齐的隆冬强 发表于 2013-10-8 08:37 static/image/common/back.gif
为啥像尼克松和撒切尔夫人这样出身并不高贵的，其实就是个小资产阶级，甚至是落魄的小资产阶级，早期生活 ...
正因为他们出身不够“正”，所以要比出身正的统治阶级表现得更正。
tanis 发表于 2013-10-8 23:39 static/image/common/back.gif
是自助餐t么。。。
正是巴非特老哥
草蜢 发表于 2013-10-8 21:32 static/image/common/back.gif
就算最后一秒，没有协议，美国国债也不会default. 印钱的还怕付不起钱？当然那＂钱＂肯定不值钱了。 ...
美国目前的财政形势本身其实并不差。随着美国经济的复苏，以及sequestration对支出的削减，美国的财政赤字大幅度回落，不需要印钱来弥补赤字。市场对美国债卷也很信任，这个星期以前，即时有debt ceiling的威胁，美国债卷价格也没什么变化，目前的危机是政治问题，不是经济问题。如果到了10月17号或者是11月1号，国会还不能达成协议，FED无法通过购买美国国债，也就是你所说的印钱来干预，因为尽管FED也算是政府部门，财政部将债卷卖给FED也还是突破了债务上限，是违法的。我读到的猜测是由于美国default的后果不可想象，会动摇全球的金融市场，财政部可以选择暂停其它方面的开支，比如social security，比如士兵的工资，来支付国债的利息，防止default。因此即使共和党真的失去理智，情况也很可能不会发展到最坏的一步。但是财政部大多数支付都是通过电脑自动实现的，因此有担忧这么做不是那么容易，有可能通过错误，一部分债卷到期不能支付，这种担忧有多大道理我不是太清楚。
伯威 发表于 2013-10-8 22:44 static/image/common/back.gif
靠打牌赢钱赚足国会议员竞选经费？美国海军军官可真有钱！
那时还没有电视，竞选远没有现在这么昂贵。尼克松竞选的时候也很省钱，身边没有太多的工作人员。另外尼克松也争取到了一些富人的赞助，不是只靠这笔钱。
晨枫 发表于 2013-10-8 21:16 static/image/common/back.gif
奥巴马的做法如出一辙：先在阿富汗扩大驻军，然后撤出。在一段时间里，还频繁打击巴基斯坦境内，不过进来 ...
铁杆的Tea Party在众议院好像有80多个人，是2010年新选上来的，他们对众议院的committee-ship不太在乎，加上现在没了earmarks，Boehner对他们没有任何控制力。尽管铁杆的Tea Party在共和党也还是少数，目前他们能够左右共和党的政策的原因在于 Tea Party强调意识形态的纯洁，他们似乎对攻击温和的共和党比攻击民主党更有兴趣，这样采取温和立场主张同民主党妥协的共和党议员会面临明年大选共和党初选Tea Party的严厉挑战，由于共和党初选的选民要保守的多，这个威胁非常大。我前面说的党内多数正在找台阶下，是他们私下的意见，公开表示大多数还是很强硬。Boehner如果完全让步于民主党，没有什么收获的话，我读的分析是党内意见的反弹会让他地位不保。
Obamacare是Obama最重要的成就，在这一点上是不可能让步的。Obamacare各个组成部分是一环扣一环的，废除一部分比如individual mandate，整个系统就会垮掉。民主党能让步的可能也就是废除医疗仪器的税。
我1个星期以前在Financial Times上读了一篇关于Keystone的文章，提到大力支持管道建设的包括石油企业和加拿大政府，文章对他们合在一起的力量还不能说服Obama政府感到惊讶。文章认为1年之内Obama还是会同意管道建设的。
草蜢 发表于 2013-10-8 08:19 static/image/common/back.gif
他没有能够当总统，说明美国人民的眼睛是雪亮的。 这位真的不是做总统的料。有一位著名的金融大鳄本来是 ...
