巴马演讲全文We're here to nominate a President, and I've got one in mind.I want to nominate a man whose own life has known its fair share of adversity and uncertainty. A man who ran for President to change the course of an already weak economy and then just six weeks before the election, saw it suffer the biggest collapse since the Great Depression. A man who stopped the slide into depression and put us on the long road to recovery, knowing all the while that no matter how many jobs were created and saved, there were still millions more waiting, trying to feed their children and keep their hopes alive.I want to nominate a man cool on the outside but burning for America on the inside. A man who believes we can build a new American Dream economy driven by innovation and creativity, education and cooperation. A man who had the good sense to marry Michelle Obama.I want Barack Obama to be the next President of the United States and I proudly nominate him as the standard bearer of the Democratic Party.In Tampa, we heard a lot of talk about how the President and the Democrats don't believe in free enterprise and individual initiative, how we want everyone to be dependent on the government, how bad we are for the economy.The Republican narrative is that all of us who amount to anything are completely self-made. One of our greatest Democratic Chairmen, Bob Strauss, used to say that every politician wants you to believe he was born in a log cabin he built himself, but it ain't so.We Democrats think the country works better with a strong middle class, real opportunities for poor people to work their way into it and a relentless focus on the future, with business and government working together to promote growth and broadly shared prosperity. We think "we're all in this together" is a better philosophy than "you're on your own."Who's right? Well since 1961, the Republicans have held the White House 28 years, the Democrats 24. In those 52 years, our economy produced 66 million private sector jobs. What's the jobs score? Republicans 24 million, Democrats 42 million!It turns out that advancing equal opportunity and economic empowerment is both morally right and good economics,because discrimination, poverty and ignorance restrict growth, while investments in education, infrastructure and scientific and technological research increase it, creating more good jobs and new wealth for all of us.Though I often disagree with Republicans, I never learned to hate them the way the far right that now controls their party seems to hate President Obama and the Democrats. After all, President Eisenhower sent federal troops to my home state to integrate Little Rock Central High and built the interstate highway system. And as governor, I worked with President Reagan on welfare reform and with President George H.W. Bush on national education goals.I am grateful to President George W. Bush for PEPFAR, which is saving the lives of millions of people in poor countries and to both Presidents Bush for the work we've done together after the South Asia tsunami, Hurricane Katrina and the Haitian earthquake.Through my foundation, in America and around the world, I work with Democrats, Republicans and Independents who are focused on solving problems and seizing opportunities, not fighting each other.When times are tough, constant conflict may be good politics but in the real world, cooperation works better. After all, nobody's right all the time, and a broken clock is right twice a day. All of us are destined to live our lives between those two extremes. Unfortunately, the faction that now dominates the Republican Party doesn't see it that way. They think government is the enemy, and compromise is weakness.One of the main reasons America should re-elect President Obama is that he is still committed to cooperation. He appointed Republican Secretaries of Defense, the Army and Transportation. He appointed a Vice President who ran against him in 2008, and trusted him to oversee the successful end of the war in Iraq and the implementation of the recovery act. And Joe Biden did a great job with both. He appointed Cabinet members who supported Hillary in the primaries. Heck, he even appointed Hillary! I'm so proud of her and grateful to our entire national security team for all they've done to make us safer and stronger and to build a world with more partners and fewer enemies. I'm also grateful to the young men and women who serve our country in the military and to Michelle Obama and Jill Biden for supporting military families when their loved ones are overseas and for helping our veterans, when they come home bearing thewounds of war, or needing help with education, housing, and jobs.President Obama's record on national security is a tribute to his strength, and judgment, and to his preference for inclusion and partnership over partisanship.He also tried to work with Congressional Republicans on Health Care, debt reduction, and jobs, but that didn't work out so well. Probably because, as the Senate Republican leader, in a remarkable moment of candor, said two years before the election, their number one priority was not to put America back to work, but to put President Obama out of work. Senator, I hate to break it to you, but we're going to keep President Obama on the job!In Tampa, the Republican argument against the President's re-election was pretty simple: we left him a total mess, he hasn't cleaned it up fast enough, so fire him and put us back in.In order to look like an acceptable alternative to President Obama, they couldn't say much about the ideas they have offered over the last two years. You see they want to go back to the same old policies that got us into trouble in the first place: to cut taxes for high income Americans even more than PresidentBush did; to get rid of those pesky financial regulations designed to prevent another crash and prohibit future bailouts; to increase defense spending two trillion dollars more than the Pentagon has requested without saying what they'll spend the money on; to make enormous cuts in the rest of the budget, especially programs that help the middle class and poor kids. As another President once said – there they go again.I like the argument for President Obama's re-election a lot better. He inherited a deeply damaged economy, put a floor under the crash, began the long hard road to recovery, and laid the foundation for a modern, more well-balanced economy that will produce millions of good new jobs, vibrant new businesses, and lots of new wealth for the innovators. Are we where we want to be? No. Is the President satisfied? No. Are we better off than we were when he took office, with an economy in free fall, losing 750,000 jobs a month. The answer is YES.I understand the challenge we face. I know many Americans are still angry and frustrated with the economy. Though employment is growing, banks are beginning to lend and even housing prices are picking up a bit, too many people don't feel it.I experienced the same thing in 1994 and early 1995. Our policies were working and the economy was growing but most people didn't feel it yet. By 1996, the economy was roaring, halfway through the longest peacetime expansion in American history.President Obama started with a much weaker economy than I did. No President – not me or any of my predecessors could have repaired all the damage in just four years. But conditions are improving and if you'll renew the President's contract you will feel it.I believe that with all my heart.President Obama's approach embodies the values, the ideas, and the direction America must take to build a 21st century version of the American Dream in a nation of shared opportunities, shared prosperity and shared responsibilities.So back to the story. In 2010, as the President's recovery program kicked in, the job losses stopped and things began to turn around.The Recovery Act saved and created millions of jobs and cut taxes for 95% of the American people. In the last 29 months the economy has produced about 4.5 million private sector jobs. Butlast year, the Republicans blocked the President's jobs plan costing the economy more than a million new jobs. So here's another jobs score: President Obama plus 4.5 million, Congressional Republicans zero.Over that same period, more than more than 500,000 manufacturing jobs have been created under President Obama –the first time manufacturing jobs have increased since the 1990s.The auto industry restructuring worked. It saved more than a million jobs, not just at GM, Chrysler and their dealerships, but in auto parts manufacturing all over the country. That's why even auto-makers that weren't part of the deal supported it. They needed to save the suppliers too. Like I said, we're all in this together.Now there are 250,000 more people working in the auto industry than the day the companies were restructured. Governor Romney opposed the plan to save GM and Chrysler. So here's another jobs score: Obama two hundred and fifty thousand, Romney, zero.The agreement the administration made with management, labor and environmental groups to double car mileage over thenext few years is