2008 美國總統競選第一場辯論中英文對照

顯示全部樓層 · 發表於 2008-10-23 21:25:02

LEHRER: Respond directly to him about that, to Senator Obama about that, about the -- he's made it twice now, about your tax -- your policies about tax cuts.

主持人：（麥凱恩議員，）直接向奧巴馬議員回答那個，那個）——他已經指出來兩次了，關於你的減稅政策。

MCCAIN: Well -- well, let me give you an example of what Senator Obama finds objectionable, the business tax.

麥凱恩：這個——這個，讓我給你們一個被奧巴馬議員找出來反對的例子，商業稅。

Right now, the United States of American business pays the second-highest business taxes in the world, 35 percent. Ireland pays 11 percent.

目前，在美利堅合眾國的生意繳納著世界第二高的商業稅，百分之35。在愛爾蘭（只需）繳納百分之11。

Now, if you're a business person, and you can locate any place in the world, then, obviously, if you go to the country where it's 11 percent tax versus 35 percent, you're going to be able to create jobs, increase your business, make more investment, et cetera.

現在，如果你是一個生意人，而你可以（把你的生意）放在世界上的任何位置，然後，顯然，相對於收百分之35稅的國家，如果你去只收百分之11的國家，你將可以創造工作機會，做大你的生意，作出更多的投資，等等。

I want to cut that business tax. I want to cut it so that businesses will remain in -- in the United States of America and create jobs.

我希望削減商業稅。我希望削減它使得生意能夠留在——留在美利堅合眾國並創造工作（機會）。

But, again, I want to return. It's a lot more than $18 billion in pork-barrel spending. I can tell you, it's rife. It's throughout.

但，再說一次，我想回到（特別撥款的話題）。它遠比180億美元的建設經費花銷多。我可以告訴你，它相當普遍，它已經遍及了（整個議會）。

The United States Senate will take up a continuing resolution tomorrow or the next day, sometime next week, with 2,000 -- 2,000 -- look at them, my friends. Look at them. You'll be appalled.

美國參議院將要繼續一項決議，明天，也許後天，也許下個周。那是2000——2000——瞅瞅那個，我的朋友。瞅瞅，你會被嚇壞的。

And Senator Obama is a recent convert, after requesting $932 million worth of pork-barrel spending projects.

而奧巴馬議員最近洗手了，在申請了價值9.32億美元的特別撥款項目後。

So the point is, I want people to have tax cuts. I want every family to have a $5,000 refundable tax credit so they can go out and purchase their own health care. I want to double the dividend from $3,500 to $7,000 for every dependent child in America.

所以問題是，我希望人們得到減稅。我希望每個家庭得到五千美元的退稅，這樣，他們能出去購買他們自己的醫療保障。我希望每一個撫養美國貧苦兒童的獎金翻番，由3500美元到7000美元。

I know that the worst thing we could possibly do is to raise taxes on anybody, and a lot of people might be interested in Senator Obama's definition of "rich."

我知道我們最糟的做法也許就是向任何人增加稅收，而許許多多人也許都會對奧巴馬議員所謂的「富裕」感興趣。

顯示全部樓層 · 發表於 2008-10-23 21:25:52

LEHRER: Senator Obama, you have a question for Senator McCain on that?

主持人：奧巴馬議員，對麥凱恩議員剛才所說的有問題嗎？

OBAMA: Well, let me just make a couple of points.

奧巴馬：呃，讓我指出幾點來。

LEHRER: All right.

主持人：好的。

OBAMA: My definition -- here's what I can tell the American people: 95 percent of you will get a tax cut. And if you make less than $250,000, less than a quarter-million dollars a year, then you will not see one dime's worth of tax increase.

奧巴馬：我的（關於富裕的）定義——這裡是我可以告訴美國人民的：你們中的百分之95都將得到減稅。而如果你的收入少於25萬美元，每年少於25萬美元，你將不會看到（哪怕是）一分錢的稅收增加。

Now, John mentioned the fact that business taxes on paper are high in this country, and he's absolutely right. Here's the problem: There are so many loopholes that have been written into the tax code, oftentimes with support of Senator McCain, that we actually see our businesses pay effectively one of the lowest tax rates in the world.

現在，約翰（麥凱恩）提到這個國家的商業稅在紙面上很高的這個事實，他完全正確。問題是：我們有太多的漏洞寫進了稅務法，這些漏洞常常就是麥凱恩議員支持的，以致於我們國家的商業活動實際上繳納是世界上最低的稅率之一。

And what that means, then, is that there are people out there who are working every day, who are not getting a tax cut, and you want to give them more.

那意味著什麼？那意味著那些每天工作的人們，他們沒有得到減稅，而你還想要從他們那裡收取更多（稅）。

It's not like you want to close the loopholes. You just want to add an additional tax cut over the loopholes. And that's a problem.

似乎你不是想要關閉那些漏洞。只是想在那些（免稅）漏洞上（向富人）提供更多的減稅。而那就是問題所在。

Just one last point I want to make, since Senator McCain talked about providing a $5,000 health credit. Now, what he doesn't tell you is that he intends to, for the first time in history, tax health benefits.

既然麥凱恩議員談到了提供5000美元的退稅（計劃），我還想指出最後一點。那些他沒有告訴你們的，那就是，他企圖有史以來首次向醫療保險收稅。

So you may end up getting a $5,000 tax credit. Here's the only problem: Your employer now has to pay taxes on the health care that you're getting from your employer. And if you end up losing your health care from your employer, you've got to go out on the open market and try to buy it.

所以你們最終也許能得到5000美元的退稅。唯一的問題是：你們的老闆現在得為向你們提供的醫療保險繳稅。而且如果你們最終（由於老闆不願意繳稅）而失去了你們老闆所提供的醫療保險，你們只能到外面去自己給自己買一份。

It is not a good deal for the American people. But it's an example of this notion that the market can always solve everything and that the less regulation we have, the better off we're going to be.

這對美國人民來說可不是一件好事。但這就是採納（麥凱恩的）這個觀念一個例子。這觀念認為市場可以解決一切問題，對市場的管理越少，我們的日子就會過得越好。

顯示全部樓層 · 發表於 2008-10-23 21:26:17

MCCAIN: Well, you know, let me just...

麥凱恩：呃，你知道，讓我只是……

LEHRER: We've got to go to another lead question.

主持人：（打斷）我們得進入下一個引導問題了。

MCCAIN: I know we have to, but this is a classic example of walking the walk and talking the talk.

麥凱恩：（打斷）我知道我們得（進入下一個問題）了，但（奧巴馬）的行為是一個典型的做歸做，說歸說的例子。

（註： Walking the walk, and talking the talk。最早源自亞里士多德的追隨者，他們通常一邊走來走去，一邊討論著哲學問題。後來，這些人就被稱為「Walk the talk」，即「實踐著談論」，因為他們的討論就是在實踐。而「Walk the walk」後來就指實踐活動，「Talk the talk」則指高談闊論。）

We had an energy bill before the United States Senate. It was festooned with Christmas tree ornaments. It had all kinds of breaks for the oil companies, I mean, billions of dollars worth. I voted against it; Senator Obama voted for it.

美國國會之前曾有過一個能源議案。它用聖誕樹上的裝飾品打扮得很好。它有著各種各樣的向石油公司的減稅，我指的是，價值幾十億美元的稅。我投票反對了這個議案，而奧巴馬議員投票支持了這個議案。

OBAMA: John, you want to give oil companies another $4 billion.

