1. rehydration salts or intravenous fluids
2. Web 2.0
3. Wikis
4. cross-strait exchange
5. Fannie Mae in 1938 and Freddie Mac in 1970
6. mortgage lending institution
7. bail out
8. a Consent Decree that took effect in 2001
9. Somali pirates
10. Irish wake
"would have been"
(The length of the sentence shall be no less than 10 words)
2008年12月27日 星期六
2008年12月14日 星期日
Children collecting dirty water in Harare. Cholera is spread through infected water and food.
American officials say Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice will join talks on Zimbabwe this week at the United Nations. The State Department says the Security Council has failed to take meaningful action to end the country's political and health crisis. Zimbabwe faces a cholera outbreak that also threatens its neighbors. Many Zimbabweans have crossed the border into South Africa for treatment.
Secretary Rice is expected to try to increase pressure on President Robert Mugabe. Her spokesman Sean McCormack said last week that the United States wants to start a process that will bring an end to the tragedy in Zimbabwe. And he said southern African countries, especially, need to do more.
The United Nations estimated that as of last week almost seventeen thousand people were infected with cholera. Aid groups reported almost eight hundred deaths.
The outbreak grew from a lack of water-treatment chemicals and from broken sewage pipes. Many people are using unprotected wells for drinking water.
Cholera is a bacterial infection generally spread through water or food. It causes vomiting and diarrhea. In severe cases, people can die from a loss of fluids within hours unless they are treated.
Cholera is easily treated with oral rehydration salts or intravenous fluids. But Zimbabwe's health system has collapsed.
The outbreak began in August. On December fourth the government declared a national emergency and appealed for international aid.
But President Mugabe has dismissed international calls to resign. He says the West wants to use the crisis as an excuse to invade Zimbabwe. He said last week that the epidemic is under control. But on Friday U.N. Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon disagreed, based on reports from the World Health Organization and other agencies.
The U.N. chief urged President Mugabe to honor a power-sharing deal with the opposition -- and to "look to the future of his country." He said the people of Zimbabwe have suffered too much and too long.
The United Nations has been supplying clean water to treatment centers in Harare. And the International Red Cross has been preparing to provide more water and other supplies. Aid groups have warned that as many as sixty thousand people could become infected unless the outbreak is controlled.
Children collecting dirty water in Harare. Cholera is spread through infected water and food.
2008年12月10日 星期三
Questions for the "Internet Intersects politics" news article
How did Mr. Obama use Internet to win in the presidential campaign?
2008年11月29日 星期六
How Obama’s Internet Campaign Changed Politics
November 7, 2008, 7:49 pm
By Claire Cain Miller
One of the many ways that the election of Barack Obama as president has echoed that of John F. Kennedy is his use of a new medium that will forever change politics. For Mr. Kennedy, it was television. For Mr. Obama, it is the Internet.
“Were it not for the Internet, Barack Obama would not be president. Were it not for the Internet, Barack Obama would not have been the nominee,” said Arianna Huffington, editor-in-chief of The Huffington Post.
She spoke Friday about how politics and Web 2.0 intersect on a panel with Joe Trippi, a political consultant, and Gavin Newsom, the mayor of San Francisco, at the Web 2.0 Summit in San Francisco. (Karl Rove and Newt Gingrich had been invited to balance out the left-leaning panel, but declined, according to John Battelle, a chair of the conference.)
Howard Dean’s 2004 campaign -– which was run by Mr. Trippi –- was groundbreaking in its use of the Internet to raise small amounts of money from hundreds of thousands of people. But by using interactive Web 2.0 tools, Mr. Obama’s campaign changed the way politicians organize supporters, advertise to voters, defend against attacks and communicate with constituents.
Mr. Obama used the Internet to organize his supporters in a way that would have in the past required an army of volunteers and paid organizers on the ground, Mr. Trippi said.
“The tools changed between 2004 and 2008. Barack Obama won every single caucus state that matters, and he did it because of those tools, because he was able to move thousands of people to organize.”
Mr. Obama’s campaign took advantage of YouTube for free advertising. Mr. Trippi argued that those videos were more effective than television ads because viewers chose to watch them or received them from a friend instead of having their television shows interrupted.
“The campaign’s official stuff they created for YouTube was watched for 14.5 million hours,” Mr. Trippi said. “To buy 14.5 million hours on broadcast TV is $47 million.”
There has also been a sea change in fact-checking, with citizens using the Internet to find past speeches that prove a politician wrong and then using the Web to alert their fellow citizens.
The John McCain campaign, for example, originally said that Governor Sarah Palin opposed the so-called bridge to nowhere in Alaska, Ms. Huffington said. “Online there was an absolutely obsessive campaign to prove that wrong,” she said, and eventually the campaign stopped repeating it.