another good deal: it will cut your gas bill in half, make us more energy independent, cut greenhouse gas emissions, and add another 500,000 good jobs.President Obama's "all of the above" energy plan is helping too – the boom in oil and gas production combined with greater energy efficiency has driven oil imports to a near 20 year low and natural gas production to an all time high. Renewable energy production has also doubled.We do need more new jobs, lots of them, but there are already more than three million jobs open and unfilled in America today, mostly because the applicants don't have the required skills. We have to prepare more Americans for the new jobs that are being created in a world fueled by new technology. That's why investments in our people are more important than ever. The President has supported community colleges and employers in working together to train people for open jobs in their communities. And, after a decade in which exploding college costs have increased the drop-out rate so much that we've fallen to 16th in the world in the percentage of our young adults with college degrees, his student loan reform lowers the cost of federal student loans and even more important, gives students the right to repay the loans as a fixed percentage oftheir incomes for up to 20 years. That means no one will have to drop-out of college for fear they can't repay their debt, and no one will have to turn down a job, as a teacher, a police officer or a small town doctor because it doesn't pay enough to make the debt payments. This will change the future for young Americans.I know we're better off because President Obama made these decisions.That brings me to health care.The Republicans call it Obamacare and say it's a government takeover of health care that they'll repeal. Are they right? Let's look at what's happened so far. Individuals and businesses have secured more than a billion dollars in refunds from their insurance premiums because the new law requires 80% to 85% of your premiums to be spent on health care, not profits or promotion. Other insurance companies have lowered their rates to meet the requirement. More than 3 million young people between 19 and 25 are insured for the first time because their parents can now carry them on family policies. Millions of seniors are receiving preventive care including breast cancer screenings and tests for heart problems. Soon the insurance companies, not the government, will have millions of new customers many ofthem middle class people with pre-existing conditions. And for the last two years, health care spending has grown under 4%, for the first time in 50 years.So are we all better off because President Obama fought for it and passed it? You bet we are.There were two other attacks on the President in Tampa that deserve an answer. Both Governor Romney and Congressman Ryan attacked the President for allege dly robbing Medicare of 716 billion dollars. Here's what really happened. There were no cuts to benefits. None. What the President did was save money by cutting unwarranted subsidies to providers and insurance companies that weren't making people any healthier. He used the saving to close the donut hole in the Medicare drug program, and to add eight years to the life of the Medicare Trust Fund. It's now solvent until 2024. So President Obama and the Democrats didn't weaken Medicare, they strengthened it.When Congressman Ryan looked into the TV camera and attacked President Obama's "biggest coldest power play" in raiding Medicare, I didn't know whether to laugh or cry. You see, that 716 billion dollars is exactly the same amount of Medicare savings Congressman Ryan had in his own budget.At least on this one, Governor Romney's been consistent. He wants to repeal the savings and give the money back to the insurance companies, re-open the donut hole and force seniors to pay more for drugs, and reduce the life of the Medicare Trust Fund by eight years. So now if he's elected and does what he promised Medicare will go broke by 2016. If that happens, you won't have to wait until their voucher program to begins in 2023 to see the end Medicare as we know it.But it gets worse. They also want to block grant Medicaid and cut it by a third over the coming decade. Of course, that will hurt poor kids, but that's not all. Almost two-thirds of Medicaid is spent on nursing home care for seniors and on people with disabilities, including kids from middle class families, with special needs like, Downs syndrome or Autism. I don't know how those families are going to deal with it. We can't let it happen.Now let's look at the Republican charge that President Obama wants to weaken the work requirements in the welfare reform bill I signed that moved millions of people from welfare to work.Here's what happened. When some Republican governors asked to try new ways to put people on welfare back to work, theObama Administration said they would only do it if they had a credible plan to increase employment by 20%. You hear that? More work. So the claim that President Obama weakened welfare reform's work requirement is just not true. But they keep running ads on it. As their campaign pollster said "we're not going to let our campaign be dictated by fact checkers." Now that is true. I couldn't have said it better myself – I just hope you remember that every time you see the ad.Let's talk about the debt. We have to deal with it or it will deal with us. President Obama has offered a plan with 4 trillion dollars in debt reduction over a decade, with two and a half dollars of spending reductions for every one dollar of revenue increases, and tight controls on future spending. It's the kind of balanced approach proposed by the bipartisan Simpson-Bowles commission.I think the President's plan is better than the Romney plan, because the Romney plan fails the first test of fiscal responsibility: The numbers don't add up.It's supposed to be a debt reduction plan but it begins with five trillion dollars in tax cuts over a ten-year period. That makes the debt hole bigger before they even start to dig out. They saythey'll make it up by eliminating loopholes in the tax code. When you ask "which loopholes and how much?," they say "See me after the election on that." People ask me all the time how we delivered four surplus budgets. What new ideas did we bring? I always give a one-word answer: arithmetic. If they stay with a 5 trillion dollar tax cut in a debt reduction plan – the – arithmetic tells us that one of three things will happen: 1) they'll have to eliminate so many deductions like the ones for home mortgages and charitable giving that middle class families will see their tax bill go up two thousand dollars year while people making over 3 million dollars a year get will still get a 250,000 dollar tax cut; or 2) they'll have to cut so much spending that they'll obliterate the budget for our national parks, for ensuring clean air, clean water, safe food, safe air travel; or they'll cut way back on Pell Grants, college loans, early childhood education and other programs that help middle class families and poor children, not to mention cutting investments in roads, bridges, science, technology and medical research; or 3) they'll do what they've been doing for thirty plus years now – cut taxes more than they cut spending, explode the debt, and weaken the economy. Remember, Republican economic policies quadrupled the debt before I tookoffice and doubled it after I left. We simply can't afford to double-down on trickle-down.President Obama's plan cuts the debt, honors our values, and brightens the future for our children, our families and our nation.My fellow Americans, you have to decide what kind of country you want to live in. If you want a you're on your own, winner take all society you should support the Republican ticket. If you want a country of shared opportunities and shared responsibilities – a "we're all in it together" society, you should vote for Barack Obama and Joe Biden. If you want every American to vote and you think its wrong to change voting procedures just to reduce the turnout of younger, poorer, minority and disabled voters, you should support Barack Obama. If you think the President was right to open the doors of American opportunity to young immigrants brought here as children who want to go to college or serve in the military, you should vote for Barack Obama. If you want a future of shared prosperity, where the middle class is growing and poverty is declining, where the American Dream is alive and well, and where the United States remains the leading force for peace and prosperity in a highly competitive world, you should vote forBarack Obama. I love our country – and I know we're coming back. For more than 200 years, through every crisis, we've always come out stronger than we went in. And we will again as long as we do it together. We champion the cause for which our founders pledged their lives, their fortunes, their sacred honor –to form a more perfect union.If that's what you believe, if that's what you want, we have to re-elect President Barack Obama.God Bless You – God Bless America.。

