Week Three : Trump and Clinton: winners, losers, but no sign of compromise

Trump and Clinton: winners, losers, but no sign of compromise

By Thomas Friedman  /  NY Times News Service

Anyone who says it does not matter whether Republican Donald Trump or Democrat Hillary Rodham Clinton wins the US presidential election needs their head examined. The damage that Trump could do to the US with his blend of intellectual laziness, towering policy ignorance and reckless impulsiveness is in a league of its own. Clinton has some real personal ethics issues she needs to confront, but she has got the chops to be president.

What interests me most right now, though, is a different question. It is not: “Who are they — our politicians?” It is: “Who are we — the voters?”

To be specific: Are we all just Shiites and Sunnis now?

More and more of our politics resembles the core sectarian conflict in the Middle East between the two branches of Islam and that is not good, because whether you are talking about Shiites and Sunnis — or Iranians and Saudis, Israelis and Palestinians, Turks and Kurds — a simple binary rule dominates their politics: “I am strong, why should I compromise? I am weak, how can I compromise?”

With rare exceptions, the politics of the Middle East is just a seesaw game between those two modes of zero-sum, rule-or-die thinking. Rarely, these days, does either party stop to seek or forge common ground. It is just: I am strong, so I do not have to meet you in the middle, or I am weak, so I cannot meet you in the middle. You can see how well it has worked for them.

Politico last week reported that while some Republican officials might vote for Clinton, they are already sketching plans “to stymie a President Hillary Clinton agenda.”

Liberals are already warning Clinton not to bring Republicans into her Cabinet or explore meeting them halfway. Have a nice day.

That kind of sectarian, tribal thinking, reinforced by left-right social media enforcers, gerrymandering and giant campaign funds, gives you the sorry spectacle of US House of Representatives Speaker Paul Ryan saying, without embarrassment, that Trump’s pronouncements are a “textbook” example of racism, but he is supporting Trump anyway.

It also gives you the sorry spectacle of Clinton surrogates turning themselves into pretzels to defend her, even though it is obvious that she embraced a pattern of major donors to the Clinton Foundation being given preferential access to her as US secretary of state.

Shiites stick with Shiites. Sunnis stick with Sunnis. It is rule or die, baby. Nothing else matters.

That is not always true in other walks of life. We just got that lesson at the Olympics. US runner Abbey D’Agostino clipped New Zealand’s Nikki Hamblin from behind in the women’s 5,000m qualifying heat, sending both tumbling to the ground well short of the finish.

“D’Agostino got up, but Hamblin was just lying there. She appeared to be crying. Instead of running in pursuit of the others, D’Agostino crouched down and put her hand on the New Zealander’s shoulder, then under her arms to help her up and softly urged her not to quit,” the Associated Press reported.

They embraced at the finish.

Contrast that with the Egyptian Olympic judoka who, under pressure from his society, refused to shake hands with his Israeli opponent. And how is Egypt doing these days? Drifting aimlessly.

Yes, I know, politics is not bean bag. It is about winning, but it is also about winning with a mandate to govern and right now everything suggests that the next four years will be just like the last eight: a gridlocked, toxic, Sunni-Shiite, Democrat-Republican civil war, with little search for common ground. That is how you ruin, not run, a great nation.

How will we improve healthcare? How will we invest in infrastructure? How will we recreate the compromise on immigration that a few brave Republican and Democratic legislators tried in 2013? How will we get corporate tax reform, a carbon tax and some fiscal policy that we so desperately need to propel the economy and control the deficit?

There is no doubt that Republicans during the presidency of Barack Obama pioneered and perfected this scorched-earth politics and have paid a price for it. They let themselves be led around by a group of no-compromise talk-radio gasbags, think-tank ideologues in the pay of one industry or another, Fox News know-nothings and an alt-right fringe, who, together, so poisoned the Republican garden that an invasive species, Trump, just took it over.

That is all the more reason for Clinton to reach out, at the right time, and see if any of them have learned their lesson. There is no way she will get anything big done otherwise. We have to break this fever.

It will be a tragedy if center-right Republicans conclude that their only problem is Trump and that, once he has gone, the party will be theirs again.

Their party is over.

They have to either become conservative Democrats or redefine a responsible center-right Republican Party, with a different base, but it will be equally sad if Clinton wastes the opportunity of a potentially substantial victory, achieved with some Republican votes, to rebuild the political center in the US.