奧巴馬：（插話）約翰（麥凱恩），你想要給石油公司另外40億美元的減稅。

MCCAIN: You've got to look at our record. You've got to look at our records. That's the important thing.

麥凱恩：（打斷）我們必須瞅瞅自己的過去。瞅瞅自己的過去。那很重要。

Who fought against wasteful and earmark spending? Who has been the person who has tried to keep spending under control? Who's the person who has believed that the best thing for America is -- is to have a tax system that is fundamentally fair? And I've fought to simplify it, and I have proposals to simplify it.

誰在和浪費的撥款項目花銷作鬥爭？誰是那個一直試圖在控制花銷的人？誰認為對美國最好的東西就是……就是一個根本上公平的稅收系統？我一直在為精簡（開銷）而戰鬥，而且我提出了精簡它的辦法。

Let's give every American a choice: two tax brackets, generous dividends, and, two -- and let Americans choose whether they want the -- the existing tax code or they want a new tax code.

讓我們給每個美國人一個選擇：兩個繳稅等級（指富人和窮人繳納不同的稅率），高利息，還有，兩個——讓美國人民來選擇他們想要哪個——舊的稅務法還是想要一個新的稅務法。

And so, again, look at the record, particularly the energy bill. But, again, Senator Obama has shifted on a number of occasions. He has voted in the United States Senate to increase taxes on people who make as low as $42,000 a year.

所以，再說一次，看看（奧巴馬）以前的記錄，特別是那能源議案。奧巴馬議員在多個場合過改變（他的立場）。他曾經在美國議會投票支持向那些年收入只有4.2萬美元之低的人增稅。

OBAMA: That's not true, John. That's not true.

奧巴馬：（插話）那不是真的，約翰。那不是真的。

MCCAIN: And that's just a fact. Again, you can look it up.

麥凱恩：（打斷）那就是事實。我再說一次，你可以去查一下。

OBAMA: Look, it's just not true. And if we want to talk about oil company profits, under your tax plan, John -- this is undeniable -- oil companies would get an additional $4 billion in tax breaks.

奧巴馬：聽著，那不是真的。如果我們要談談石油公司的利潤，在你的稅收計劃下，約翰（麥凱恩）——你否認不了——石油公司將得到額外40億美元的減稅。

Now, look, we all would love to lower taxes on everybody. But here's the problem: If we are giving them to oil companies, then that means that there are those who are not going to be getting them. And...

現在，聽著，我們每個人都喜歡低稅率。但問題是：如果我們給石油公司減稅，那意味著另外一些人將得不到減稅，而且……

MCCAIN: With all due respect, you already gave them to the oil companies.

麥凱恩：（打斷）不好意思，你已經給那些石油公司減稅了。

（註：with all due respect = with the admiration that is owed。我這裡把它翻譯為不好意思。它用於禮貌地對某個人的觀點表示不贊同。）

OBAMA: No, but, John, the fact of the matter is, is that I was opposed to those tax breaks, tried to strip them out. We've got an emergency bill on the Senate floor right now that contains some good stuff, some stuff you want, including drilling off-shore, but you're opposed to it because it would strip away those tax breaks that have gone to oil companies.

奧巴馬：（打斷）沒有，約翰，實際情況是，我反對了那些減稅。試圖把它們（減稅的部分）（從能源提案中）剝離出去。現在，在議員席上我們就有一個緊急議案。它包含一些好的提議，包含一些你想要的提議，例如在海上鑽井。但是你反對了它（議案）因為那可能會奪走那些已經給予了石油公司的減稅。

顯示全部樓層 · 發表於 2008-10-23 21:26:36

LEHRER: All right. All right, speaking of things that both of you want, another lead question, and it has to do with the rescue -- the financial rescue thing that we started -- started asking about.

主持人：好了，好了，（在下一個問題裡）說你們倆想說的吧，另一個問題。這個問題與救援行動有關——我們已經開始問（你們的）金融救援行動。

And what -- and the first answer is to you, Senator Obama. As president, as a result of whatever financial rescue plan comes about and the billion, $700 billion, whatever it is it's going to cost, what are you going to have to give up, in terms of the priorities that you would bring as president of the United States, as a result of having to pay for the financial rescue plan?

什麼……呃，首先回答問題的是你，奧巴馬議員。如果你是美國總統，在金融救援計劃——不管是什麼樣的金融拯救計劃還有那上億，呃，7000億美元，不管那將要花多少錢，在金融救援計劃產生的結果中，你會放棄什麼？作為美國總統的你會按優先級提出哪些來作為（執行）金融救援計劃不得不付出的代價？

OBAMA: Well, there are a range of things that are probably going to have to be delayed. We don't yet know what our tax revenues are going to be. The economy is slowing down, so it's hard to anticipate right now what the budget is going to look like next year.

奧巴馬：好的，我們有一大批事務可能都得延期了。我們還不知道稅收將會怎樣（增加或減少）。經濟正在放緩，現在很難預測明年的預算將會是什麼樣。

But there's no doubt that we're not going to be able to do everything that I think needs to be done. There are some things that I think have to be done.

但毫不懷疑地，我們將不能做完所有我認為需要做的事情了。有些事情我認為我們必須得做。

（註：奧巴馬重點強調了「需要」做的事和「必須」得做的事的區別。）

We have to have energy independence, so I've put forward a plan to make sure that, in 10 years' time, we have freed ourselves from dependence on Middle Eastern oil by increasing production at home, but most importantly by starting to invest in alternative energy, solar, wind, biodiesel, making sure that we're developing the fuel-efficient cars of the future right here in the United States, in Ohio and Michigan, instead of Japan and South Korea.

我們必須得實現能源獨立。所以我已經拿出一個計劃來確保在10年的時間內，解除我們對中東石油的依賴，靠增加（我們）自家的（石油）產量，但最重要的是開始投資代替（石油的）能源：太陽能，風能，生物柴油。確保我們將來就在我們這裡，美國，在俄亥俄州和密歇根州，開發高效利用能源的汽車，而不是在日本或韓國。

（註：生物柴油，如甲酯，植物油，這些可以直接作為柴油機的燃料。）

We have to fix our health care system, which is putting an enormous burden on families. Just -- a report just came out that the average deductible went up 30 percent on American families.

我們得修整我們的醫療系統，它給（美國）家庭增加了巨大的負擔。剛出來的……一個剛出來的報告說美國家庭醫保的自費部分平均增加了百分之30。

（註：Deductible，可扣除部分，稅務或保險專用術語。我將之翻譯為自費部分，應該對我們中國人來說較好理解。）

They are getting crushed, and many of them are going bankrupt as a consequence of health care. I'm meeting folks all over the country. We have to do that now, because it will actually make our businesses and our families better off.

他們正被（醫療費用）壓迫，他們中的許多家庭由於醫療開支就要破產了。我在全國各地都遇到了這樣的人。我們現在得行動了，因為那樣事實上會讓我們的企業和家庭更美好。

（註：以我在美國所見到的，到處都是汽車，私人遊艇，到處都是別墅，帶著草坪，游泳池，環境不是一般般的好。超市門口的停車場比上海虹橋機場的停車場還要大，停放的汽車猶如盤子裡的芝麻。整個西海岸，綿延一片全部是城市帶，高速公路四通八達。美國如此富強的國家，那些家庭都已經因為醫療開支「就要破產」了。這讓我想起台灣物價上漲一點點，台灣人就抱怨物價太貴，活不下去了。還是我們國家好，物價再怎麼漲，還是「對生活影響不大」。）

The third thing we have to do is we've got to make sure that we're competing in education. We've got to invest in science and technology. China had a space launch and a space walk. We've got to make sure that our children are keeping pace in math and in science.