美国政治的周期性现象——从最初控制美国的60个家族，到现在已成标签的美国版“四大家族”乃至新近形成的“五大家族”，家族政治的隐性影响力，从这个国家建立之初就已经被接受，存在于美国独特的政治生态当中超过百年。

这种存在与美国对外展示的民主形象是如此迥异，但这种长期形成的特殊制度，才是美国政治最真实的棱镜面之一。

如果用一句话来形容政治豪门控制美国政治的百年历史，就是美国人用一种山寨自英国的姿态，通过美国式的讨价还价，形成一笔笔看似公平公开，但不乏偷步暗算的交易。

美国的政治运行规则许多直接来源于英国，这一点少有疑问。

许多史料研究表明，美国家族政治的形成，也直接与英国特有的贵族政治有关。

“政治流淌在一个家庭的血液中，就像煤垢永存在矿工家族的指甲缝里一样。

”“记得我21岁时，倘若有人对我说，我无法成为议会一员，我会觉得那是天大的笑话，因为我是来自那样的家庭。

”以上两段独白分别出自英国女议员、下院前议长贝蒂·布思罗伊德，以及英国前首相丘吉尔。

相似的思维也被美国开国领袖们所认同。

虽然美国的开国元勋一致认为政府不应在一个家族手中代代相传，但是他们并不反对将政治作为家族事务。

斯坦福大学的历史学家戴维·肯尼迪也认为，开国元勋“期望‘天生的贵族’或他们所谓的‘弗吉尼亚最早移民后裔的家族’能担当可以胜任的职务”。

所以在这种时代背景下，美国自建国之后很长一段时间，总统或主要的政府高层领导人，最初都几乎出现在组成美国最初的13个州的政治家族当中。

到后来陆续形成了60个政治家族——1937年，费尔南德·伦德伯格就在《美国六十个家族》一书中，阐述美国由60个最有权势的家族统治。

于是，亚当斯、汉密尔顿、塔夫脱、哈里森、罗斯福、肯尼迪，这些姓氏伴随着美国的200多年历史。

值得注意的是，这种政治豪门的力量角逐，在1952年大选，也就是二战之后美国的第一次大选中发生过巨大变化。

当时出身豪门的杜鲁门卸任，以平民身份奋斗到二战盟军总司令的艾森豪威尔接棒——以1952年大选为分野，此前的美国政坛，被称为“古典政治时代”，总统绝对是新英格兰的白人世家(信奉基督教新教，来自盎格鲁-撒克逊血统)才有资格候选，而且选上谁，是门阀们关门博弈的结果。

