英汉翻译6_六年级课文英语翻译

英汉翻译6由刀豆文库小编整理，希望给你工作、学习、生活带来方便，猜你可能喜欢“六年级课文英语翻译”。

奥巴马《勇往直前》第一章（6）原创中英对照

It was Bill Clinton’s singularcontribution that he tried to transcend this deadlock,recognizing not only that what had come to be meant by the labelsof “conservative” and “liberal” played to Republican advantage, butthat the categories were inadequate to addre the problems wefaced.At times during his first campaign, his gestures towarddisaffected Reagan Democrats could seem clumsy and transparent(what ever happened to Sister Souljah?)or frighteninglycoldhearted(allowing the execution of a mentally retarded deathrow inmate to go forward on the eve of an important primary).Inthe first two years of his presidency, he would be toabandon some core elements of his platform—universal health care,aggreive investment in education and training—that might havemore decisively reversed the long-term trends that were underminingthe position of working families in the new economy.克林顿（BillClinton）总统一人独辟蹊径，试图打破这种意识形态的僵局，他认识到在政客身上打上“保守派”和“自由派”的标签渐渐趋向有利于共和党，也发现了解决我们面对的问题的手段不足。在他第一次竞选总统时，他在处理愤愤不平的民主党里根支持者（传统上是民主党人，特别是北方的白人工人阶级，但在里根竞选总统时投票给共和党）的手法上显得有些笨拙和直率（索尔嘉妹妹是怎么啦？1992年克林顿在竞选时严厉谴责政治立场激进而且喜好饶舌的女歌星SisterSouljah，并因此而赢得了中间选民的支持），或者是令人寒心的冷淡无情（在重要的初选前夕提前对一个智障精神病的死囚执行死刑）。在总统任期的前2年，他被迫放弃了自己政治纲领中的一些核心原则——全民卫生保健计划，对教育和培训的积极投资——因此可能导致决定性地颠倒了美国长期发展趋势，这种趋势正在削弱新经济体中工作家庭的地位。

Still, he instinctively understoodthe falsene of the choices being presented to the Americanpeople.He saw that government spending and regulation could, ifproperly designed, serve as vital ingredients and not inhibitors toeconomic growth, and how markets and fiscal discipline could helppromote social justice.He recognized that not only societalresponsibility but personal responsibility was needed to combatpoverty.In his platform—if not always in his day-to-daypolitics—Clinton’s Third Way went beyond splitting the difference.It tapped into the pragmatic, nonideological attitude of themajority of Americans.但，他本能地意识到这是个错误的选择，他注意到如果能够合理安排政府开支和政府规章的话，会成为经济的发展中至关重要的因素而且不会产生抑制作用，市场和财政自律能够有助于促进社会公平。他认识到扫除贫穷不仅是社会机构的责任，也是每个人的责任。在克林顿总统的政治纲领中——并不一定呈现于他每日的政治活动中——他的第三条路线政策（ThirdWay，是介于自由放任资本主义和福利国家之间的一种发展模式。由于它与里根以前的自由主义政策以及里根后的保守主义政策都不一样，故称之为第三条道路）远不仅仅是折中路线。它迎合了注重实效的、无意识形态的大多数美国人的性情。

Indeed, by the end of hispresidency, Clinton’s policies—recognizably progreive if modestin their goals—enjoyed broad public support.Politically, he hadwrung out of the Democratic Party some of the excees that hadkept it from winning elections.That he failed, despite a boomingeconomy, to translate popular policies into anything resembling agoverning coalition said something about the demographicdifficulties Democrats were facing(in particular, the shift inpopulation growth to an increasingly solid Republican South)andthe structural advantages the Republicans enjoyed in the Senate,where the votes of two Republican senators from Wyoming, population493,782, equaled the votes of two Democratic senators fromCalifornia, population 33,871,648.实际上，在他总统任期结束时，克林顿的政策——如果谦虚一点地说，被公认为进步策略——得到了广大民众的支持。从政治上来说，为了竞选胜利，他削弱了某些民主党的政治优势。在这方面他失败了，尽管国家经济繁荣，但是将受欢迎的政策转变为两党治理联合的形式，说明民主党正在面临着人口分布带来的难题（特别是，人口增长使得共和党南方阵营日益稳固），并且共和党在国会享有组织结构优势，因为在国会中，两张来自怀俄明州（人口49万3782）共和党参议员的投票与两张来自加州（人口3387万1648）民主党参议员的投票具有相同的效力。