说的是这段吧。。。
But when McGovern endorsed giving every American a $1,000 government check, biographer Roger Lowenstein notes, Buffett crossed party lines and voted for Richard Nixon.
糊里糊涂 发表于 2013-10-8 21:50 static/image/common/back.gif
肯尼迪虽然有天生的优势，但当年也和小日本拼过命，老布什等上流阶级的子弟也是如此。相比尼克松的从军经历 ...
肯尼迪在战争中的表现是要比尼克松突出的多，表现出了特别的勇气，但他那个位置是靠他父亲的关系运动来的，他的战斗英雄的称号也成了他政治上起飞的跳板。尼克松的那份工作是海军分配的，并不是他特别逃避战斗。
我个人对肯尼迪在总统任内的成就评价不高，以前写了一点，在这儿
http://www.aswetalk.org/bbs/forum.php?mod=redirect&goto=findpost&ptid=22101&pid=384056
就个人能力来说，我觉得肯尼迪不及尼克松，但是在个人魅力方面，他要比尼克松强得多。尼克松对肯尼迪即有些瞧不起，又有些嫉妒，还有些惧怕。即使有水门事件，在总统排名上我还是倾向于把尼克松排在肯尼迪前面。
八旗子弟直接在洗手池上排泄，这也太恶了点！这么做是为了凸显其疏阔爽直做派还是纯粹为省钱？
这一段来自Robert Dallek的 Lone Star Rising : Lyndon Johnson and His Times, 1908-1960。
Stories about Johnson's overstated and crude behavior are legion. There was no private bathroom connected to his first congressional office, two friends of his remember. But there was a sink with running water. When he had to relieve himself, he would go behind a screen, turn on the tap and urinate in the sink while he continued talking to whomever was there. If one of his intentions was to fix himself in people's memories, it succeeded. Those who saw him do it never forgot.
MacArthur 发表于 2013-10-9 02:21 static/image/common/back.gif
说的是这段吧。。。
Lowenstein 在巴非特传记中有详细的描写关于McGovern 在Omaha巴非特家作客的事。
"尼克松依靠打牌，赢了一大笔钱，战争结束后，尼克松退伍，进行国会议员选举，他的竞选经费大部分来自这笔钱。"
能做到这个的真乃神人也！
Dracula 发表于 2013-10-9 02:17 static/image/common/back.gif
铁杆的Tea Party在众议院好像有80多个人，是2010年新选上来的，他们对众议院的committee-ship不太在乎， ...
Keystone 应该会通过的。 我那些反KEYSTONE的美国环保界朋友都很悲观，Obama 尽管强调环评结果对环境无害才能上马什么的，但现在美国政府授权做环评的是一个和石油界走得很近的咨询公司。 当然，Obama 是会把戏做足才会才这个问题上“让步”的。
晨枫 发表于 2013-10-8 21:16 static/image/common/back.gif
奥巴马的做法如出一辙：先在阿富汗扩大驻军，然后撤出。在一段时间里，还频繁打击巴基斯坦境内，不过进来 ...
John Boehner’s room for manoeuvre limited by unofficial principle
By Stephanie Kirchgaessner in Washington
Tea Party wields disproportionate power in Congress
http://www.ft.com/intl/cms/s/0/6427958c-2e76-11e3-be22-00144feab7de.html#axzz2hFPHlkS1
John Boehner, the Speaker of the House, is trying to keep his job as the top Republican in Washington, end the government shutdown and increase the debt ceiling.
But he wants to do so without violating an unofficial principle, known as the Hastert rule, that says a Speaker should not put up for vote any bill that does not have the support of a majority of his rank-and-file members. It might prove an impossible goal, especially with conservatives interpreting the rule as inviolable party doctrine.
For all the intractable politics and doomsday scenarios of US debt default, there is still reason to hope for a breakthrough. It is worth remembering just a few months ago, Mr Boehner seemed more concerned about his legacy and the long-term future of his party than he was about his rightwing flank.