Bill Clinton's Democratic Convention Speech: The Power of a Hug 克林顿的演说：一个拥抱的力量文章出自：纽约客Clinton started with a favorite subject of his: the coöperation that he sees among parties trying to solve problems around the world through his work at the Clinton Global Initiative. However, here in the U.S., despite President Obama’s best effo rts, an unreasonable and ideological political faction has made coöperation impossible. From there he pivoted to recent history, making a seemingly dispassionate case for why no President, even Clinton himself, could ever have repaired in four years all the damage Obama found when he arrived in the White House in 2009. But despite that, Obama’s record, told with excruciating but powerfully persuasiv e detail, has been far better than is popularly understood. Now he just needs his contract renewed to finish the job. Clinton made it all sound so simple.This was the anti-Michelle speech. While she naturally gave personal testimony about Barack Obama’s character and urged voters to support him on that basis, in the story Clinton told Obama was an ephemeral figure. There were few personal details or anecdotes about the President because Clinton isn’t particularly close to Obama. It was a speech about facts and three and a half years of decisions made and outcomes achieved. By the end of it, the only logical conclusion, Clinton argued, is that Obama would do a better job than the alternative.In a sense, Clinton’s reluctance to embrace Obama personally, and his own fraught history with the President, which I explore d in a piece for The New Yorker this week, makes him the ideal spokesman to appeal to those skeptical former Obama voters that his campaign is trying to win back. In an interview with Brian Williams earlier in the day, Clinton said of Obama, “We haven’t be en closefriends a long time or anything like tha t, but he knows that I support him.” I found it an amazingly honest statement considering that politicians often go out of their way to exaggerate their fondness for one another.And it was exactly their lack of personal chemistry and failure to become “close friends” that gave Clinton’s speech its lift. A subtext of the address was that, just like Bill Clinton, wavering voters need not love Obama to understand that he’s a better choice tha n Romney. When the two Presidents came together and hugged after the speech was (finally) over, the distance between them made their embrace all the more powerful.For more of The New Yorker’s convention coverage, visit The Political Scene. You can also read Ryan Lizza on Julián Castro’s keynote address and the relations hip between President Obama and Bill Clinton; John Cassidy on Michelle Obama’s convention speech and Obama’s and Paul Ryan’s false statements about the economy; Amy Davidson on what Bill Clinton didn’t say; the First Lady’s sp eech, the gay-rights platform, and whether Democrats are better off than they were four years ago; Hendrik Hertzberg on renewed Democratic enthusiasm; and Alex Koppelman on Obama and the American Dream.Photograph by Alex Wong/Getty Images.克林顿的演说：一个拥抱的力量克林顿的口才无语伦比，其演说才能也极具天赋，看看在前几天的民主党全国大会的演讲上，他会带给我们什么呢？克林顿的演说：一个拥抱的力量作者：Ryan Lizza我认为，无论从哪方面来讲，在几天前晚上的民主党全国大会上，相比朱利安•卡斯特罗可谓弱暴了的表现，克林顿的演说堪称完美。

奥巴马如何改变美国2009-01-13 17:04分类：默认分类字号：大中小我们如何从演讲中去认识奥巴马？他的上台是否能够挽救美国经济?他的经济政策对中国有着什么样的影响? 在奥巴马的执政纲要中他强调的是改变，而他发表的《更完美的联邦》演讲和林肯的就职宣言是一样的伟大！奥巴马是一个什么样的人？奥巴马是一个非常深奥的一个人,我们把他看的太简单了,我举个例子, 他从竟选的第一天到他当选总统值得欢呼的那一天,我没有看他笑过,我也没有看他哭过,也就是他的喜怒不形于色,随时随地都是非常稳定的个性,当他受到别人攻击的时候,包括别人攻击他的牧师,他的反映简直让我感到震惊,像他这种冷酷的性格,如果他选不上总统话,他做基金经理最适合.尤其在中国做基金经理最适合.而且这个人很幽默,上次他去美国南达科他州,有四个总统雕像在那里,记者问他:你想不想当第五个雕像呀?他想了半天说:不行,我的耳朵太大,可能挂不住.另外他曾经遭到一个最大的挫败.那就是他的一个黑人牧师,像疯子一样的说“911事件是上帝对于美国的诅咒！”这个牧师与奥巴马的关系非常好,他的两个女儿信基督教的时候也是这个牧师替他洗礼的.但是这个牧师非常痛恨美国白人的牧师,天天在骂,说非洲的爱滋病是美国人带进去的. 911事件是上帝对于美国的诅咒!等等之类的话, 等到奥巴马出来竞选总统的时候,就被对方给突然宣布出来,奥巴马是如何来处理这个问题的?按照我们一般人的做法,就会说“我错了, 对不起.....!我本来就讨厌那个牧师…..!切断关系,划清界线!”。

