Saturday, January 22, 2011

Obama's Speech at Tucson Memorial



整整一個星期都抽不出時間好好介紹這段影片,現在才談頗有點明日黃花,但這麼好的演講實在不能不提。

美國亞利桑那州發生槍擊案,六人死亡,一名國會議員重傷。奧巴馬上週出席槍擊案的追思會,發表了一段非常感人的演講。我最喜歡這個演講之處有三點:

第一,對每一名遇害者,奧巴馬都點名簡述了他們的生平,對每一名救人英雄,奧巴馬亦點名稱讚,並讓群眾向他們致敬。這些介紹說得真摯、生動、平易近人,你會覺得在這位總統心目中,每一位美國國民都是獨特的,每一位美國國民的生命都值得尊重。

「These men and women remind us that heroism is found not only on the fields of battle. They remind us that heroism does not require special training or physical strength. Heroism is here, in the hearts of so many of our fellow citizens, all around us, just waiting to be summoned — as it was on Saturday morning.」

第二,槍擊案發生後社會出現想當然耳的分化,但奧巴馬重覆了兩次:That we cannot do。他說,我們不要互相指摘、不要遷怒別人,這個時候最需要的是療傷、是互相扶持、是加倍珍惜眼前人:

「Rather than pointing fingers or assigning blame, let's use this occasion to expand our moral imaginations, to listen to each other more carefully, to sharpen our instincts for empathy and remind ourselves of all the ways that our hopes and dreams are bound together.
After all, that's what most of us do when we lose somebody in our family — especially if the loss is unexpected (...) So sudden loss causes us to look backward — but it also forces us to look forward; to reflect on the present and the future, on the manner in which we live our lives and nurture our relationships with those who are still with us.」
最令人感動的是最後一部份。奧巴馬說,我們或許並不認識這些遇害的人,但我們從他們身上看見自己(「We may not have known them personally, but surely we see ourselves in them」)。這中間有生死相許的愛侶、親切的老太太、盡忠職守的公務員、和對世事充滿好奇的九歲女孩。
尤其是這個在九一一慘劇當天出生、叫Christina的小女孩,特別讓人感到惋惜。奧巴馬說:
「 in Christina we see all of our children. So curious, so trusting, so energetic, so full of magic. So deserving of our love. And so deserving of our good example.
(...)I want to live up to her expectations. I want our democracy to be as good as Christina imagined it. I want America to be as good as she imagined it. All of us — we should do everything we can to make sure this country lives up to our children's expectations.」
奧巴馬再一次讓美國人感到自己是整個美國大家庭的一分子,呼籲大家團結一致。他更以一個小孩的眼光來鞭策自己,表現得謙卑、真誠,愛民如子。最令人激動的一刻,是當奧巴馬提到被槍擊的國會議員首次睜開眼睛時,重覆了四次「Gabby opened her eyes」,語調一次比一次激昂,台下無不動容(其中表現最肉緊的是一直坐在台下的Michelle Obama ﹣我懷疑她和朱麗倩應該有說不完的共同話題,因為她們的老公都是這樣充滿魅力的萬人迷啊)。
如果我是美國人,給我再選一次,我仍會選奧巴馬,因為我實在太喜歡他了。
要不,若Steve Jobs有什麼三長兩短,而奧巴馬又選不上總統的話,我希望他會考慮到蘋果電腦應徵CEO﹣畢竟世上渲染力和「教主」Steve Jobs旗鼓相當的,除奧巴馬外別無他人。何況,連醫改都能推銷成功,賣電話對奧巴馬來說應毫無難度吧。
***

是次演講的文字足本
Obama bouncing back - 偉大的政治家把握每次災難化危為機,對比我們親愛的香港高官們,卻把每個好好的機會變成災難。Can't we deserve someone better?
黃永評論文章:「...當中最觸動人心的,相信是以下這句話:
「在大家的分歧激化之時……我們更須確保人與人之間的交流對話,乃用以療傷,而非傷害對方。」 (……in a way that heals, not a way that wounds.) 讀到這一句時,我想起了唐英年那句「剛愎自用加上勇往直前,最後很容易車毀人亡」--兩句說話放在一起,高下立見自不用說,但那是幾近天國與地獄的落差,是「療傷 Vs 創傷」之別。」

10 comments:

Alvin said...

估唔到香港都有Obamabot! :)

奧巴馬演講就叻(但嚴格嘅講係讀稿叻﹐冇貓紙機/貓紙機故障嘅奧巴馬簡直判若兩人)﹐但行政決策真係唔掂﹐做總統唔掂﹐做大企業CEO一樣唔掂﹐佢連任失敗﹐做聯合國秘書長就o岩晒佢喇!

s tsui said...

have you read his speech on race? it's also magnificent. i don't think there is going to be any credible threat from the republican camp in the next election cycle, so i don't think his talent will be wasted in selling phones (thank god). that being said, his "selling" of the health care reform was terrible, resulting in the disastrous mid-term election. let's hope his PR machine somehow recovers and gets him the credit he deserves (e.g. all the liberal initiatives passed during the lame duck session).

ethan.k said...

由衷的讚美幾句也被謔稱為「Obamabot」,真不值!當然,自由派的大概會以「Re-thug」(共和黨)或「Tea-tard」(茶黨)反稽。這種對持不同政見者的鄙視態道,自08大選以來,在美國社會實在越鬧越凶。雖然在美國歷史中(尤其在立國之初)也常有「不文明」的時候,但大人們這樣互相潑婦罵街,也實在愧對九歲小孩。

作為美國選民,我對總統的言語能打動國外人民,著實有點自豪。犬孺一點說,這也是「軟實力」的表現。即使你不同意奧巴馬的政策,也不能否定這點吧。

Leona said...