我們得做的第三條就是我們得確保我們的教育有競爭力。我們必須得投資科學技術了。中國作了一次太空發射（指我們的神七）和太空行走。我們必須得確保我們的孩子在數學和科學上跟上節奏。

（註：中國還可以做得更好！只要我們給八億農民公平的機會，給他們的孩子好一點的教育機會，多一點教育投入，讓我們的教育投入占財政收入的比例在世界國家中不用倒著數。不是靠教育來掙錢，不是靠戶口來剝奪農民的孩子公平的機會。我們中國自古以來就有不少偉大的思想家、教育家、科學家，十幾億人口，我相信我們的愛因斯坦就在其中。）

（同時，我還想到老祖宗的一句話：人貴有自知之明。美國人這麼說，是他們的危機意識比較強。我們自己不能忘乎所以，連實際的科技水平在哪裡都忘了。實際的情況是，1961年蘇聯就發射了宇宙飛船，加加林繞地球一周，成為歷史上第一個進入太空的人類。70年代，美國發射行星探測器，先探測火星，然後繼續飛向木星的幾顆衛星，利用木星的引力作為動力，飛向土星的衛星，穿過土星光環，飛向冥王星，傳輸了無數有價值的資料。至今該探測器已經飛出太陽系外，還在不斷地向地球傳回數據。現在距離1961年已經快半個世紀了。曾記否，我們還拿不出一張自己的災區的衛星圖片，我們還沒有國產的helicopter，甚至在失事之後，我們幾天都找不到。那些為中國科技進步而高興的朋友看到我說這些話請不要生氣。因為只有正確地認識自己，才能認識世界。如果連自己都欺騙，那真的很可悲。）

And one of the things I think we have to do is make sure that college is affordable for every young person in America.

其中我認為我們得做的一件事是讓每一個美國的年輕人都上得起大學。

（註：這裡，奧巴馬更多的是為美國的貧民，黑人爭取利益。如果奧巴馬競選總統成功，這些人的狀況當有所改善。）

And I also think that we're going to have to rebuild our infrastructure, which is falling behind, our roads, our bridges, but also broadband lines that reach into rural communities.

我也認為我們得要重建我們的基礎建設，它已經落後了，我們的道路，橋樑，還有接入農村的寬帶連接。

Also, making sure that we have a new electricity grid to get the alternative energy to population centers that are using them.

還有，確保我們有一個新的電網，使得那些人口中心能夠用它作為替代能源。

So there are some -- some things that we've got to do structurally to make sure that we can compete in this global economy. We can't shortchange those things. We've got to eliminate programs that don't work, and we've got to make sure that the programs that we do have are more efficient and cost less.

所以，這裡有一些——一些我們在結構上必須得做的事情，以確保我們能在當今全球經濟中競爭。我們不能從這些上面省錢。我們得消除那些不起作用的計劃，我們還得確保我們現有的計劃更加有效，花銷更少。

（註：奧巴馬真是雄心勃勃。然奧巴馬聰明之處在於他說了一大堆冠冕堂皇的話後，仍然沒有回答主持人的問題。他確定地沒有說他要放棄什麼。而且，如果我是一個美國人，我對奧巴馬能否實現他這些甜言蜜語將表示懷疑。畢竟 Action speaks louder than words。要取得美國人的信任，奧巴馬還需要努力。）

顯示全部樓層 · 發表於 2008-10-23 21:26:53

LEHRER: Are you -- what priorities would you adjust, as president, Senator McCain, because of the -- because of the financial bailout cost?

主持人：你會……作為總統，你會給出一個什麼樣的優先級，麥凱恩議員，作為……作為金融拯救（計劃）的代價？

MCCAIN: Look, we, no matter what, we've got to cut spending. We have -- as I said, we've let government get completely out of control.

麥凱恩：聽著，我們，不管（發生）什麼情況，都得控制花銷。我們已經……如我所說，政府（的開銷）已經完全失去控制了。

Senator Obama has the most liberal voting record in the United States Senate. It's hard to reach across the aisle from that far to the left.

奧巴馬議員有著美國議會中最為慷慨的投票記錄（註：指奧巴馬花錢大手大腳）。江山易改，本性難移啊。

The point -- the point is -- the point is, we need to examine every agency of government.

問題……問題是……問題是，我們需要檢查政府的每一個部門。

First of all, by the way, I'd eliminate ethanol subsidies. I oppose ethanol subsidies.

首先，我順便說一下，我要取消酒精補助。我反對酒精補助。

（註：酒精補助。由於全球石油價格上漲，以及新能源開發的需要，美國開始用玉米來釀造酒精，用於內燃機的能源。為了鼓勵大家釀造酒精，美國政府對酒精生產給予補助。2006年美國生產了49億加侖的酒精，美國政府為之付出了70億美元的補助。即每加侖酒精，補助1.45美元。用於釀造酒精的玉米都是轉基因玉米，產量大，價格低。但是轉基因玉米雖然便宜，也不是人吃的，美國人用它來餵狗，因為轉基因食品可能對人體產生不可逆轉的影響。）

（酒精補助在美國國內遭到了一些非議。例如，即使在2006年油價最高的時候，生產一加侖的酒精也只比生產一加侖的汽油多出38美分。那意味著每加侖酒精補助的 1.45美元中，有1.12美元都是實實在在的獎勵。這讓農場主、酒精生產工廠還有那些中間商發了一筆橫財。納稅人為此抱怨不止，認為政府亂花他們的錢。）

（以上關於酒精補助的信息部分來源於zfacts (http://zfacts.com)，zfacts是一個討論（美國）各類有爭議性的時事話題的站點，如，稅收，財富，工作，戰爭以及環境。）

（大家也許會問，為什麼麥凱恩會反對酒精補助呢？這是因為麥凱恩所代表的，有一部分是美國軍工和石油巨頭的利益，大家在後面會看到麥凱恩和奧巴馬關於伊拉克局勢截然不同的觀點。）

（大家不要一看到麥凱恩代表了資本家的利益，就習慣性地認為麥凱恩是」壞「的。這其實是我們國內教育環境下的一種定勢思維。用我們老祖宗的一句話來說：兵無常勢，水無常形。沒有人是天生的資本家，也沒有人是天生的苦力。這兩種人都是可能互相轉換的。在一個公平競爭的社會環境下，老闆之所以稱為老闆，在於他過人的膽識和智慧，再加上點運氣。資本家一樣為社會作出貢獻，我不敢說資本家和工人的貢獻誰更大，但那就只是不同的社會分工而已。一個公平的社會，資本家和工人應該是勢力均衡的，資本家考慮的是更自由的市場，更公平的環境，更精簡的政府，資本家還有著對外擴張的野心。正如你們將在麥凱恩的語言中看到的一樣。而資本家的這種行為，對本國人民來說，未必是件壞事。工人則會考慮的更多的社會福利，醫療，教育。這些社會福利的錢來自於稅收。工人和資本家的分歧就在於政策的天平往哪個方向多傾斜一點而已。）

（在一個均衡的環境下，政策的天平總是微微晃動著。有時候資本家壟斷了太多資源，並剝削工人以致於他們只能簡單再生產，無法給他的孩子好的教育，無法得到醫療保障，沒有成長成為資本家的機會。政策就要傾向於對資本家多徵稅，多制約，再將這些稅用於社會福利。）

（有時稅向資本家收得太多，這些稅收又用於社會福利，使得工人福利太好，以致於大家都樂意吃大鍋飯，社會變得懶散，科技開始停滯，就要減少徵稅，鼓勵大家自己為自己的未來打拼。）

（任何一方的坐大，都將使得社會變得畸形。而畸形的社會只能畸形發展。對於美國來說，代表資本家利益的共和黨已經執政了八年，現在是時候考慮一下社會的福利問題了。）

I think that we have to return -- particularly in defense spending, which is the largest part of our appropriations -- we have to do away with cost-plus contracts. We now have defense systems that the costs are completely out of control.