全世界的人都期望他会开个记者招待会,进行道歉。

可是他没有,奥巴马3月18号在费城,就是我读书的那个地方,奥巴马发表一篇文章叫做《更完美的联邦》.他开头的第一名话就是“对不起,我不能跟那个黑人牧师切断关系”。

这话讲出来之后,全场愣了他说“正如我不能切断我和我白人外祖母的关系是一样的,从小我父母离异.我爸爸是黑人,我妈妈是白人,所以我的外祖母从小把我带大,她是个白人,她将一生的爱都放在我身上,可是我的外祖母也告诉过我,她最害怕上街的时候,有黑人在她旁边走过,她怕黑人抢他,而且我的外祖母也常常告诉我她有多痛恨黑人,因此我要接受我的外祖母,我就要接受我的牧师,因为那就是美国的一部分,我不可能脱离的.但是这个牧师最大的错误不是非常偏激的种族言论,而是他忘了美国是一个不断进步的国家,因此美国是一个会改变的国家”。

奥巴马为什么能当上总统挪威诺贝尔委员会2009年诺贝尔和平奖授予奥巴马，以表彰他在促进国际外交和各国人民合作所作出的非凡努力。

为什么奥巴马能当上总统，以下就是店铺做的整理，希望对你们有用。

奥巴马能当上总统的原因一来他较年轻而且他的参政计划很多年轻人支持二者他是非洲裔的美国人三来一般总统是两大政党轮流来而且人们认为布什做的不好然而麦凯恩的政策基本上与布什一样并且经济危机的问题所以美国人希望有一个改变奥巴马的个人介绍贝拉克·侯赛因·奥巴马(Barack Hussein Obama)[1]，1961年8月4日出生于美国夏威夷州檀香山，美国民主党籍政治家，第44任美国总统，为美国历史上第一位非洲裔总统。

1991年，奥巴马以优等生荣誉从哈佛法学院毕业，而后在著名的芝加哥大学法学院教授宪法长达12年(1992年-2004年)。

2008年11月4日，正式当选为美国总统。

2009年10月9日，获得诺贝尔委员会颁发的诺贝尔和平奖。

2012年11月6日，第57届美国总统大选中，奥巴马击败共和党候选人罗姆尼，成功连任。

2014年11月10日，奥巴马出席亚太经合组织领导人非正式会议并对中国进行国事访问;12月，奥巴马参加由非盈利组织举办的编程大会，成美国史上首位会编程总统。

11月4日名列《福布斯》全球最有权力人物排行榜第三。

12月22日，奥巴马在最受欢迎的领导人排名中名列第一。

奥巴马的政坛经历总统竞选第一任期2008年11月4日，美国各大电视网公布的初步统计结果显示，美国民主党总统候选人、伊利诺伊州国会参议员贝拉克·奥巴马在2008年11月4日举行的总统选举中击败共和党对手、亚利桑那州国会参议员麦凯恩，当选第44任(第56届)美国总统已成定局。

初步统计结果，奥巴马已获得297张选举人票，超过当选总统所需的270张选举人票;麦凯恩仅获得145张选举人票。

成功当选美国第44任总统后的奥巴马在芝加哥发表讲话，表示“这是属于大家的胜利(this is your victory)，美国开始改变(change has come to America)”。

2011美国国务卿克林顿与总统奥巴马向海外美国人发表的2011年国庆节致辞Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton:美国国务卿希拉里·罗德海姆·克林顿：Hello, everyone, and happy Independence Day.诸位好，祝各位独立纪念日快乐。

At home, the Fourth of July means fireworks, barbeques, family and friends. But for all of you Americans living and working overseas, this day takes on a whole new meaning. It’s an opportunity to share our culture and our spirit, to open our doors and welcome new friends and partners. I want to thank you for representing the American people so well on this and every other day.在国内，7月4日意味着燃放烟火、烧烤野餐、家人和朋友。

但对你们所有在海外生活和工作的美国人来说，这一天具有一层新的意义。

这一天提供了一个机会，可以分享我们的文化和我们的精神，敞开我们的大门，欢迎新朋友和新伙伴。

我感谢你们成为美国人民的优秀代表，不仅在这一天，而且天天如此。

Today is a time to celebrate the birth of our nation and the values that have sustained us for 235 years — equality, opportunity, the rights enshrined in our founding documents. This year, we have been reminded again that these are not just American values; they are truly universal values. And as people across North Africa, the Middle East and around the world risk their lives to claim these universal human rights and freedoms, Americans are proud to stand with them. We are united by our common hopes and aspirations for a better world.今天是值得纪念的日子，庆祝我国诞生和维系我们235年之久的价值观——建国文献阐明的平等、机会和权利。

【名人故事】克林顿成近40年来最富裕美国总统
,
克林顿
据媒体5月31日报道，克林顿是近40年来最富裕的美国总统，他卸任后在全球巡回
演说带来巨额收入，出版自传先收1500万美元订金，估计其身家高达3800万美元，远高
于现任总统奥巴马，奥巴马家财仅500万美元。

1993年1月，克林顿从阿肯色州――美国出名的穷乡僻壤的州长官邸搬进了白宫，当时他和妻子希拉里口袋里没几个钱。

8年后离开白宫时，夫妻俩的财产不但没有增加，反
而变成了负数――因为“白水”地产官司、莱温斯基丑闻调查和两人的竞选活动，他们欠
下了一屁股债务，据估计总额高达1200万美元。