Americans were once summoned by our politics to be participants in a race to the moon. Lately we have been summoned by our politics to be spectators in a race to the bottom. We can do better, and we must.

http://www.taipeitimes.com/News/editorials/archives/2016/09/06/2003654573

*Structure of the Lead：
WHO-Anyone
WHAT-  it does not matter whether Republican Donald Trump or Democrat Hillary Rodham Clinton wins the US presidential election

WHY-not given
WHERE- not given    
HOW-not  given

 *Keywords：
1. need one''s head examined : 需要檢查一下腦子; 冒傻氣
2. impulsiveness : 衝動；心血來潮
3. ethics : 倫理學，道德學
4. sectarian : 宗派成員；鬧宗派的人
5. summon : 召喚；傳喚；請求；要求

Week Two : Same-sex marriage criticized

Same-sex marriage criticized

CHILDREN AND CIVILIZATION:The Alliance of Religious Groups for the Love of Families Taiwan tried to highlight problems caused by legalizing same-sex marriage

By Loa Iok-sin  /  Staff reporter

 

Religious groups of various faiths yesterday voiced their strong opposition to legislation allowing for same-sex marriage and family diversity, saying that same-sex marriage might lead to the eventual destruction of human society.
“Legalizing same-sex marriage is a reverse tide in the international movement for sexual liberation, it is not progressive, rather, it is a downward step that will lead to the collapse of civilizations,” Unification Church Taiwan vice president Paul Chang (張全鋒) told a press conference hosted by the Alliance of Religious Groups for the Love of Families Taiwan at the Legislative Yuan.
“Legalizing same-sex marriage is legalizing adultery, incest and group sex,” he said.
He said the gay rights movement seeks to create more homosexuals through group sex.
“We must understand how dangerous it is, because once such legislation is passed, our children will be taught at school that it is OK to be gay, which will lead to very serious consequences for our society,” he said.
Whether looking for an Eastern or Western perspective, marriage should for a union between a man and a woman, Chang said.
“From our traditional perspective, it is in line with the heavenly way for a man and a woman to get married,” Chang said. “From the Christian perspective, God has created men and women, and blessed their union.”
Chang also spoke against allowing gay couples to adopt children, saying that children raised in same-sex families are more likely to become criminals or victims of sexual violence.
Chen Chih-hung (陳志宏), a Taiwan Lutheran Church bishop, said that marriage between a man and woman is the best system, and that legalizing same-sex marriage would encourage more people to become homosexuals, which would destroy the marriage system.
“If, one day, after the bill to legalize same-sex marriage is passed, if your child or grandchild tells you that he or she is homosexual, and thus your family lineage would stop right there, can you accept it?” Chen asked.
He also said that Taiwan already has a large number of people with AIDS.
“Would you like to see more people being infected with AIDS due to same-sex marriage? Would you like to see the birthrate continues to decline due to same-sex marriage?” he said.
Buddhist master Shih Ching-yao (釋淨耀) said the religious leaders were speaking out because they “feel it is our responsibility to stand up for family values and the stability of our society.”
“The family is the basis of social stability. How will we able to maintain social stability if people of the same sex could form a family?” Shih said.
He said it is also the duty of a family to produce children.
“People should not sacrifice this important moral value just because they want to enjoy sex,” he said.
“Many Western countries have legalized same-sex marriage, but no Asian country has done so,” Shih said. “I hope that Taiwan will learn from countries upholding the right values, not from those who follow bad values.”

 

 

http://www.taipeitimes.com/News/taiwan/archives/2013/09/19/2003572509

 

*Structure of the Lead：
WHO-Religious groups of various faiths WHEN-yesterday
WHAT- voiced their strong opposition to legislation allowing for same-sex marriage and family diversity  

WHY-that same-sex marriage might lead to the eventual destruction of human society
WHERE- not given HOW-not  given

 

 *Keywords：
1. legislation : 制定法律，立法 

2. diversity : 多樣性

3. perspective : 看法，觀點

4. lineage : 後裔；家系，世系

5. upholding : 維護；維持；贊成；確認

Week One : Aung San Suu Kyi leaves for Europe

Aung San Suu Kyi leaves for Europe

POLITICAL AND PERSONAL:The democracy icon will visit five countries and deliver her Nobel Peace Prize speech, but also attend a family reunion and celebrate her birthday