“In 2004, trust me, they would have gone on repeating it, because the echo chamber would not have been as facile,” Ms. Huffington said.
The Internet also let people repeatedly listen to the candidates’ own words in the face of attacks, Mr. Huffington said. As Reverend Jeremiah Wright’s incendiary words kept surfacing, people could re-watch Mr. Obama’s speech on race. To date, 6.7 million people have watched the 37-minute speech on YouTube.
The Internet also changes the way politicians govern. Mr. Newsom learned that last year when he ran for re-election. He showed up at a rally and didn’t see the usual crowd. His aides told him the audience was made up of his Facebook friends. “I said, ‘What’s Facebook?’” Mr. Newsom recalled.
These days, Mr. Newsom is “obsessed with Facebook.” It strengthens his connection with his constituents and their connection with the causes they care about, he said.
The constant exposure can, of course, turn against politicians.
Ms. Huffington’s “off the bus” team of 10,000 citizen journalists caught candidates saying things that embarrassed them later, such as Mr. Obama’s “guns and religion” remark. Now, she said, “there is no off-the-record fundraiser.”
Mr. Newsom said he is fearful of the constant need to watch his tongue. “I have to watch myself singing, ‘I left my heart in San Francisco’ on YouTube and it can’t go away. I am desperate to get it to go away,” he said dryly.
“There will be a lot of collateral damage coming to grips with the fact that we’re in a reality TV series, ‘Politics 24/7,’” Mr. Newsom said.
That’s a good thing, Mr. Trippi said. “This medium demands authenticity, and television for the most part demanded fake. Authenticity is something politicians haven’t been used to.”
He predicted that this real-time Internet contact with constituents will also change the way the president of the United States governs. He recently proposed that Mr. Obama start a Web site called MyWhiteHouse.gov to talk with citizens. (Mr. Obama just started a different site, Change.gov, on Thursday to keep in touch with people during the transition.)
“When Congress refuses to go with his agenda, it’s not going to be just the president they oppose," Mr. Trippi said. It will be the president and his huge virtual network of citizens.
“Just like Kennedy brought in the television presidency, I think we’re about to see the first wired, connected, networked presidency,” Mr. Trippi said.
By Claire Cain Miller
One of the many ways that the election of Barack Obama as president has echoed that of John F. Kennedy is his use of a new medium that will forever change politics. For Mr. Kennedy, it was television. For Mr. Obama, it is the Internet.
“Were it not for the Internet, Barack Obama would not be president. Were it not for the Internet, Barack Obama would not have been the nominee,” said Arianna Huffington, editor-in-chief of The Huffington Post.
She spoke Friday about how politics and Web 2.0 intersect on a panel with Joe Trippi, a political consultant, and Gavin Newsom, the mayor of San Francisco, at the Web 2.0 Summit in San Francisco. (Karl Rove and Newt Gingrich had been invited to balance out the left-leaning panel, but declined, according to John Battelle, a chair of the conference.)
Howard Dean’s 2004 campaign -– which was run by Mr. Trippi –- was groundbreaking in its use of the Internet to raise small amounts of money from hundreds of thousands of people. But by using interactive Web 2.0 tools, Mr. Obama’s campaign changed the way politicians organize supporters, advertise to voters, defend against attacks and communicate with constituents.
Mr. Obama used the Internet to organize his supporters in a way that would have in the past required an army of volunteers and paid organizers on the ground, Mr. Trippi said.
“The tools changed between 2004 and 2008. Barack Obama won every single caucus state that matters, and he did it because of those tools, because he was able to move thousands of people to organize.”
Mr. Obama’s campaign took advantage of YouTube for free advertising. Mr. Trippi argued that those videos were more effective than television ads because viewers chose to watch them or received them from a friend instead of having their television shows interrupted.
“The campaign’s official stuff they created for YouTube was watched for 14.5 million hours,” Mr. Trippi said. “To buy 14.5 million hours on broadcast TV is $47 million.”
There has also been a sea change in fact-checking, with citizens using the Internet to find past speeches that prove a politician wrong and then using the Web to alert their fellow citizens.
The John McCain campaign, for example, originally said that Governor Sarah Palin opposed the so-called bridge to nowhere in Alaska, Ms. Huffington said. “Online there was an absolutely obsessive campaign to prove that wrong,” she said, and eventually the campaign stopped repeating it.
“In 2004, trust me, they would have gone on repeating it, because the echo chamber would not have been as facile,” Ms. Huffington said.
The Internet also let people repeatedly listen to the candidates’ own words in the face of attacks, Mr. Huffington said. As Reverend Jeremiah Wright’s incendiary words kept surfacing, people could re-watch Mr. Obama’s speech on race. To date, 6.7 million people have watched the 37-minute speech on YouTube.