But that failure also testified tothe skill with which Gingrich, Rove, Norquist, and the like wereable to consolidate and institutionalize the conservative movement.They tapped the unlimited resources of corporate sponsors andwealthy donors to create a network of think tanks and mediaoutlets.They brought state-of-the-art technology to the task ofmobilizing their base, and centralized power in the House ofRepresentatives in order to enhance party discipline.但是这方面的失败也是拜金里奇,罗夫和罗奎斯特等人的所赐，他们有能力巩固并制度化保守党的政治运动。他们利用企业赞助者和富有捐赠者的无限资源建造了一个政治智囊团和媒体渠道的网络。他们应用这种艺术级别的政治活动方式来动员基层党员，而且为了加强党纪，将众议院的权力集中化。

And they understood the threatClinton posed to their vision of a long-term conservative majority,which helps explain the vehemence with which they went after him.It also explains why they invested so much time attacking Clinton’smorality, for if Clinton’s policies were hardly radical, hisbiography(the draft letter saga, the marijuana puffing, the IvyLeague intellectualism, the profeional wife who didn’t bakecookies, and most of all the sex)proved perfect grist for theconservative base.With enough repetition, a loosene with thefacts, and the ultimately undeniable evidence of the President’sown personal lapses, Clinton could be made to embody the verytraits of sixties liberalism that had helped spur the conservativemovement in the first place.Clinton may have fought that movementto a draw, but the movement would come out stronger for it—and inGeorge W.Bush’s first term, that movement would take over theUnited States government.而且他们也明白克林顿总统对长期占据议会中多数席位的共和党所形成的威胁，这也解释了为何他们如此热衷于对付克林顿。这同样解释了为何他们花了如此多时间攻击克林顿的道德问题。因为，如果他们在克林顿的政策上找不出什么毛病，那克林顿的自传（当逃兵，吸食大麻，在名牌大学习得的理智主义，从政的老婆从不下厨，最糟糕的是性丑闻）则被证明对共和党阵营十分有利。他们将材料复制足够多份，对事件进行添油加醋，还有在根本上不可否认的克林顿自身行为不检的证据，最后结论是在克林顿身上体现了60年代自由主义的明显特征，而恰恰是60年代的自由主义在最初刺激了保守党政治活动。虽然克林顿在当时也许和这个运动团体打成个平手，但他们经过这事后变得更强大了——在小布什的第一任总统任期，这个运动团体接管了美国政府。

THIS TELLING OF the story is tooneat, I know.It ignores critical strands in the historicalnarrative—how the decline of manufacturing and Reagan’s firing ofthe air traffic controllers critically wounded America’s labormovement;the way that the creation of majority-minoritycongreional districts in the South simultaneously ensured moreblack representatives and reduced Democratic seats in that region;the lack of cooperation that Clinton received from congreionalDemocrats, who had grown fat and complacent and didn’t realize thefight they were in.It also doesn’t capture the degree to whichadvances in political gerrymandering polarized the Congre, or howefficiently money and negative television ads have poisoned theatmosphere.我知道，这种叙事方式过于简洁了。我忽略了在历史叙事中的一些关键情节，例如：制造业是如何衰落的；里根政府开除罢工的航管员是如何关键性地重创了美国劳工运动；南方是如何划分多数派选举区和少数派选举区，在同一地区保证黑人拥有更多众议员席位的但同时使得民主党席位减少了；克林顿总统很难从民主党议员们处得到支持，因为自鸣得意的他们正在捞政治油水，而没有意识到他们已陷入一场斗争中。文章也没有记录改划选举区所导致的国会两极分化造成的影响，或金钱和负面电视广告是如何有效的荼毒政治环境。

Still, when I think about what thatold Washington hand told me that night, when I ponder the work of aGeorge Kennan or a George Marshall, when I read the speeches of aBobby Kennedy or an Everett Dirksen, I can’t help feeling that thepolitics of today suffers from a case of arrested development.Forthese men, the iues America faced were never abstract and hencenever simple.War might be hell and still the right thing to do.Economies could collapse despite the best-laid plans.People couldwork hard all their lives and still lose everything.当我想起那位老华盛顿政客在那晚对我说的话时，当我仔细估量乔治·凯南（GeorgeFrost Kennan，美国外交家，冷战时对苏联遏制政策的始创人）或乔治·马歇尔（GeorgeMarshall，美国军事家、战略家、政治家、外交家，美国陆军五星上将）的丰功伟绩时，当我阅读博比.肯尼迪（BobbyKennedy）或埃弗里特.德克森（EverettDirksen）的演讲稿时，我忍不住感到今日的政治正经历一段发育不良的时期。在这些人的年代，他们一直面对的都是复杂的难题，而且非常棘手。战争也许带来痛苦，但在当时仍是一个正确的选择。就算准备了最好的计划，经济还是有可能会崩溃。人们一生勤劳工作但是仍然有可能会失去一切。