AFP, YANGON, MYANMAR

Democracy icon Aung San Suu Kyi left Myanmar yesterday on her first trip to Europe since 1988 to formally accept the Nobel Peace Prize that thrust her into the global limelight two decades ago.
Her visit marks a new milestone in the political changes that have swept the country since decades of military rule ended last year, bringing to power a new quasi-civilian government.
“I would like to do my best for the interests of the people,” Aung San Suu Kyi told reporters before her plane left Yangon airport.
She will visit Switzerland, Norway, Britain, France and Ireland on her more than two-week tour, which will include a speech in Oslo for her 1991 Nobel Peace Prize.
She leaves as western Myanmar is rocked by sectarian violence between Buddhists and Muslim Rohingya that has left dozens dead and prompted Burmese President Thein Sein to warn of disruption to the fragile reform process.
Aung San Suu Kyi could face calls in Europe to address the underlying sectarian issues, although analysts say she may instead choose to focus on the wider topic of human rights.
“It’s a very explosive situation and whoever touches the issue will have to walk a very, very fine line,” said Aung Naing Oo, a Myanmar expert with the Vahu Development Institute in Thailand.
The Myanmar government and many Burmese consider the Rohingya to be illegal immigrants and view them with hostility. Even key figures in the democratic movement have come out to say the Rohingya are not one of Myanmar’s ethnic nationalities.
A spokesman for Aung San Suu Kyi’s National League for Democracy party said the former political prisoner had instructed him to work “to help both sides equally” before she left for Europe.

Aung San Suu Kyi is due to speak at an International Labour Organization conference, address Britain’s parliament and receive an Amnesty International human rights award in Dublin from rock star Bono.
The veteran activist will also join a “family reunion” in Britain, according to her party and celebrate her 67th birthday on Tuesday in the country.
For years, since returning to her homeland to care for her sick mother, Aung San Suu Kyi did not dare leave — even to see her sons or British husband before his death from cancer in 1999 — fearing the ruling generals would not let her return.
She made her first overseas foray for 24 years earlier this month to visit Thailand.
Her lecture on Saturday in Oslo to accept the Nobel Prize, which propelled her onto the global stage and spurred decades of support for her party’s democratic struggle against authoritarian rule, will be hugely symbolic. However, she may also inject a note of caution.
“She will re-iterate the message that there’s still a long way to go in Burma,” said Gareth Price, an Asia expert at Chatham House in London. “She will also call for responsible trade and investment and support for the rule of law in Burma, as the reforms are reversible.”
Aung San Suu Kyi is traveling with her personal assistant, her security chief, the dissident rapper-turned-politician Zayar Thaw and a youth member from her National League for Democracy party, Nay Chin Win.
There is also a strong personal dimension to the tour, although her party has declined to say whether she will see both her sons, Kim and Alexander Aris, as well as her grandchildren. While Kim has visited his mother in Myanmar since her release, Alexander has not and he now lives in the US.


http://www.taipeitimes.com/News/world/archives/2012/06/14/2003535305 

*Structure of the Lead：
WHO-Aung San Suu Kyi WHEN-yesterday
WHAT-left Myanmar 
WHY- to formally accept the Nobel Peace Prize
WHERE- Europe HOW-not  given

 *Keywords：
1. formally : 正式地；正規地
2. milestone : 里程碑
3. fragile : 易碎的；脆的；易損壞的 
4. hostility : 敵意，敵視
5. dimension : 重要性；範圍 

Week Eight : May’s vocabulary signals shift from ‘hard Brexit’

May’s vocabulary signals shift from ‘hard Brexit’

Reuters, LONDON

 

There is a recognizable repetition in British Prime Minister Theresa May’s speeches about the decision to leave the EU: “Brexit means Brexit,” making “a success of it” and getting “the best deal” for Britain are some of her stump phrases.
However, a closer look at her speeches suggests her position on key aspects of Brexit has evolved since she took office in the aftermath of the June 23 vote to leave.
Alongside comments by ministers in her Conservative government, the changes appear to suggest that May has shifted from favoring a “hard Brexit” — a clean break with the EU single market — to supporting continued membership.
May has declined to say whether she wants Britain to remain in the single market.
Her aides say she is considering all options.
Since July 13, when May made her first speech as prime minister, subtle changes have emerged in the way she describes her priorities for talks with the EU. Those talks will determine Britain’s future and that of the EU.
Early on in her tenure, May said little more than that she wanted “the right deal” or “best possible deal” on the trade of goods and services with the rest of Europe, which account for more than 50 percent of the British economy.
However, at the Conservative Party conference in October she unveiled a more specific phrase to describe her aims for Brexit.
“I want it to give British companies the maximum freedom to trade with and operate within the single market — and let European businesses do the same here,” May said.
Richard North, a former speechwriter for several euroskeptic lawmakers, says the phrase “operate within” is telling.
“She is very, very precise and there is no way that she is saying anything other than she’s going after the single market within a negotiated settlement,” said North, who wants Britain to remain a member of the broader European Economic Area trading zone after leaving the EU.
In her Oct. 2 speech to the Conservative Party, she dismissed the choice between a “soft Brexit” and “hard Brexit” as a “false dichotomy” and said Britain could regain control over immigration and its sovereignty while continuing cooperation on security and trade.