麥凱恩：我認為我們得回到（節省的政府）了——特別是在國防開支上。它佔據了最多的特別撥款——我們得廢除這個（國防的）「加價合同」。我們現在的國防系統開支已經完全失控了。

（註： cost-plus contract，項目招投標專用術語，指的是可加價合同。指承包人在完成項目後可以根據自己的實際花銷報價，或者是增加價格，以彌補由於當初訂合同時考慮不周而忽略的款項。相對於cost-plus contract的是fixed-price contract，即固定價格合同。而這裡的cost-plus contract指的就是政府議員通過特別撥款法案從而在預算外額外增加國防撥款，這個行為看上去就好像國防開支這個項目與美國納稅人之間訂了一個加價合同一樣。）

We tried to build a little ship called the Littoral Combat Ship that was supposed to cost $140 million, ended up costing $400 million, and we still haven't done it.

我們曾經要研發一種叫」海岸戰艦「的小型戰艦。我們預期花費1.4億美元，結果我們花了4億美元，而且戰艦的研發還沒有結束。

（註： Littoral combat ship，一種美國海軍的下一代輕型戰艦。最早於2004年提出設計藍圖。其研發目標是創建一種小巧、快速、機動性強而且相對價格較低的戰艦，它隸屬於朱姆沃爾特級驅逐艦類。它將容易被配置於多種用途，這些用途包括反潛戰、反水雷、海面作戰、偵察、後勤等等。）

So we need to have fixed-cost contracts. We need very badly to understand that defense spending is very important and vital, particularly in the new challenges we face in the world, but we have to get a lot of the cost overruns under control.

所以我們得要一個「固定價格合同」（註：指國防開支嚴格按照預算執行）。（我知道）我們得高度重視國防開支的重要性和關鍵性，特別是我們在這個世界上面臨到的新挑戰方面，但是我們必須得控制這許許多多的開銷氾濫。

I know how to do that.

我知道該怎麼去做。

MCCAIN: I saved the taxpayers $6.8 billion by fighting a contract that was negotiated between Boeing and DOD that was completely wrong. And we fixed it and we killed it and the people ended up in federal prison so I know how to do this because I've been involved these issues for many, many years. But I think that we have to examine every agency of government and find out those that are doing their job and keep them and find out those that aren't and eliminate them and we'll have to scrub every agency of government.

麥凱恩：我曾經抗爭過一個波音公司和美國國防部之間的完全錯誤的合同，從而為納稅人省下了68億美元。我們修訂了它（合同）並最後取消了它。那些人（註：指美國國防部最初去簽訂合同的人）最終進了聯邦監獄。我與這種事情戰鬥了許多，許多年，這就是為什麼我知道怎麼去做（減少政府開銷）。我認為我們必須得檢查每一個政府部門，留下那些認真做好他們工作的部門，解散那些沒有做好工作的部門。最終我們將淨化每一個政府部門。

（註：DOD = United States Department of Defense.)

顯示全部樓層 · 發表於 2008-10-23 21:29:34

LEHRER: But if I hear the two of you correctly neither one of you is suggesting any major changes in what you want to do as president as a result of the financial bailout? Is that what you're saying?

主持人：（迷惑）但如果我沒有聽錯的話，你們倆都沒有提出由於金融拯救的後果，你們成為美國總統後做法的主要變化。你們的回答是這樣的嗎？

OBAMA: No. As I said before, Jim, there are going to be things that end up having to be ...

奧巴馬：不。我剛才說過了，吉姆（主持人），有一些事務最終將不得不……

LEHRER: Like what?

主持人：例如哪些事務？

OBAMA: ... deferred and delayed. Well, look, I want to make sure that we are investing in energy in order to free ourselves from the dependence on foreign oil. That is a big project. That is a multi-year project.

奧巴馬：……不得不推到後面去做和延遲了。呃，你看，我想確保我們對能源的投資，這樣，我們就能解放我們對外國石油的依賴。那是一個很大的計劃，那是一個多年計劃。

LEHRER: Not willing to give that up?

主持人：（你）不會放棄它（能源投資）？

OBAMA: Not willing to give up the need to do it but there may be individual components that we can't do. But John is right we have to make cuts. We right now give $15 billion every year as subsidies to private insurers under the Medicare system. Doesn't work any better through the private insurers. They just skim off $15 billion. That was a give away and part of the reason is because lobbyists are able to shape how Medicare works.They did it on the Medicaid prescription drug bill, they've done it with respect to Medicare. and we're gonna have to change the culture.

奧巴馬：（我）不會放棄執行它的需要，但（其中）一些個別事務我們不能做了。我們得削減（支出），約翰（麥凱恩）在這點上是對的。現在我們每年都要給醫療保障制度下的一些私營保險公司發放150億美元的補助。（但醫療保障卻）沒有通過這些私營保險公司做得更好。他們只是刮走了150億美元。那就是白送，部分（出現這種情況）的原因是因為政客可以指定醫療保險如何實施。他們（政客）這樣對政府補助的藥品清單議案做了，他們已經這樣修改了醫療保障系統。而我們將得改變那種風氣。

（註：They did it on the Medicaid prescription drug bill. 指某些代表藥品公司利益的政客為了替藥品公司爭取利益，將一些藥品公司的藥物列為了自費藥物。）

Tom -- or John mentioned me being wildly liberal. Mostly that's just me opposing George Bush's wrong headed policies since I've been in Congress but I think it is that it is also important to recognize I worked with Tom Coburn, the most conservative, one of the most conservative Republicans who John already mentioned to set up what we call a Google for government saying we'll list every dollar of federal spending to make sure that the taxpayer can take a look and see who, in fact, is promoting some of these spending projects that John's been railing about.

湯姆……呃，約翰（麥凱恩）提到過我是胡亂地慷慨。但大多數時候那只是因為自從我進入國會後，我反對喬治. 布什錯誤方向的政策。我認為重要的是要記得我曾經和湯姆.科本一起工作。他是最保守、約翰（麥凱恩）已經提到過的最保守的共和黨人之一。我們一起建立一個系統，叫做政府Google。（這個系統的）構思是我們將列出聯邦政府所花出的每一分錢，以確保納稅人可以看看誰，事實上正在倡議那些約翰（麥凱恩）一直在責罵的花銷項目。

LEHRER: What I'm trying to get at this is this. Excuse me if I may, senator. Trying to get at that you all -- one of you is going to be the president of the United States come January. At the -- in the middle of a huge financial crisis that is yet to be resolved. And what I'm trying to get at is how this is going to affect you not in very specific -- small ways but in major ways and the approach to take as to the presidency.