For the generation of leaders whofollowed, raised in relative comfort, different experiences yieldeda different attitude toward politics.In the back-and-forth betweenClinton and Gingrich, and in the elections of 2000 and 2004, Isometimes felt as if I were watching the psychodrama of the BabyBoom generation—a tale rooted in old grudges and revenge plotshatched on a handful of college campuses long ago—played out on thenational stage.The victories that the sixties generation broughtabout—the admiion of minorities and women into full citizenship,the strengthening of individual liberties and the healthywillingne to question authority—have made America a far betterplace for all its citizens.But what has been lost in the proce,and has yet to be replaced, are those shared aumptions—thatquality of trust and fellow feeling—that bring us together asAmericans.由于各代领导者们的目标和成长经历的不同，使得他们对政治的态度也不同。在克林顿和金里奇之间不断的争斗中，在2000年和2004年的选举中，我有时感觉自己是在观看生育高峰的一代人在国家政治舞台上喧泻情感，扮演心理剧(一种可使患者的感情得以发泄从而达到心理治疗效果的戏剧)，讲述一个在很久以前有一群大学生在上学时就构思策划好的包含怨恨和复仇的故事。上世纪60年代的人们争取到的胜利有：承认了少数派种族和女人的公民权利，巩固了公民个人的自由权利，并且只要你带着好的意愿你就可以质问当局，这使得所有的公民们都认为美国是一个极度美好的国家。但是在取得这些进步的过程中我们所失去的，并且现在已经被取代了的，是那些共同的预期——那是信任和互相理解的本质，也是使美国人团结一心的思想。

So where does that leave us?Theoretically the Republican Party might have produced its ownClinton, a center-right leader who built on Clinton’s fiscalconservatism while moving more aggreively to revamp a creakyfederal bureaucracy and experiment with market-or faith-basedsolutions to social policy.And in fact such a leader may stillemerge.Not all Republican elected officials subscribe to thetenets of today’s movement conservatives.In both the House and theSenate, and in state capitals acro the country, there are thosewho cling to more traditional conservative virtues of temperanceand restraint—men and women who recognize that piling up debt tofinance tax cuts for the wealthy is irresponsible, that deficitreduction can’t take place on the backs of the poor, that theseparation of church and state protects the church as well as thestate, that conservation and conservatism don’t have to conflict,and that foreign policy should be based on facts and not wishfulthinking.那么，现在我们该怎么办？理论上来说，共和党可以打造出一个保守派的克林顿，一个稍稍右倾的领导人，一方面坚持克林顿的财政保守政策，另一面更加积极地修复摇摇欲坠的联邦官僚作风，并且更加积极地在市场上做尝试，或者提出基于信仰的社会政策解决方法。实际上，这样的一个领导还是有可能被造出来的。不是所有的共和党推举出的官员都是坚守当今保守主义运动原则的。在众议院在参议院中，在全国的州首府中，存在有一些公务员，他们坚守更加传统的保守主义美德，如自我克制和态度严谨，他们明白为富有的人减税而增加国家负债是不负责任的，减少国家财政赤字的责任不能扔给穷人，保留传统和保守派政策并不一定有冲突，外交政策应建立在事实的基础上，而不是自己的愿望或欲望上。

But these Republicans are not theones who have driven the debate over the past six years.Instead ofthe “compaionate conservatism” that George Bush promised in his2000 campaign, what has characterized the ideological core oftoday’s GOP is absolutism, not conservatism.There is theabsolutism of the free market, an ideology of no taxes, noregulation, no safety net—indeed, no government beyond what’srequired to protect private property and provide for the nationaldefense.但是这些共和党人并不是在过去6年里在党内掌权的人。小布什总统在他2000年竞选时曾经向选民承诺“有同情心的保守主义”，但今日大老党的意识核心思想却表现为专制主义，而非保守主义。就是对市场完全放开，不加税，政府放开管制，没有安全保证——的确，没有政府能在保护民众的私有财产的同时向他们提供国家安全防卫。

There’s the religious absolutism ofthe Christian right, a movement that gained traction on theundeniably difficult iue of abortion, but which soon floweredinto something much broader;a movement that insists not only thatChristianity is America’s dominant faith, but that a particular,fundamentalist brand of that faith should drive public policy,overriding any alternative source of understanding, whether thewritings of liberal theologians, the findings of the NationalAcademy of Sciences, or the words of Thomas Jefferson.还有宗教信仰上基督教的专制问题，由无可置疑的棘手问题堕胎而引致的政治运动，但很快地就发展成为更普遍性的问题；宗教政治者在活动中坚称基督教不只是一个在美国处于支配地位的宗教信仰，它也是一个单独特别的正统信仰，应该由宗教信仰来引导国家政策，它高于其它所有认知和信仰，不管是自由主义神学研究者的著作和国家科学院的研究报告，还是托马斯.杰斐逊（ThomasJefferson，第三任美国总统(1801-1809年），他参与起草了《独立宣言》(1776年））关于宗教信仰自由的言论。