主题：只能自由的失声——眯看奥八坦承直言之后 -- 黑岛人

精英威武！！

先仍蛋，再讲话。

要是你有杀生大权，岂不是，先杀人再和死人讨论了？

这么简单的一句话为什么会被人家断章取义。

打铁还要自身硬，归根结底还是要从自身去深究去找原因，如果精英们对他们放炮的方式还不深刻的反思，这样的断章取义又怎么能够在将来所避免呢？

“I think”是什么意思不会不懂吧？从头到尾都是奥巴马在自说自话。既然要贴，就把后面的也贴出来吧。

KERRY O’BRIEN: TO COME BACK TO CHINA, AMERICA HAS BEEN THE WORLD’S MOST POWERFUL NATION FOR A CENTURY. BUT GIVEN THE PROJECTIONS THAT CHINA IS WELL ON THE WAY TO BECOMING THE WORLD’S BIGGEST ECONOMY, WITH ALL THAT THAT POTENTIALLY DELIVERS INCLUDING GREATER POLITICAL MUSCLE, HOW HARD IS IT GOING TO BE FOR AMERICANS TO ADJUST IN A MATURE WAY TO THE INCREASING PROSPECT THAT YOU CAN’T BE NUMBER ONE FOREVER?

PRESIDENT OBAMA: Oh you know I don’t think about this as a zero sum gain, I actually think that America can be number one for a very very long time but we think that there can be a whole host of countries that are prospering and doing well. Here’s one way to think about it. The Chinese standard of living and industrial output per capita is about where the United States was back in 1910, I mean they’ve got a lot of catching up to do.

KERRY O’BRIEN:THEY DO

PRESIDENT OBAMA: It is in our interests, both of our countries interests for China to be successful, for China to be prosperous, because that means they’re more likely to be stable, that means they’re more likely to be able to deal with issues like the energy efficiency of their industries, and reduce pollution, and so we’re not interested in constraining China, we want China to do well. The only thing we want to make sure of is that a country like China as it is growing and inevitably will end up being the largest economy just because of the enormous size of their population, that they are also taking their international responsibilities seriously and that they recognise that with great power comes great responsibility.

在政客那里（企业里也会有这种人）有一种修辞叫客气地说No，其格式就是“我们不是不同意，但是你们要满足一个抽象的且不可实现的条件（因为抽象，所以不可实现）”。你要真的跟他讨论那个无聊的抽象概念那你就败了——那是跟无赖讲道理。

All animals are created equal, but some are more equal than others.

既然奥巴马说So I think they understand intellectually，那么他怎么不说说在他领导下的美国有着这样的living patterns，他understand intellectually了吗？

事实上他说的完全是矛盾的：既然“so we’re going to have to have everybody moving on the same track at the same time”，那么中国人的想法“well let’s let the developed countries, the Australias, and the Americas deal with this problem first and we’ll get to it when we’ve caught up a little bit in terms of our standard of living”就完全正确。还没有达到相同的生活水平呢，same track从何谈起？

这才是不断章取义的理解。他真觉得你“understand intellectually”了？不是的，虽然他也不得不承认中国想改善生活水平的想法是“understandable”，但是他“we can’t allow China to wait”；你的合情理的想法他都不准备接受。拿两句奥巴马表面上的恭维话“So I think they understand intellectually”这种屁话来说事的，才叫断章取义。

情何以堪 ？　他们本来就是一伙的，或者是替人数钱的