主持人：我一直想要在這個（話題）上知道的是這個。（麥凱恩插話）（主持人再次插話）對不起，議員。我想要知道你們都……呃，你們中的其中一個將在來年一月份成為美國總統。在這個……在一場巨大的尚未解決的金融危機中。我想要知道的是這個（金融危機）會怎樣影響你們……不是在一些具體的方法，一些小的方法上，而是在你們在總統任期內要採用的主要的方式和方法。

MCCAIN: How about a spending freeze on everything but defense, veteran affairs and entitlement programs.

麥凱恩：（你們覺得）凍結所有的開銷，除了國防，退伍軍人事務和社會福利程序怎麼樣？

LEHRER: Spending freeze?

主持人：凍結開銷？

MCCAIN: I think we ought to seriously consider with the exceptions the caring of veterans, national defense and several other vital issues.

麥凱恩：我認為我們應該認真考慮一下（凍結開銷），除了照顧退伍軍人、國防和其他一些最重要的事情例外。

LEHRER: Would you go for that?

主持人：（對奧巴馬說）你會擁護那個（開銷的凍結）嗎？

OBAMA: The problem with a spending freeze is you're using a hatchet where you need a scalpel. There are some programs that are very important that are under funded. I went to increase early childhood education and the notion that we should freeze that when there may be, for example, this Medicare subsidy I think doesn't make sense.

奧巴馬：凍結大多數開銷的問題是你在用斧頭（處理問題），而你（真正）需要的是一把（精巧的）手術刀。（註：完了，麥凱恩又一次被奧巴馬抓住了把柄。這句「凍結開銷」真的是說得太過了。作為政客，最忌諱把話說死，留給對手的是無數的把柄。麥凱恩今天的狀態真的太差了。）有一些非常重要的程序，現在投資不足。我準備增加早期幼兒教育（的投入），而（我們的）觀念應該是我們凍結那些，例如，這個醫保補助。我認為它沒有意義。

Let me tell you another place to look for some savings. We are currently spending $10 billion a month in Iraq when they have a $79 billion surplus. It seems to me that if we're going to be strong at home as well as strong abroad, that we have to look at bringing that war to a close.

讓我告訴你們另一個地方可以省錢的。我們當下每個月在伊拉克都花費100億美，而他們（伊拉克）（註：到2008年年底）有著790億美元的盈餘。對我來說，如果我們想要在國內和國際都一樣強大，那我們就得著眼於結束那場戰爭了。

MCCAIN: Look, we are sending $700 billion a year overseas to countries that don't like us very much. Some of that money ends up in the hands of terrorist organizations. We have to have wind, tide, solar, natural gas, flex fuel cars and all that but we also have to have offshore drilling and we also have to have nuclear power.

麥凱恩：聽著，我們每年都在向海外一些不喜歡我們的國家送出7000億美元。那些錢有些最後落到了恐怖組織的手裡。我們必須得有風能、潮汐能、太陽能、天然氣、混合燃料汽車還有所有那些。但我們也必須得有海底鑽探，還有，我們得有核能。

Senator Obama opposes both storing and reprocessing of spent nuclear fuel. You can't get there from here and the fact is that we can create 700,000 jobs by building constructing 45 new nuclear power plants by the year 2030. Nuclear power is not only important as far as eliminating our dependence on foreign oil but it's also important (responsibility) as far as climate change is concerned and the issue that I have been involved in for many, many years and I'm proud of the work that I've done there along with President Clinton.

奧巴馬議員反對廢棄核燃料的存儲和回收。（那樣）你將不能從現在（的狀況）到達（你所說的）那裡。實際上是，我們可以通過在2030年前建設45家新的核能工廠創造70萬個就業崗位。核能不僅僅重要在消除我們對外國石油的依賴上，還在於環境改變（溫室效應）被考慮到上。我已經涉入這個問題（核能開發）許多許多年了。我為我和克林頓總統一起為之做出的成就感到驕傲。

顯示全部樓層 · 發表於 2008-10-23 21:29:53

LEHRER: Before we go to another lead question. Let me figure out a way to ask the same question in a slightly different way here. Are you -- are you willing to acknowledge both of you that this financial crisis is going to affect the way you rule the country as president of the United States beyond the kinds of things that you have already -- I mean, is it a major move? Is it going to have a major affect?

主持人：在我們進入下一個引導問題之前，請讓我以另外一種稍微不同的方式來問同一個問題。你們……你們是否承認這次金融危機會影響到你們作為美國總統管理這個國家的方法，在那些你們已經提出的方法之外……我指的是，它（金融危機）會變換你們的主要路線嗎？你們的政策會主要地到影響嗎？

OBAMA: There's no doubt it will affect our budgets. There is no doubt about it. Not only -- Even if we get all $700 billion back, let's assume the markets recover, we' holding assets long enough that eventually taxpayers get it back and that happened during the Great Depression when Roosevelt purchased a whole bunch of homes, over time, home values went back up and in fact government made a profit. If we're lucky and do it right, that could potentially happen but in the short term there's an outlay and we may not see that money for a while.

奧巴馬：毫不懷疑金融危機將影響我們的預算，毫不懷疑。不僅僅在……呃，即使我們賺回了那7000億美元。我們假設市場恢復了，我們足夠長時間擁有那些資產，最終納稅人收回了那些錢。那樣的事情在大蕭條(1929)時發生過，當時羅斯福購買了一大批住房，隨著時間的過去，房價重新恢復（到了以前的價格），事實上，政府（在這個過程中）還賺了一筆。如果我們幸運地做好了這件政策的話，這件可能執行的政策（指救市）的話。但是短時間內，我們將付出一筆費用，而我們在一段時間內都看不到那筆錢。

And because of the economy's slowing down, I think we can also expect less tax revenue so there's no doubt that as president I'm go doing have to make some tough decision.

又因為經濟正在放緩，我覺得我們也可以預見稅收的減少，所以，毫不懷疑地，作為總統，我將不得不做出一些艱難的決定。

The only point I want to make is this, that in order to make the tough decisions we have to know what our values are and who we're fighting for and our priorities and if we are spending $300 billion on tax cuts for people who don't need them and weren't even asking for them, and we are leaving out health care which is crushing on people all across the country, then I think we have made a bad decision and I want to make sure we're not shortchanging our long term priorities.

我想指出的唯一點是這個：為了做出這些艱難的決定，我們得知道我們的（核心）價值在哪裡，我們為誰戰鬥以及我們（做事）的優先級。如果我們把3000億美元的減稅給予了那些根本不需要減稅的人們，那些甚至沒有要求這個的人們，那我們就放棄了（解決）重壓在這個國家的人民頭上的醫療保障。如果是那樣，我認為我們就做了一個錯誤的決定。我希望我們沒有在長期的重要事務上省錢。

MCCAIN: Well, I want to make sure we're not handing the health care system over to the federal government which is basically what would ultimately happen with Senator Obama's health care plan. I want the families to make decisions between themselves and their doctors. Not the federal government. Look. We have to obviously cut spending. I have fought to cut spending. Senator Obama has $800 billion in new spending programs. I would suggest he start by canceling some of those new spending program that he has.

麥凱恩：呃，我不希望讓我們的聯邦政府管理整個醫療保障系統，而那將是麥凱恩議員的醫療保障計劃的一部分。我希望讓那些家庭在他們和醫生間自己決定（醫療保障），而不是聯邦政府。顯然，我們必須得消減開支。我一直為消減開支而戰鬥。奧巴馬議員提出了8000億美元的新開支項目。我希望他能取消掉一些他提出的新開支項目。

We can't I think adjust spending around to take care of the very much needed programs, including taking care of our veterans but I also want to say again a healthy economy with low taxes would not raising anyone's taxes is probably the best recipe for eventually having our economy recover.