http://www.taipeitimes.com/News/world/archives/2016/11/19/2003659588

*Structure of the Lead：
WHO-British Prime Minister Theresa May  
WHEN-not given
WHAT- the decision to leave the EU
WHY-not given
WHERE- British  
HOW-not  given


 *Keywords：
1. shift from：從...移開
2. aide：【美】助手
3. unveil ：除去……的面紗（或覆蓋物）；揭開……的幕
    SYN：uncover, disclose, reveal, show；ANT：veil
4. aim ：目標，目的
5. regain ：取回，收回；收復，恢復

 

Week seven : Islamic State claims bombing that killed 70 in Iraq

Islamic State claims bombing that killed 70 in Iraq

AFP, HILLAH, Iraq

 

A suicide bombing claimed by the Islamic State group killed at least 70 people, mainly Shiite pilgrims, south of Baghdad on Thursday, as Iraqi forces battle to retake Mosul from the extremists.
The blast from the truck bomb ripped through a gas station, where packed buses returning from the Arbaeen commemoration in Karbala, Iraq, were parked, officials said.
Most of the dead were Iranians, the largest contingent of foreigners in the pilgrimage, which is one of the world’s largest religious events and culminated on Monday.
The attack took place near the Babylon Governorate village of Shomali, about 120km southeast of Baghdad.
The Islamic State, which is fighting to defend its Mosul stronghold in northern Iraq, claimed responsibility for the attack.
Babylon security committee head Falah al-Radhi said several buses were targeted.
“A large truck exploded among them. It was a suicide attack,” he told reporters. “There are at least 70 dead, fewer than 10 are Iraqis, the rest are Iranians.”
Videos circulating on social media showed debris scattered over a large area along the main highway linking Baghdad to the main Iraqi southern port city of Basra.
“There are completely charred corpses at the scene,” said Radhi, who added that at least 20 wounded were transferred to nearby hospitals.
As many as 20 million people visited Karbala, home to the mausoleum of Imam Hussein, for Arbaeen this year, about 3 million of whom were Iranians, Iraqi authorities said.
Iranian Ministry of Foreign Affairs spokesman Bahram Ghasemi condemned the “brutal and inhumane” attack, Iran’s Islamic Republic News Agency said.
US National Security Council spokesman Ned Price also strongly condemned the attack, saying it was “clearly intended to stoke sectarian tensions.”
“The United States remains steadfast in its partnership with the Iraqi people and government, and this attack only serves to strengthen our resolve in defeating ISIL,” he said, referring to the Islamic State by one of its many acronyms.
Iraq had deployed about 25,000 members of its security forces in and around the shrine city to protect pilgrims from a feared Islamic State attack.
The extremist group, which is losing ground in Mosul, has carried out a series of high-profile diversionary attacks since Iraqi forces launched a huge offensive against their northern stronghold last month.
Elite forces on Thursday battled extremists in eastern Mosul, looking for fresh momentum in their five-week-old offensive to retake Iraq’s second city.
Iraqi Counter-Terrorism Service commander Maan al-Saadi told reporters on the front line in Mosul that his forces were fighting the Islamic State in the neighborhood of al-Khadraa.
“They cannot flee. They have two choices — give up or die,” he said.
Over the past few days, Iraqi forces have cut off the main supply line running from Mosul to the western border with Syria, where the Islamic State still controls the city of al-Raqqah.
The US-led coalition also bombed bridges over the Tigris river that splits Mosul in two, reducing the extremists’ ability to resupply the eastern front.
“It is extraordinarily tough fighting, just brutal, but there is an inevitability to it. The Iraqis are going to beat them,” coalition spokesman Colonel John Dorrian told reporters.
Islamic State fighters moving in an intricate network of tunnels have used snipers, booby traps and a seemingly endless supply of suicide car bombers to stop Iraqi forces.

http://www.taipeitimes.com/News/world/archives/2016/11/26/2003660043


*Structure of the Lead：
WHO-the Islamic State group  
WHEN-on Thursday
WHAT- not given
WHY- Iraqi forces battle to retake Mosul from the extremists
WHERE- A suicide bombing 
HOW-not  given


*Keywords：
1. extremist：極端主義者；過激分子
2. blast：爆炸，爆破    
3. return from：從(由)...回來 
4. contingent：一組
5. pilgrimage：朝聖，朝覲