The Internet also changes the way politicians govern. Mr. Newsom learned that last year when he ran for re-election. He showed up at a rally and didn’t see the usual crowd. His aides told him the audience was made up of his Facebook friends. “I said, ‘What’s Facebook?’” Mr. Newsom recalled.
These days, Mr. Newsom is “obsessed with Facebook.” It strengthens his connection with his constituents and their connection with the causes they care about, he said.
The constant exposure can, of course, turn against politicians.
Ms. Huffington’s “off the bus” team of 10,000 citizen journalists caught candidates saying things that embarrassed them later, such as Mr. Obama’s “guns and religion” remark. Now, she said, “there is no off-the-record fundraiser.”
Mr. Newsom said he is fearful of the constant need to watch his tongue. “I have to watch myself singing, ‘I left my heart in San Francisco’ on YouTube and it can’t go away. I am desperate to get it to go away,” he said dryly.
“There will be a lot of collateral damage coming to grips with the fact that we’re in a reality TV series, ‘Politics 24/7,’” Mr. Newsom said.
That’s a good thing, Mr. Trippi said. “This medium demands authenticity, and television for the most part demanded fake. Authenticity is something politicians haven’t been used to.”
He predicted that this real-time Internet contact with constituents will also change the way the president of the United States governs. He recently proposed that Mr. Obama start a Web site called MyWhiteHouse.gov to talk with citizens. (Mr. Obama just started a different site, Change.gov, on Thursday to keep in touch with people during the transition.)
“When Congress refuses to go with his agenda, it’s not going to be just the president they oppose," Mr. Trippi said. It will be the president and his huge virtual network of citizens.
“Just like Kennedy brought in the television presidency, I think we’re about to see the first wired, connected, networked presidency,” Mr. Trippi said.
2008年11月19日 星期三
Question for the news article
What is the best strategy used by China with Taiwan, your opinions? (no less than 100 words)
2008年11月15日 星期六
Beijing's best strategy to use with Taiwan
Beijing's best strategy to use with Taiwan
Chen Yunlin, chairman of the Beijing-based Association for Relations Across the Taiwan Straits (ARATS), left Taiwan on Nov. 7 with mixed results. Chen made history by being the highest ranking Chinese Communist official ever to formally visit Taiwan, technically still an enemy of Beijing. Four important agreements were signed.
The general perception is that Taipei and Beijing were treated on an equal footing in all activities during his visit. Official media in mainland China for the first time called Taiwan officials by their official titles. In Taipei, Chen even addressed Wang Jin-pyng, president of the Legislative Yuan, as “President Wang.” The only disappointment was that during his meeting with President Ma on the final day of his tour, he did not clearly call Ma “president.” Instead, he used “nin,” which was a deferential form of “you” in Chinese.
On the part of Ma, he made no mistake in reminding Chen that he is the president. In fact, calling people by their official titles should not be a significant issue at all, as long as the two sides are treated with parity during the cross-strait exchanges. It became an increasingly hot question, only because of the manipulation by the opposition Democratic Progressive Party (DPP), which kept saying that if Ma is not addressed as “president,” the dignity of the Republic of China (ROC) on Taiwan as a sovereign state will be seriously impaired.
As a result, all Taiwanese are focusing their attention on this point, which became the main theme of the violent and bloody anti-government and anti-Chen protests sponsored by the DPP. Everyone knows that what a person is called is merely a formality, with little substantial meaning. Recent developments have indicated that Beijing has become more and more flexible and pragmatic in handling Taiwan affairs, by not denying Taipei as an independent political entity.
Against this background, Chen should have faced reality by calling President Ma as such to satisfy the persistent demand of dissidents here, without causing Beijing to sacrifice anything substantial.
While visiting Taiwan, Chen was, by and large, perceived as an intelligent, calm and professional diplomat. His emotional remarks upon arrival and his composure displayed in front of the violent protests that dogged him wherever he went, won widespread acclaim. But, if Chen had addressed Ma as president, his trip would have been much more successful.
How China deals with this question of calling Taipei’s government officials by their titles is directly related to its grand strategy toward Taiwan. An elaborate display of goodwill gestures by Beijing, we believe, would be the best and most effective method.
In this regard, it should be in the larger interest of China to consider removal of some, if not all, of its missiles aimed at Taiwan. Next, it should agree to a diplomatic truce with Taipei. Finally, it should help Taiwan participate in international activities as much as possible. That Lien Chan, as a former ROC vice president, will be the highest ranking representative from Taiwan to attend the forthcoming APEC meeting with the tacit approval of Beijing should be considered a wide move on the part of the Chinese Communists. Furthermore, China should consider giving active assistance to Taipei to enable it to participate in the World Health Organization (WHO) as an observer. Lien reportedly will mention this when meeting Hu Jintao, chairman of the People’s Republic of China (PRC), at the APEC meeting. Of course, there are hardliners in China, just as there are in Taiwan, who oppose any concessions to the island, considered a “renegade province” of China, on the question of sovereignty. But, it should not be difficult to convince these people of the need and advantage of using this kind of “soft strategy.”