我們不能……我認為……不能調整那些真正需要的開支項目，例如退伍軍人的照顧。但我想再說一次，一個健康的經濟（環境），低稅率……呃，不對任何人增加稅收，也許是最終讓我們的經濟恢復的最好處方。

And spending restraint has got to be a vital part of that. And the reason, one of the major reasons why we're in the difficulties we are in today is because spending got out of control. We owe China $500 billion. And spending, I know, can be brought under control because I have fought against excessive spending my entire career. And I got plans to reduce and eliminate unnecessary and wasteful spending and if there's anybody here who thinks there aren't agencies of government where spending can be cut and their budgets slashed they have not spent a lot of time in Washington.

而開銷控制將是一個重要的部分。其原因，一個造成我們今天這種困難的主要的原因，是因為不受控制的花銷。我們欠中國5000億美元。而花銷，我知道，是可以被控制住的，因為在我的整個職業生涯中，我一直在與過度花銷作鬥爭。我有減少和取消不必要和浪費的花銷的計劃。而如果有任何人認為沒有一個政府部門的開銷可以削減，預算可以削減的話，他一定沒有在華盛頓長時間呆過。（註：這裡映射奧巴馬經驗不足。）

OBAMA: I just want to make this point, Jim. John, it's been your president who you said you agreed with 90 percent of the time who presided over this increase in spending. This orgy of spending and enormous deficits you voted for almost all of his budgets. So to stand here and after eight years and say that you're going to lead on controlling spending and, you know, balancing our tax cuts so that they help middle class families when over the last eight years that hasn't happened I think just is, you know, kind of hard to swallow.

奧巴馬：我只是想指出這點，吉姆……呃，約翰（麥凱恩），百分之90的時候都是你那位你支持的總統（註：指布什）在主持花銷的增加。你投票支持了幾乎所有他那些放縱的花銷和巨大的赤字預算。而八年後，你站在這裡，說你要主導花銷的控制。還有那個，你知道的，在過去的八年時間你從沒有要平衡我們的減稅（註：指麥凱恩為富人減稅太多，卻忽略了平民）以便幫助中產階級家庭。我認為這（行為）是，你知道，某種自食其言。

LEHRER: Quick response to Senator Obama.

主持人：（對麥凱恩）快速回答奧巴馬議員。

MCCAIN: It's well-known that I have not been elected Miss Congeniality in the United States Senate nor with the administration. I have opposed the president on spending, on climate change, on torture of prisoner, on - on Guantanamo Bay. On a -- on the way that the Iraq War was conducted. I have a long record and the American people know me very well and that is independent and a maverick of the Senate and I'm happy to say that I've got a partner that's a good maverick along with me now.

麥凱恩：眾所周知我在美國議員和行政部門都不是好好先生。我曾經反對過（布什）總統的花銷——在氣候變化上，在虐囚上，在關塔那摩灣上，在——在伊拉克戰爭的執行方式上，我有很多這樣的記錄。美國人民也許對我在議會的獨立和不結黨的做法瞭解的很清楚。我很高興地說現在我有一位很好的獨立合作者了。

金融危機部分終於告一個段落了，接下來將是關於伊拉克戰爭的討論。

顯示全部樓層 · 發表於 2008-10-23 21:30:09

LEHRER: All right. Let's go another subject. Lead question, two minutes to you, senator McCain. Much has been said about the lessons of Vietnam. What do you see as the lessons of Iraq?

主持人：好了，讓我們開始另一個話題。引導問題，給你兩分鐘時間，麥凱恩議員。我們聽說過很多關於越戰的教訓。你認為伊拉克（戰爭）的教訓是什麼？

MCCAIN: I think the lessons of Iraq are very clear that you cannot have a failed strategy that will then cause you to nearly lose a conflict. Our initial military success, we went in to Baghdad and everybody celebrated. And then the war was very badly mishandled. I went to Iraq in 2003 and came back and said, we've got to change this strategy. This strategy requires additional troops, it requires a fundamental change in strategy and I fought for it. And finally, we came up with a great general and a strategy that has succeeded.

麥凱恩：我認為伊拉克（戰爭）的教訓很清楚，你不能做出錯誤的決策，（否則）它就會讓你在鬥爭中失敗。我們最初的軍事勝利，我們進入了巴格達，每個人都為之慶祝。而之後的作戰就被胡亂操作了。2003 年我去過一趟伊拉克，回來後我說道，我們得改變策略了。我們的新策略需要更多的部隊，它意味著對舊策略的徹底改變，我為（這個新策略）而奮鬥。最終，我們有了一位傑出的將軍和最終獲得了成功的策略。

This strategy has succeeded. And we are winning in Iraq. And we will come home with victory and with honor. And that withdrawal is the result of every counterinsurgency that succeeds.

這個策略成功了。我們在伊拉克即將勝利。而我們將帶著勝利和榮譽回家。而我們的回家將是每一次成功鎮壓叛亂的結果。

MCCAIN: And I want to tell you that now that we will succeed and our troops will come home, and not in defeat, that we will see a stable ally in the region and a fledgling democracy.

麥凱恩：我想告訴你們的是，我們我們的隊伍將帶著勝利回家，而不是失敗。我們將在那個地區（伊拉克）看到一個穩固的盟友和新的民主國家。

The consequences of defeat would have been increased Iranian influence. It would have been increase in sectarian violence. It would have been a wider war, which the United States of America might have had to come back.

而（在伊拉克）失敗的後果是：伊朗的影響力將增大，宗派間的暴力衝突將更多，更大範圍的戰爭將被觸發，而美利堅合眾國將不得不再回到戰爭。

So there was a lot at stake there. And thanks to this great general, David Petraeus, and the troops who serve under him, they have succeeded. And we are winning in Iraq, and we will come home. And we will come home as we have when we have won other wars and not in defeat.

所以那裡有著我們相當多的利益。而多虧這位傑出的將軍，大衛.佩崔斯，還有他手下的部隊，他們獲得了成功。我們將在伊拉克勝利並回家。而我們將像經歷過其他那些戰鬥（註：指以前的勝利的戰爭）一樣回家，而不是失敗。

LEHRER: Two minutes, how you see the lessons of Iraq, Senator Obama.

主持人：兩分鐘，你如何看待伊拉克戰爭的教訓，奧巴馬議員？

OBAMA: Well, this is an area where Senator McCain and I have a fundamental difference because I think the first question is whether we should have gone into the war in the first place.

奧巴馬：嗯，這是一個麥凱恩議員和我有著本質上區別的地方。因為我認為首要的問題是在最開始的時候我們應該開始戰爭嗎？

Now six years ago, I stood up and opposed this war at a time when it was politically risky to do so because I said that not only did we not know how much it was going to cost, what our exit strategy might be, how it would affect our relationships around the world, and whether our intelligence was sound, but also because we hadn't finished the job in Afghanistan.

六年前，我站起來反對這場戰爭，當時這樣做有著（巨大的）政治風險。我（當時）說不僅僅是因為我們不知道它（伊拉克戰爭）要花多少錢，不知道我們的撤退方針，不知道它會怎樣影響我們和世界的關係，不知道我們的情報是否可靠，但更因為我們當時還沒有完成在阿富汗的工作。

We hadn't caught bin Laden. We hadn't put al Qaeda to rest, and as a consequence, I thought that it was going to be a distraction. Now Senator McCain and President Bush had a very different judgment.

