“She is warm; he is crazy: the Media’s Tale of two front-
runners”.她溫暖;他瘋狂︰讓媒體細說兩位領先候選人
的故事。-(紐約時報拆穿兩候選人的底細)-1
編按：全球囑目的美國兩黨初選，已逐漸明朗化，共和民主兩黨的人選也呼之欲出。民主黨的前總統夫人-希拉蕊，挾其豐沛的政治資本與人脈，無人有能力與其匹敵；共和黨的川普雖以瘋狂出名，頗懂群眾心理，激發(incite) 群眾，無人能挫其威風、擋其銳氣，正以加倍的支持率領先其他兩位。川普以狂妄姿態得罪共和、民主兩黨人士、到處樹敵、排斥非法移民、婦女、回教徒，但他不過說說而已。而希拉蕊與其夫婿柯林頓問題也不少；包括老柯在任內私生活不檢、在阿肯色州州長任內兩夫婦A錢舊帳、兩任總統任內以政治捐款名義又A了不少、以及很難獲得眾多白人藍領階級的支持。而她任國務卿時嚴重失職，導致外交官遇害，此案未決，人們記憶猶新，這些事希拉蕊卻做出來。紐約時報記者以睿智的頭腦、尖銳的眼光、犀利的分析，提供美國選民參考。台灣與中國大陸兩地華人隔岸觀火，應另有一番心得，原來天下烏鴉一般黑。在資深媒體人眼中，美國政客一樣「心黑手辣臉皮厚」，耍詐耍狠全來，兩位政客全為「一丘之貉」，「五十步笑百步」。有人說，政治就是一種騙術，眾口鑠金，上當的就是選民。
Charles Dickens was a piker. He settled for “A Tale of Two Cities,” but when it comes to an age of foolishness, America thinks big. Through seasons of light and darkness, hope and despair, our presidential holy war is unfolding as a Tale of Two Front-runners.
英國小說家狄更斯是一個小氣的膽小鬼(註)。他為他的小說-“雙城記” 最後定了調，但當我們談到愚蠢的一個時代時，美國異想天開大。通過光明和黑暗、 希望和絕望的季節，我們總統的神聖選戰，正在以兩個領先的候選人的故事而展開。
註：A tale of two…. ，不一定只用來寫城市，也可以指人或其他事。本文作者，半幽默，半諷刺狄更斯。
One front-runner says outrageous things. He willy-nilly insults everybody from his rivals to whole religions. He never apologizes, even after boasting about his penis on live television.
其中一位領先者說些攻擊性的事情。從他的競爭對手到整個宗教，他肆意侮辱每個人。即使在電視直播上吹噓他的陰莖之後，也從不道歉。
The other front-runner does outrageous things. She risks national-security secrets, rewards donors with government favors and misleads the parents of dead heroes about why their loved ones died.
另一位領先者做了無恥、駭人聽聞的事。她冒洩漏國家安全機密之風險、 用政府給予的好處，獎勵她的政治捐助者，與誤導遇難英雄者的父母，告訴他們親人死去的原因。(註：說謊是美國人認為不可原諒)
Guess which front-runner the media treats as the barbarian at the gate.
猜猜看，媒體把哪個領先的候選人，視為應被趕出去的人。
The fall folly looks as if it’s going to be Donald Trump vs. Hillary Clinton, but that’s the political surface. We are living through a clash of cultures, and the press is busy unloading its full arsenal of double standards.
在來日秋天愚人的選戰中，看起來好像是川普與希拉蕊兩人的對決，但那是政治上的表象。我們正在經歷一場的文化的衝突，而新聞界正忙著卸下，裝滿整個火藥庫的雙重標準。
But there’s a catch: The loaded treatment doesn’t always break along the usual fault lines of liberal and conservative. The split is over how much revolution America really wants and who gets to dictate the terms.
但這裡面有蹊蹺︰在沿著自由派和保守派的斷層線上，過度宣染的處理並非總是會打破的。這個分裂是關於美國真正想要多少革命，和誰說了算。
Trump, the unlikely leader of the pitchfork army, is a ratings and click-bait bonanza, but gets hit with Hitler and Mussolini comparisons from both left and right media because of things he says and the passion of his working-class supporters. Even people who know better were quick to blame him for the Chicago tumult, conveniently ignoring the fact that the protesters were vandals aiming to stop the event, not just voice opposition to Trump.
芝加哥的激情
因為他說的事情和他的工人階級支援者的熱情， 位不可能當上雜牌軍隊領袖的川普，是位吸引高收視率的誘餌，但他卻獲取予人與希特勒和墨索里尼比較的機會，不論是左派和右派媒體的看法。甚至更清楚的人，很快就指責他惹起芝加哥選民的騷動，而忽略了這個事實-抗議者就是破壞者，他們不僅僅是嗆聲反對川普而已，其目標是在阻止競選，。
Meanwhile, Clinton’s blue-nosed brigade keeps her far from the reporting rabble as she milks her C-suite connections to browbeat big-media elites into a nonaggression pact.
與此同時，希拉蕊底下的那一群過分端莊的團隊，阻止她接近下層人士，因她享用對她提供完整服務關係網的好處，來威逼大媒體的菁英們和她簽訂了互不侵犯條約。
The lopsided coverage comes with pictures. Look at almost any website, newspaper, magazine or TV, and Clinton is inevitably smiling a happy-warrior smile. Trump is just as inevitably glowering, his face flushed with anger, lips in a snarl.
醒目的報導帶有圖片。看看幾乎在任何網站、 報紙、 雜誌或電視裡，希拉蕊那不可避免地像個快樂戰士微笑著。川普則是不可避免地會怒目而視，臉通紅，嘴唇在咆哮著。
She’s warm. He’s crazy.
令人感覺到，女的是溫暖的。男的是瘋了。
She’s coddled on substance, too, and it wasn’t until last week, at the eighth Democratic debate, that she was asked the two toughest questions of the year. Will you resign if you are indicted, and did you lie to the families of the four brave Americans killed in the Benghazi terror attack?
她實質上也受到寵壞，和它直到上個星期，在第八次民主黨初選的辯論中，她才被問到兩個本年度最棘手的問題。如果起訴你，你會辭職嗎？你有無向在班加西(利比亞美國大使館所在地)恐怖襲擊事件中，喪生的四個勇敢的美國人的家庭撒謊? (如果有，你會辭職嗎？)
美國四外交官遇害，是希拉蕊的責任?
Both questions came from moderator Jorge Ramos of Univision, who persevered despite audience booing at the Miami debate, a cue to Clinton that she could duck without penalty.
儘管在邁阿密辯論中，觀眾對希拉蕊發出噓聲，暗示她能夠閃避不答也不會受到處罰，但發問這兩個問題，來自Univision電視台的主持人 Jorge Ramos仍咄咄逼人。
“Oh, for goodness — that’s not going to happen. I’m not even answering that question,” she shot back when Ramos cut off her attempt to filibuster the indictment question.
"哦，天啊， 要我辭職？那不可能。我甚至不想回答那個問題", 這是她回敬記者Ramos的問話，當Ramos 切斷她想阻撓被提起公訴的問題的企圖時。
To be continued 未完
Justin Lai 編譯
03/15/2016
No comments:
Post a Comment