Alvin,
係啊,我係obamabot啊,還不明顯嗎?

s tsui,
我覺得healthcare reform本身沒有錯,但不是在這個時候谷,美國經濟首要解決的是失業問題。你說得對,但願奧巴馬得回他應有的credit

ethan.K,
謝謝留言:)
作為一個美國選民,你的候選人總得討好你,然後你能從中挑一個最喜歡的。奇怪在香港這個地方,特首候選人偏和他的市民過不去(當然,這些人沒有投票權嘛),不但不作討好,還要訓斥呢。你看那幾個「特首黑馬」,還真沒哪個討人喜歡。

說到軟實力,大國勃起嘛,怎麼肯軟下來

lam said...

提提你,社論職業病發作,世上哪有"美國市民"這一回事?

Leona said...

lam,你瞧我!分明是出現了寫作疲勞,竟連這個明顯錯誤都不察覺!

謝謝你好心提醒:)

嚴櫻 said...

不好意思,
想跟你賣廣告
我的書,正進入設計階段,預計最快月尾推出。
定在月尾,因為我跟媽都是一月三十一日生日。
這本書,是為了紀念我媽而出,亦是為著讓自己重新上路而出,性質很私人,版稅收入會撥捐志願機構,支持生死教育。
筆者當然希望您會慷慨解囊,隨緣樂助﹔但我亦明白作品性質始終個人,跟市場原則大相違背,故此我只祈望您有幸經過書局時,可以找著我這本書,偶意翻閱,看過一點,體會一刻,便好。
如果此書能令您腦裡閃過善待摯親的念頭,也算得上是跟我和我媽結了一場善緣。我會衷心祝福你。
摯親離世,痛是難免,我不信時間可以凋淡一切,只求著力保守每一渺寶貴的回憶,我只想靠文字保守媽的靈魂,讓她存在於永恒。
思念,是永遠,縱非永遠熾烈,亦肯定不會磨滅。如果來日我有子女,我希望可將此書留給他們,讓他們知道:你爸的媽,你的嫲嫲,是多麼的好。倘若她依然尚 在,一定會很痛錫你們,希望你們看過這書,再回頭望你爸,你們會爸身上看見嫲的身影,同意爸也曾用心愛你們、呵護你們,就跟你嫲愛你爸一樣。

Alvin said...

Leona - I definitely agree with you that Obama should have focused on jobs creation and the economy first. But then Obama was probably too eager to pass healthcare reform as his legacy, knowing that the super majority he enjoyed in Congress wouldn't last forever.

But while I agree that some form of healthcare reform will be needed eventually, the bill that was passed was choked full of flaws. Let's set aside for a moment whether the Federal Gov't even have the power to mandate citizens to purchase something, forcing insurance companies not to charge more (or deny coverage) for pre-existing conditions means people will only buy insurance when they're sick (and opt for the much cheaper insurance), insurance premiums will skyrocket because insurance companies will have to "pre-charge" people for not-yet-existing conditions, and thus forcing more people not to buy insurance and companies not to provide insurance for their employees. Eventually private insurance companies will be driven out of business. Perhaps that was Democrats' goal all along, to have a single-payer system.

Besides, the whole notion that we need to provide coverage for the 30+ million people that don't have health insurance today is bogus. First off, many of those are young people that have opted not to have insurance because insurance is more expensive than an occasional doctor's visit. And then there is this thing called Medicaid which already provides health coverage for those without insurance.

Alvin said...

ethan.k - "這種對持不同政見者的鄙視態道,自08大選以來,在美國社會實在越鬧越凶。"

I wonder why? Would it be because the Democrats ignored the will of the majority of the American people and rammed the Healthcare bill down our throat? Would it be because of arrogant attitude like "I won", "you have to pass the bill to find out what's in it", and "you gotta sit in the back seat"? Would it be because such a massive entitlement program had to be passed with political payoffs like the Cornhusker Kickbacks and the Louisiana Purchase? I can go on and on...

Alvin said...

對美國政治兩極化補充一下﹐小弟在奧巴馬當選後第二日(5/11/08)就在自己blog寫過以下一段...

"更令小弟擔心的是,美國政治逐步走向兩極化。國會參眾兩院一直能順利運作,倚賴的是兩黨裡一班中間溫和派議員游走於兩黨之間,作其潤滑劑。前文提過,Al Gore八年前敗選,自由左派心心不忿,一口怨氣鬱足八年,今天大獲全勝,就是不知他們會怎樣渲泄這口鬱氣。民主黨在國會中有不少議席是從共和黨溫和派手中贏來的,少了共和黨的溫和派,若果民主黨領導層一方面講unity和reconciliation,另一方面就盡情推動自由左派的理念,將民主黨的溫和派也都邊緣化,最終這口怨氣並沒有化去,只不過是將它全數過給共和黨和保守右派。自由左派需明白,民主黨今次大勝,不是因為自由左派理念受廣泛支持,只不過是中間游離選民求變。民主黨掌政不可能世世代代,尤其國會兩年選一次,民主黨執政有何差池,共和黨重新上台是早晚的事。將怨氣傳來傳去,這不是美國之福。"

好可惜﹐不幸言中。