我們沒有抓到本拉登。我們沒有讓基地組織（阿爾-凱達）停下來休息，而正因為此，我當時認為它（伊拉克戰爭）將轉移我們的注意力。而當時麥凱恩議員和布什總統做出了完全不同的判斷。

And I wish I had been wrong for the sake of the country and they had been right, but that's not the case. We've spent over $600 billion so far, soon to be $1 trillion. We have lost over 4,000 lives. We have seen 30,000 wounded, and most importantly, from a strategic national security perspective, al Qaeda is resurgent, stronger now than at any time since 2001.

而為了這個國家的利益，我希望我是錯的，他們是對的，但事實情況卻不是這樣。我們已經花掉了6000多億美元，很快就要1萬億美元了。我們失去了4000 多位（戰士的）生命，我們看到了3萬的傷員。而從一個民族的安全角度來說最重要的是，基地組織復活了，比從2001年來的任何時候都還要強大。

We took our eye off the ball. And not to mention that we are still spending $10 billion a month, when they have a $79 billion surplus, at a time when we are in great distress here at home, and we just talked about the fact that our budget is way overstretched and we are borrowing money from overseas to try to finance just some of the basic functions of our government.

我們把我們的注意力從（應該注意的地方）挪開了。更別說在現在我們在家遭到了一次大危難的時候，我們現在每個月還要花100億美元（在伊拉克），而他們（伊拉克政府）有著790億美元的盈餘。我們剛才談到我們的預算鋪得太開的這個事實，我們現在為了維持我們政府運作的一些基本功能還要從海外（國家）借錢。

So I think the lesson to be drawn is that we should never hesitate to use military force, and I will not, as president, in order to keep the American people safe. But we have to use our military wisely. And we did not use our military wisely in Iraq.

所以我認為（伊拉克戰爭）引出的教訓是我們絕不應該猶豫使用武力，如果我是美國總統，為了保護美國人民的安全，我也不會（猶豫）。但是我們必須明智地使用我們的武力。而我們沒有在伊拉克明智地使用我們的武力。

LEHRER: Do you agree with that, the lesson of Iraq?

主持人：（對麥凱恩）你同意那個嗎，伊拉克戰爭的教訓？

MCCAIN: The next president of the United States is not going to have to address the issue as to whether we went into Iraq or not. The next president of the United States is going to have to decide how we leave, when we leave, and what we leave behind. That's the decision of the next president of the United States.

麥凱恩：下一屆美國總統不是解決我們應不應該去伊拉克的問題。下一屆的美國總統應該決定我們如何離開（伊拉克），而當我們離開時，我們留下了什麼。那（才）是下一屆美國總統應該決定的事。

Senator Obama said the surge could not work, said it would increase sectarian violence, said it was doomed to failure. Recently on a television program, he said it exceed our wildest expectations.

奧巴馬議員說過(2007年的）增派部隊不會起作用，說過那會增加教派間的暴力衝突，說過那注定要失敗。在最近的一次電視節目上，他還說那（增兵伊拉克）超出了最瘋狂的預期。

（註： Surge，這裡指的是2007年布什總統計劃向伊拉克增加部隊，以維護巴格達和安巴爾省的穩定。安巴爾是伊拉克西部的一個省，首都是拉馬迪。安巴爾是伊拉克境內最大的省份，與敘利亞、約旦和沙特阿拉伯接壤。在伊拉克戰爭之後，伊拉克的叛亂在安巴爾省內最為激烈，人民對佔領軍的敵對狀態也特別強烈，所以直到今天，美國的武裝部隊仍然在為取得該地區的控制而費盡心思。安巴爾省內，特別是拉馬迪和費盧傑兩個城市，以其居民強烈的部落和宗教情節而聞名，甚至前總統薩達姆·侯塞因的政權都對該地區動盪的天性而保持高度的機警。）

But yet, after conceding that, he still says that he would oppose the surge if he had to decide that again today. Incredibly, incredibly Senator Obama didn't go to Iraq for 900 days and never asked for a meeting with General Petraeus.

而在他不情願地讓步後，他還在說如果今天再給他一次機會讓他做決定，他將反對增兵。神奇的是，神奇的是奧巴馬議員900天來（根本）沒有去過伊拉克而且從沒有要求過一次和佩崔斯將軍的會面。

LEHRER: Well, let's go at some of these things...

主持人：好的，讓我們討論一下這些事情……

MCCAIN: Senator Obama is the chairperson of a committee that oversights NATO that's in Afghanistan. To this day, he has never had a hearing.

麥凱恩：（打斷）奧巴馬議員是一個監管北約在阿富汗的委員會的主席。直到今天，他還從沒有舉行過一次會議。

（註：這一次輪到奧巴馬的尾巴被麥凱恩抓住了。正如剛才大家看到，奧巴馬強烈抨擊本拉登在逃，基地組織復活等，不料麥凱恩抖出奧巴馬在阿富汗本有職務的這個事實。這樣一來，奧巴馬所攻擊的阿富汗局面反而看起來是在攻擊自己沒做好工作了。而麥凱恩如果成為總統，他本來就要取消掉那些沒有做好工作的政府部門和官員。）

LEHRER: What about that point?

主持人：（對奧巴馬）對這一點你怎麼說？

MCCAIN: I mean, it's remarkable.

麥凱恩：（打斷）我指的是，這真是印象深刻啊。

LEHRER: All right. What about that point?

主持人：（打斷）好了好了。（對奧巴馬）對這一點你怎麼說？

顯示全部樓層 · 發表於 2008-10-23 21:30:24

OBAMA: Which point? He raised a whole bunch of them.

奧巴馬：哪一點？他拋出了一大批觀點。

LEHRER: I know, OK, let's go to the latter point and we'll back up. The point about your not having been...

主持人：我知道，這樣，讓我們先談（約翰.麥凱恩）的第二點然後我們再回來。是關於你一直沒有…… （註：一直沒有舉行奧巴馬負責的阿富汗的一個委員會的會議）

OBAMA: Look, I'm very proud of my vice presidential selection, Joe Biden, who is the chairman of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, and as he explains, and as John well knows, the issues of Afghanistan, the issues of Iraq, critical issues like that, don't go through my subcommittee because they're done as a committee as a whole.

奧巴馬：聽著，我一直為我的副總統候選人喬.拜登而驕傲。他是參議院外交委員會的主席，正如他所解釋的，約翰你也知道，阿富汗的問題和伊拉克的問題以及類似的重要問題，並不通過我的小組委員會來解決，因為那些問題已經由委員會作為一個整體來解決了。

But that's Senate inside baseball. But let's get back to the core issue here. Senator McCain is absolutely right that the violence has been reduced as a consequence of the extraordinary sacrifice of our troops and our military families.

但那（註：指阿富汗和委員會的問題）是在轉移話題（伊拉克戰爭）。讓我們回到這裡的核心問題。（伊拉克的）暴力事件減少了，麥凱恩議員在這點上完全正確，（但）那是我們的部隊和我們軍人的家庭做出了相當的犧牲的結果。

They have done a brilliant job, and General Petraeus has done a brilliant job. But understand, that was a tactic designed to contain the damage of the previous four years of mismanagement of this war.

他們，還有佩崔斯將軍，做出了一項輝煌的成就。但要知道，那只是一項抑制（更多）破壞的戰術，之前四年來的破壞，源自作戰的管理不善。

And so John likes -- John, you like to pretend like the war started in 2007. You talk about the surge. The war started in 2003, and at the time when the war started, you said it was going to be quick and easy. You said we knew where the weapons of mass destruction were. You were wrong.