It was a period when Mr Boehner appeared ready to turn his back on the Tea Party and set Republicans on a course toward rehabilitation following their dismal 2012 election results.
In the aftermath of Barack Obama’s win in November, Mr Boehner brought to the floor, and passed, a handful of bills with Democratic support and only a minority of Republicans on board. They included the “fiscal cliff” deal that raised some taxes but also made tax cuts permanent for the vast majority of Americans; a bill to aid victims of Hurricane Sandy; and a bill to support abused women.
In each instance, Mr Boehner violated the “Hastert Rule”, for reasons that seemed obvious: the Republican party had just lost a presidential election, in part for seeming out of touch with the concerns of ordinary Americans and for waging what was dubbed by Democrats as a “war on women”.
As Mr Boehner’s violations began to mount, so did suspicions among conservatives that the Speaker might pursue an even bigger goal: passing a bipartisan immigration bill in the House, with the help of Democratic legislators, that had already won passage in the Senate.
Sure enough, in early June Mr Boehner suggested, to ABC News, that he would be willing to bring immigration to the floor in violation of the Hastert rule.
“It’s about what the House wants. And my job is, as Speaker ... is to ensure that all members on both sides have a fair shot at their ideas,” he said
Passing immigration reform with cross-party support, but without that of his conservative party colleagues in the House, would have helped transform the Republicans’ image. It would also have made Mr Boehner’s legacy.
Instead, the Speaker crumbled as conservatives insisted that he abide by the Hastert rule. Some rank-and-file members warned him of dire consequences if he tried to pass immigration without conservatives’ full support.
By the end of June, under intense pressure, Mr Boehner gave his word to fellow Republicans that immigration reform would not come up for a vote unless it was supported by most of his party in the House. If the reform fails to pass by the end of Mr Obama’s term, as many now fear, Mr Boehner will surely get the blame.
The bigger constitutional questions raised by the current fiscal debacle is whether the Hastert rule, intended to ensure that the Speaker serves the interests of his party members, is a dangerous relic in the age of the Tea Party, which wields a disproportionate amount of power in Congress and seems happier to shut down government than to govern.
While it is certainly not Mr Boehner’s job to do Democrats’ bidding in the lower chamber, a return to coalition building would serve the country better than the current dysfunction. It would also help the Republican party. Assuming he could hold on to his gavel long enough and get enough moderate Republicans on board, the passage of bipartisan bills, from immigration reform to a grand bargain to reduce long-term deficits to tax reform, would boost the economy.
Instead, the nation finds itself on the verge of a default that is worrying the markets. Were the US to default, the Speaker might not have to worry about his job for much longer. Mr Boehner would probably lose it come the midterm elections in November.
草蜢 发表于 2013-10-8 07:19 static/image/common/back.gif
他没有能够当总统，说明美国人民的眼睛是雪亮的。 这位真的不是做总统的料。有一位著名的金融大鳄本来是 ...