神奇的是，退休后，克林顿的身家却迅速膨胀，不仅还清了所有欠债，而且摇身变成
一个千万富豪。

他们的赚钱途径除了离开白宫不久后各自签署的数百万美元出书合同之外，最重要的一项就是克林顿到处发表演讲的收费。

克林顿的收费演讲足迹遍布全球六大洲的
数十个国家，听众大多是商界人士，每场收费几乎都在10万美元以上。

仅2021年10月
18日一天，在加拿大多伦多市发表的两场演讲就为他赚进47.5万美元，比他当总统时辛
苦一年挣的薪水高出一倍多。

不过，在过去43任美国总统之中，财富称冠的是第1任总统华盛顿，他不但是一众
总统中薪酬最高──薪金占1789年美国财政预算总值的2%，也是精明的奴隶主，在弗吉
尼亚州拥有8000英亩农场、300名奴隶，种植烟草和酿制威士忌酒，并从太太的家族继承大片土地。

经通胀调整后，估计其家财净值高达 5.25亿美元。

感谢您的阅读，祝您生活愉快。

奥巴马之后，美国会有怎样的总统【奥巴马如今焦头烂额，在国内，问题频出的医改网站被曝烧掉21亿美元；又因对军人随意“挥一挥手”，陷入“拿铁敬礼门”。

在国际舞台上，奥巴马在联合国演讲中，将俄罗斯与埃博拉、伊斯兰国并列，引起一片哗然。

奥巴马的第二任期一度被寄予厚望，现在，批评奥巴马似乎成了新的“政治正确”。

美国《外交政策》集团首席执行官戴维〃罗特科普夫刊文质疑：奥巴马的外交政策能否得到拯救？著名政治学者福山与前美国驻阿富汗大使撰文抨击奥巴马应对伊斯兰国的政策。

美国中期选举临近，但许多由希望到失望的美国人，目光已经投向“后奥巴马时代”，希拉里也蠢蠢欲动，为2016年参选总统造势。

美国政坛存在一个“历史规律”，即总统轮回说。

那么，奥巴马是哪一类总统？在他之后，又会有怎样的继任者？】美国国会中期选举如今进入收官阶段，而新一届的总统大选也开始预热，众多有意竞逐白宫的候选人都在摩拳擦掌。

但不论下一届总统是共和党还是民主党，美国都很可能在两个历史规律的作用下进入一个短暂的衰退期，如何把握这个历史机遇，将是摆在几个试图挑战美国霸权的新兴国家面前的重大课题。

美国的政党重组“政坛重组”是美国政治史的一个规律性现象，基本上每隔三四十年美国政坛将会出现一次大洗牌。

各方势力会借所谓的“关键性选举”的机会合纵连横，在同一个政党下形成新的选民结构，然后这个利益共同体会在内外作用下逐渐瓦解，直到新一轮的重组彻底打乱旧秩序形成新的选民结构。

比如说同样叫民主党，杰克逊时期的民主党、富兰克林时期的民主党和如今的民主党的选民构成就有极大的差异。

1800年大选杰斐逊终结了联邦党自1789年立国起的12年执政，开启了“弗吉尼亚王朝”的稳定统治（2 8年）；1828年民主共和党分裂，继承杰斐逊衣钵的安德鲁·杰克逊缔造的新民主党时代却最终导致南北兵戎相见（32年）；但1860年突然崛起的共和党在林肯的带领下不仅在大选中击败民主党，在战场上终结了奴隶制，还在接下来30年时间内助美国完成工业化（36年）；可工业化却制造了一系列新的问题：政治腐败低效，贫富差距加大，城市化导致的卫生治安等。

奥巴马的悲剧在于他生不逢时与最近几任总统相比，世界的分裂在奥巴马任内呈现出了更多的形式。

乔治•H•W•布什巧妙地应对了苏联解体一事。

比尔•克林顿是第一位下令发射巡航导弹攻击个人——在阿富汗的奥萨马•本•拉登——的总统，那是一个超级大国首次和实力极强的暴怒者展开战斗。

当这个暴怒者在9月11日对美国发动攻击时，乔治•W•布什用两次入侵行动作为回击。

这些趋势都已经达到巅峰，奥巴马需要面对它们，为前任打扫战场。

坦率地说，一切爱国的中国人对奥巴马是不会有什么好感的。

但公正地说，作为美国总统，奥巴马无论在战略上还是理性上，都是很了不起的。

里根总统之后，在水平与能力上可与奥巴马相提并论的，大概只有老布什，至于克林顿以及小布什等，一个放荡一个莽撞，他们所取得的所谓成就，不过机缘巧合、顺势而为，前靠里根以及老布什的基础，后挟冷战胜利的余威，仅此而已。

奥巴马则可谓生不逢时，既要面对前人留下的几个乱摊子，还要应对不期而遇的经济与金融危机，更要面对中国的迅猛崛起，所以，任何人坐在奥巴马的位置上，都很难说会比他干得更出色。

与最近几任总统相比，世界的分裂在奥巴马任内呈现出了更多的形式。

乔治•H•W•布什(George H.W. Bush)巧妙地应对了苏联解体一事。

比尔•克林顿(Bill Clinton)是第一位下令发射巡航导弹攻击个人——在阿富汗的奥萨马•本•拉登(Osama bin Laden)——的总统，那是一个超级大国首次和实力极强的暴怒者展开战斗。