而約翰（麥凱恩）想要……約翰，你想讓這戰爭看起來像是2007年開始的。你談論增派部隊。（但是）戰爭是2003年開始的，而在戰爭開始的時候，你說它（伊拉克戰爭）會很快很簡單（地結束）。你說我們知道哪裡有大殺傷性武器。（然而）你錯了。

You said that we were going to be greeted as liberators. You were wrong. You said that there was no history of violence between Shia and Sunni. And you were wrong. And so my question is...

你說我們會像解放軍一樣受到歡迎。你錯了。你說什葉派和遜尼派之間沒有暴力衝突的歷史，你又錯了。所以，問題是……

(CROSSTALK)
（插話）

LEHRER: Senator Obama...

主持人：奧巴馬議員……

OBAMA: ... of judgment, of whether or not -- of whether or not -- if the question is who is best-equipped as the next president to make good decisions about how we use our military, how we make sure that we are prepared and ready for the next conflict, then I think we can take a look at our judgment.

奧巴馬：……問題是判斷力，關於是否……是否……（主持人中間多次插話，奧巴馬不予理會，繼續說了下去）呃，如果要問作為下一任總統，誰整裝待發，誰能對武力的使用做出更好的決策，如何確保我們為下一次衝突做好了準備，那麼我認為我們要看看我們的判斷力。

LEHRER: I have got a lot on the plate here...

主持人：我已經有很多需要（你們）討論的……

（註：on (one's) plate 需要完成工作或任務）

MCCAIN: I'm afraid Senator Obama doesn't understand the difference between a tactic and a strategy. But the important -- I'd like to tell you, two Fourths of July ago I was in Baghdad. General Petraeus invited Senator Lindsey Graham and me to attend a ceremony where 688 brave young Americans, whose enlistment had expired, were reenlisting to stay and fight for Iraqi freedom and American freedom.

麥凱恩：我恐怕奧巴馬議員不清楚一個（局部）戰術和一個（全局性）戰略的區別。但重要的是……我想告訴你，兩年前我在巴格達，佩崔斯將軍邀請林德西.格雷厄姆議員和我去參加一個儀式。在那個儀式上，688位勇敢的美國年輕人，他們服役期已經滿了，（但）他們延長了服役期並留下來為伊拉克人和美國人的自由而戰鬥。

（註：Fourths of July，美國獨立紀念日，七月四日。）

I was honored to be there. I was honored to speak to those troops. And you know, afterwards, we spent a lot of time with them. And you know what they said to us? They said, let us win. They said, let us win. We don't want our kids coming back here.

我很榮幸地當時在那裡。我很榮幸能向那些部隊講話。正如你所知道的，之後，我們和他們（部隊）在一起呆了很長時間。你知道他們對我們說什麼嗎？他們說：「讓我們去爭取勝利」。他們說：「讓我們去爭取勝利」。我們不希望我們的孩子（就這樣）回來。

And this strategy, and this general, they are winning. Senator Obama refuses to acknowledge that we are winning in Iraq.

而這個戰略（註：指留在伊拉克及增派部隊），還有將軍，他們即將取得勝利。奧巴馬議員拒絕承認我們現在在伊拉克即將取得勝利。

OBAMA: That's not true.

奧巴馬：那不是真的。

MCCAIN: They just passed an electoral...

麥凱恩：他們剛通過了一項選舉……

OBAMA: That's not true.

奧巴馬：那不是真的。

MCCAIN: An election law just in the last few days. There is social, economic progress, and a strategy, a strategy of going into an area, clearing and holding, and the people of the country then become allied with you. They inform on the bad guys. And peace comes to the country, and prosperity.

麥凱恩：就在最近幾天通過了一項選舉法。那裡在社會和經濟上都有進步，還有（我們的）一項戰略，就是進入一個地區，清除（敵人）並佔領它，而（之後）那個國家的人們將成為我們的盟友。他們（伊拉克人）向我們揭發壞蛋。而和平和繁榮將降臨這個國家。

（註： inform on sbd: to inform on is to give incriminating information to the authorities about someone: Only two people knew, and it must have been you that told the police - Benny would never inform on his brother.）

That's what's happening in Iraq, and it wasn't a tactic.

那就是伊拉克正在發生的。而那可不是一個（局部的）戰術。

顯示全部樓層 · 發表於 2008-10-23 21:30:40

LEHRER: Let me see...

主持人：讓我說……

OBAMA: Jim, Jim, this is a big...

奧巴馬：吉姆，吉姆，這是一個巨大的……

MCCAIN: It was a stratagem. And that same strategy will be employed in Afghanistan by this great general. And Senator Obama, who after promising not to vote to cut off funds for the troops, did the incredible thing of voting to cut off the funds for the troops in Iraq and Afghanistan.

麥凱恩：這是一個戰略。同樣的戰略將被這位傑出的將軍用在阿富汗上面。而奧巴馬議員，在承諾不會投票反對削減部隊撥款後，做了一件讓人難以置信的事情，他投票支持削減在伊拉克和阿富汗部隊的撥款。

OBAMA: Jim, there are a whole bunch of things we have got to answer. First of all, let's talk about this troop funding issue because John always brings this up. Senator McCain cut -- Senator McCain opposed funding for troops in legislation that had a timetable, because he didn't believe in a timetable.

奧巴馬：吉姆，我得回答一整大批東西。首先，讓我們談談部隊撥款的問題，因為約翰（麥凱恩）總是把它提出來。麥凱恩議員削減……麥凱恩議員在有時間表時反對給部隊的撥款立法，因為他不相信有一個時間表。（註：這一點上，2004年的總統辯論上，布什的觀點和麥凱恩也是一樣的。）

I opposed funding a mission that had no timetable, and was open-ended, giving a blank check to George Bush. We had a difference on the timetable. We didn't have a difference on whether or not we were going to be funding troops.

我反對對一個沒有時間表的任務撥款，而且是開放式的（任務），這給了喬治.布什自由處理權。我們（只是）在時間表上有分歧。我們並沒有在是否對部隊撥款上面有分歧。

We had a legitimate difference, and I absolutely understand the difference between tactics and strategy. And the strategic question that the president has to ask is not whether or not we are employing a particular approach in the country once we have made the decision to be there. The question is, was this wise?

我們有一個真正的分歧，而我完全理解戰術和戰略的區別。而一旦做了決定（進攻）伊拉克，總統要問的戰略性問題不是我們該不該在伊拉克執行一個特殊的任務。問題是，那（進攻）明智嗎？

We have seen Afghanistan worsen, deteriorate. We need more troops there. We need more resources there. Senator McCain, in the rush to go into Iraq, said, you know what? We've been successful in Afghanistan. There is nobody who can pose a threat to us there.

我們已經看到阿富汗（的局勢）變糟，惡化。那裡需要更多部隊，需要更多資源。麥凱恩議員在（支持）襲擊伊拉克時說，你們知道（他說）什麼嗎？「我們在阿富汗已經勝利了，那裡沒人能威脅到我們了。」

This is a time when bin Laden was still out, and now they've reconstituted themselves. Secretary of Defense Robert Gates himself acknowledges the war on terrorism started in Afghanistan and it needs to end there.

那是本拉登還在逍遙法外的時候，而現在他們已經重組了。國防部長羅伯特.蓋茨他自己也承認反恐戰爭在阿富汗開始（打響），而我們需要在那裡結束它。

		自動登錄	找回密碼
密碼			免费注册