巴菲特？
美国史上最不要脸的总统，呵呵。克林顿那点事和他比起来，都不算啥了
君子动口不动手，永远干不过野蛮人
natasa 发表于 2013-10-8 04:23 static/image/common/back.gif
和奥巴马对比如何？我记得约翰逊貌似也比较像流氓。
约翰逊是随处都要发老大威风的高级流氓。
刚当总统的时候，约翰逊点名要胡椒博士饮料，然后对着回答没有的乘务员大发脾气，还威胁要开除。实际上约翰逊根本不喝个这饮料。
尼克松跟肯尼迪竞争有先天的弱势。竞选时尼克松要为艾森豪威尔进行的各种强硬对古巴政策保密，只能装鸽派。肯尼迪却能大打鹰派牌。实际上肯尼迪的激进建议尼克松不但干了而且有过之无不及，结果替艾森豪威尔背黑锅了。
尼克松基辛格跟老毛有共鸣，因为他们都非常厚黑。肯尼迪和约翰逊任内基辛格已经有很大影响力，很多重大决策都会有。当时约翰逊已经准备跟越共接触，体面脱身。然后已经决定支持尼克松的基辛格私下向越共吹风，要越共抬高要价，搅黄此事。筹码是尼克松当选后会给越共更加优厚的条件。中间人是陈纳德的遗孀，放中国，这汉奸卖国的帽子绝对跑不了。
基辛格风度翩翩魅力十足，弥补了尼克松的不足。而且他不会跟尼克松争夺真正的老大位置。这是他们合作的基础。换成魅力十足的艾森豪威尔就对尼克松嗤之以鼻了。尼克松这种人在今天绝对混不开，一个躲在豪华酒店奋斗的总统候选人在今天是灾难性的存在。
Dracula 发表于 2013-10-8 18:46 static/image/common/back.gif
你如果对约翰逊感兴趣的话，我大力推荐Robert Caro的传记，我刚读完第一卷。对这套书我读的一致评价认为 ...
如果和纸牌屋中的手腕相比，约翰逊做得如何呢？
猪头大将 发表于 2013-10-14 08:58 static/image/common/back.gif
如果和纸牌屋中的手腕相比，约翰逊做得如何呢？
电视剧没看过，不好评论。但是一般都公认约翰逊是有史以来最有效，最有成就的参议院多数党领袖。同众议院相比，参议院议员在传统上要独立得多。参议员任期6年，位置要比众议员稳定，参议院人数少，每个参议院的影响就要大很多。参议员有filibuster的权利，一个人就可以阻碍法律的通过。因此参议院的多数党领袖历来就不好干。而约翰逊又面临特别的困难。当时的民主党由两部分组成，北方的自由派和犹太人黑人等少数民族以及南方各州。南方各州从内战后一直是铁杆的民主党，但是随着民权运动，种族融合的问题越来越提上议程，南方和北方民主党的距离越来越远。约翰逊对每个参议员的政治立场，性格，喜好，弱点，所需都了如指掌，他的进行幕后交易的能力可以说无出其右，任内最重要的成就是通过了1957年的民权法案，而且还避免了民主党内部的分裂。再往后，肯尼迪政府在国内政策上提出的议案很多，雄心很大，但是和今天的Obama政府很相似，没有能力在国会通过，没有什么实际作用。约翰逊上任后，对国会的控制则要娴熟的多，最重要的成就是1964年的Civil Rights Act和1965年的Voting Rights Act, 从法律上摧毁了南方的种族隔离制度。其它的包括Medicar和Medicaid的建立，1965年的移民法案（此后美国向欧洲以外的移民敞开了大门），以及联邦政府对小学中学教育的资金援助。这些法案都是在肯尼迪任内有的提案，但是无法在国会通过。在国内政策上约翰逊是罗斯福后最有成就的总统。自由派由于越南战争的原因，对约翰逊的看法历来是很矛盾。但是随着Obama在国会的困难和相对来说无能的表现，他们对约翰逊非常的怀念。
Dracula 发表于 2013-10-14 12:05 static/image/common/back.gif
电视剧没看过，不好评论。但是一般都公认约翰逊是有史以来最有效，最有成就的参议院多数党领袖。同众议院 ...
以前上学的时候，老师就评价约翰逊政府是少见的行政、立法都强势的政府，因此也有能力通过一系列民权法案。看来果然人不可貌相。
Dracula 发表于 2013-10-8 04:31 static/image/common/back.gif
约翰逊的早年，我觉得比尼克松还贫寒，有时间的话我会写一下，然后写一写后来他怎么利用他国会议员的身份 ...
这些都是人才流动的典型，一旦没有这种流动出现阶级固化，王朝也就完蛋了。我们的李木匠应该也是这种里的典型吧。