当这个暴怒者在9月11日对美国发动攻击时，乔治•W•布什用两次入侵行动作为回击。

这些趋势都已经达到巅峰，奥巴马需要面对它们，还有：两次入侵行动的后果；衰弱、受辱但仍旧危险的俄罗斯；针对从也门到巴基斯坦的越来越多的暴怒者而发起的无人机战争；传统阿拉伯国家的同时瓦解，以及伊朗的有核化；传统大国划定的“势力范围”的缩小，广场及社交网络上底层的“有影响力的人”的崛起。

这些“广场人”挑战一切，从俄罗斯在乌克兰的势力范围，到亲美埃及军队继续统治埃及的权力。

十位最佳美国总统1.富兰克林·罗斯福《新闻周刊》杂志选择了来自不同地方和不同党派的最佳总统名单，排在第一位的富兰克林·罗斯福被认为是现代总统中最好的一名。

很难只选择一项富兰克林·罗斯福留下的贡献，他是一名有深度和热情的总统，他不仅带领美国人民度过了经济大萧条时期和第二次世界大战，而且他还革命性地开创了美国社会公正体系，创造了一直沿用至今的国家安全网络。

他所达到的高度是之后任何一位美国总统都无法达到或接近的。

2.西奥多·罗斯福西奥多·罗斯福制定了全美国家公园系统，在西奥多·罗斯福的强硬领导风格下，美国逐渐成为一个具有先锋开拓者精神、自由和开放的国家。

尽管西奥多·罗斯福的立法进程表十分满档，但他提出的保留美国国家自然资源的法令使得近1亿英亩国家森林区得到了很好保留。

3.林登·约翰逊林登·约翰逊的最大贡献是1964年推动了民权法案的通过，从法律上禁止种族歧视的不良行为。

在他的任期的后半段，越南战争的爆发让美国遭受一定损失，但不影响他成为最佳总统的人选。

4.德怀特·艾森豪威尔美国巨大的收入差距是当时美国社会不安定因素的主要原因，艾森豪威尔为此打造了中产阶级。

艾森豪威尔冷静成熟的个性帮助美国在第二次世界大战后迅速的恢复并发展经济，修建了全美高速公路系统和大城市在遭受核袭击时所需要的疏散通道。

随着交通设施的完善，美国梦也就此诞生。

5. 伍德罗·威尔逊伍德罗·威尔逊的最大贡献就是让美国在国际地位上得到最多的重视。

美国历史学家将伍德罗·威尔逊的排名放在前五的原因正是他纠正了美国在第一次世界大战后的孤立倾向，他鼓励向外传播美国的民主经验。

在他的影响下，1919年成立了国际联盟，他因此获得了诺贝尔和平奖。

6. 哈里·杜鲁门哈里·杜鲁门担任美国副总统仅3个月，就因富兰克林·罗斯福突发脑溢血而宣布就职总统。

奥巴马是第几任？历届美国总统名单一览美国总统(ThePresidentoftheUnitedStatesofAmerica)是美利坚合众国的国家元首和政府首脑，同时是美国行政部门的最高领袖与三军统帅，一般被称为Mr.President(总统先生)。

根据现行的美国宪法第二十二修正案，美国总统任期4年，可以连任一届。

作为世界上最强大的国家、世界上最大的正在扩张利益国家-美国的最高领导者，美国总统的权力与影响力极大，不仅影响国内，更是影响世界其它国家。

传统上，美国总统（若为男性）的夫人称为“第一夫人”，其家庭称为“第一家庭”。

历届美国总统名单第一任美国的国父：乔治·华盛顿(George Washington) 任期：1789年-1797年开国总统所属政党：联邦主义者第二任白宫的第一个主人：约翰·亚当斯 (John Adams) 任期：1797年-1801年人称“老亚当斯”，儿子是第6任美国总统，和儿子共同成为美国历史上第一对父子档总统。

所属政党：美国联邦党第三任《独立宣言》的起草者：托玛斯·杰弗逊 (Thomas Jefferson) 任期：1801年-1809年民主共和党第四任美国宪法的奠基人：詹姆斯·麦迪逊 (James Madison) 任期：1809年-1817年民主共和党第五任“门罗主义”的创始人：詹姆斯·门罗 (James Monroe) 任期：1817年-1825年民主共和党第六任能干的外交官：约翰·昆西·亚当斯 (John Quincy Adams)任期：1825年-1829年人称“小亚当斯”，父亲是第二任美国总统，和父亲是为美国历史上第一对父子档总统。

民主共和党第七任第一位平民出身的总统：安德鲁·杰克逊 (Andrew Jackson) 任期：1829年-1837年民主党第八任第一个立国后出生的总统：马丁·范布伦 (Martin Van Buren) 任期：1837年-1841年民主党第九任任职期最短的总统：威廉·亨利·哈里森 (William Henry Harrison) 任期：1841年上任一个月后便死在任期内，其孙为第23任美国总统。

克林顿国务卿为奥巴马中东和北非讲话所做的引言SECRETARY CLINTON: Thank you all, and welcome to the State Department. I am delighted to be here to welcome the President as well as our colleagues from the Diplomatic Corps, Senator Kerry, and senior officials from across our government, and especially the many young Foreign Service and Civil Servants who are here today.克林顿国务卿：谢谢大家，欢迎光临国务院。

我很高兴能在这里欢迎总统以及来自外交使团的同事们、参议员克里、我们政府各部门的高级官员、特别是今天在座的许多年轻的外交人员和公务员。

Mr. President, from your first days in office you have charged us with implementing a bold new approach for America’s foreign policy – a new blueprint for how we advance our values, project our leadership, and strengthen our partnerships. We have seen that in a changing world, America’s leadership is more essential than ever, but t hat we often must lead in new and innovative ways.总统先生，从您就职初始，您就赋予我们重任，在美国外交政策上实施一个大胆而全新的方针——这是指导我们推广我们的价值观、发挥我们的领导作用、加强我们的伙伴关系的一幅新蓝图。

奥巴马班底鲜为人知的一幕：金钱政治深嵌美国肌体自奥巴马宣誓就任美国总统那一刻起，在他的身上，许多人期待着一个真正变革时代的到来。

然而，需要思考的问题或许还有很多：奥巴马究竟是谁？是那位“富兰克林·奥巴马”吗？谁在影响奥巴马的决策？其背后的利益集团又是谁呢？要搞清楚这些问题，除了要熟悉美国华盛顿特区的宾州大街1600号——白宫，还要关注另外一条街道——K街，因为这里是深深嵌入美国政治肌体的游说集团集中地。

奥巴马与波德斯塔集团的政治秀从白宫往北三个街区，便是K街。

这条大街被称作美国政治体系的第四分部，云集了最著名的以游说为生的律师事务所和中介机构。

庞大的游说集团与国会山和白宫近在咫尺，形成了华盛顿独特的政治生态圈。

这个连接着政策制定者与利益群体的生态圈里的一举一动，也成为政治分析家们考察华盛顿动向的最佳视角。

K街著名公关公司波德斯塔集团有一句广告语：“白宫的许多人能告诉你刚刚发生了什么，我们则帮助你改变结果。

”但是在竞选期间，誓言变革的奥巴马却在发给选民的一封电子邮件中说，“那些说客以及特殊利益集团把政府变成了只有他们才能玩的游戏场。

当他们签下支票时，选民增加了账单。

他们认为是他们掌控着政府，但今天我们要把政府从他们手中夺回来，是时候让这种金钱政治结束了，我们要翻开新的一页。

”有人说，要改变说客“操纵”白宫的政治生态是奥巴马在竞选期间的一张牌，也有人认为，奥巴马的举动不过只是一场政治秀。

如今，波德斯塔集团反倒很可能迎来它的鼎盛时期，因为该公司的创立者之一——曾任克林顿白宫办公厅主任的约翰·波德斯塔——前段时间的身份是奥巴马过渡团队的主管。

不过也有媒体报道，当波德斯塔的兄弟托尼·波德斯塔和妹妹希瑟·波德斯塔轮流为这位奥巴马过渡班子的负责人举办家庭晚宴时，约翰·波德斯塔变得有些沉默。

希瑟曾坦言：“有时，我们会问上几句，但约翰不会回应，然后就是沉默，于是我们立刻转换话题，聊聊葡萄酒或当代艺术……”尽管如此，对于约翰·波德斯塔的“沉默”与“尴尬”，谁又能保证它不是为了配合奥巴马的竞选策略而进行的临时表演呢？事实上，多年来的驴象轮替从来没有对波德斯塔集团的生意造成重大打击。

看过电影《社交网络》（The Social Network）的人应该还记得这样一个场景：温克吾斯兄弟的网站创意被马克?扎克伯格偷走了，因此兄弟二人跑到时任哈佛校长的拉里?萨默斯那里告状。

上周萨默斯本人出席了《财富》科技头脑风暴大会（Fortune's Brainstorm Tech conference）。

当被问到电影里的这个场景时，萨默斯坦率地评价了温克吾斯兄弟。

他的发言引起了不小的轰动。

另一方面，随着华盛顿的债务谈判走向破裂，萨默斯认为另一轮金融浩劫正在隐隐逼近，因此他也就这个问题发表了看法。

在本次峰会上采访萨默斯的，是阿斯彭研究会（Aspen Institute）的沃特?艾萨克森。

这次采访所涉及的话题甚广。

萨默斯上个月刚刚加盟了风投机构安德里森霍洛维茨基金（Andreessen Horowitz），受聘为该公司的特别顾问。

萨默斯在采访中透露，克林顿和奥巴马的管理风格迥然不同。

以下是这次采访的摘录：萨默斯：为克林顿工作的时候是一个样子，为奥巴马做事又是另一个样子。

如果说有一个会议原定于10点召开，那么有25%的可能性这个会议会在10点前开始，还有70%的可能性是在10点15分开始。

如果你在开会前给奥巴马写了份备忘录，他基本上一定会看。

不过如果你试图在会上解释你给他写的那份备忘录，他就会打断你，而且会生气。

他作为这个会议的主导者，可能会问一两个补充性的问题，但是基本上他的重点还是在于，会议所讨论的议题究竟如何才能符合他在总统任期内的愿景和路线。

如果你是他的金融顾问的话，他基本上会听取你的态度。

比如说如果政府要进行紧急救助的话，优先股和次级债哪个才是合适的金融工具，要靠你给他指出来。

如果你办不到，或者如果他不信任你，他就会找一个新的金融顾问。

不过他不会在这个问题上花时间。

所以说奥巴马的风格就是在执行上非常专注，注重宏观指导，做事方法很有原则。

到了指定的时间，他的秘书就会进来，递给他一张卡片，上面写着“下一次会议的时间到了”。