Now that China has been universally recognized as a giant world power, and as such it can afford to be magnanimous in dealing with a state as small as the ROC on Taiwan.
Even today, Taiwan is already, to a great extent, dependent on mainland China for its export surplus. Many Taiwanese, including DPP followers, have toured and invested in mainland China. In fact, most of the protesters against Chen’s visit were partisan-motivated, many of whom, deep in their hearts, supported increasing cross-strait exchanges because such a development is in their best interest.
There is a well-known saying that all humans are made of flesh, meaning people are easily moved by tender acts. And this will particularly apply to the psychology of down-to-earth Taiwanese people, who are scrupulously taught by Chinese culture to be grateful to whomever is nice to them. It was reported that several residents in southern Taiwan, considered a stronghold of the Taiwan independence movement, expressed deep regret that they could not see Chen Yunlin to say “thank-you” for the hospitality he extended to them while sightseeing in mainland China.
Chen Yunlin, chairman of the Beijing-based Association for Relations Across the Taiwan Straits (ARATS), left Taiwan on Nov. 7 with mixed results. Chen made history by being the highest ranking Chinese Communist official ever to formally visit Taiwan, technically still an enemy of Beijing. Four important agreements were signed.
The general perception is that Taipei and Beijing were treated on an equal footing in all activities during his visit. Official media in mainland China for the first time called Taiwan officials by their official titles. In Taipei, Chen even addressed Wang Jin-pyng, president of the Legislative Yuan, as “President Wang.” The only disappointment was that during his meeting with President Ma on the final day of his tour, he did not clearly call Ma “president.” Instead, he used “nin,” which was a deferential form of “you” in Chinese.
On the part of Ma, he made no mistake in reminding Chen that he is the president. In fact, calling people by their official titles should not be a significant issue at all, as long as the two sides are treated with parity during the cross-strait exchanges. It became an increasingly hot question, only because of the manipulation by the opposition Democratic Progressive Party (DPP), which kept saying that if Ma is not addressed as “president,” the dignity of the Republic of China (ROC) on Taiwan as a sovereign state will be seriously impaired.
As a result, all Taiwanese are focusing their attention on this point, which became the main theme of the violent and bloody anti-government and anti-Chen protests sponsored by the DPP. Everyone knows that what a person is called is merely a formality, with little substantial meaning. Recent developments have indicated that Beijing has become more and more flexible and pragmatic in handling Taiwan affairs, by not denying Taipei as an independent political entity.
Against this background, Chen should have faced reality by calling President Ma as such to satisfy the persistent demand of dissidents here, without causing Beijing to sacrifice anything substantial.
While visiting Taiwan, Chen was, by and large, perceived as an intelligent, calm and professional diplomat. His emotional remarks upon arrival and his composure displayed in front of the violent protests that dogged him wherever he went, won widespread acclaim. But, if Chen had addressed Ma as president, his trip would have been much more successful.
How China deals with this question of calling Taipei’s government officials by their titles is directly related to its grand strategy toward Taiwan. An elaborate display of goodwill gestures by Beijing, we believe, would be the best and most effective method.
In this regard, it should be in the larger interest of China to consider removal of some, if not all, of its missiles aimed at Taiwan. Next, it should agree to a diplomatic truce with Taipei. Finally, it should help Taiwan participate in international activities as much as possible. That Lien Chan, as a former ROC vice president, will be the highest ranking representative from Taiwan to attend the forthcoming APEC meeting with the tacit approval of Beijing should be considered a wide move on the part of the Chinese Communists. Furthermore, China should consider giving active assistance to Taipei to enable it to participate in the World Health Organization (WHO) as an observer. Lien reportedly will mention this when meeting Hu Jintao, chairman of the People’s Republic of China (PRC), at the APEC meeting. Of course, there are hardliners in China, just as there are in Taiwan, who oppose any concessions to the island, considered a “renegade province” of China, on the question of sovereignty. But, it should not be difficult to convince these people of the need and advantage of using this kind of “soft strategy.”
Now that China has been universally recognized as a giant world power, and as such it can afford to be magnanimous in dealing with a state as small as the ROC on Taiwan.
Even today, Taiwan is already, to a great extent, dependent on mainland China for its export surplus. Many Taiwanese, including DPP followers, have toured and invested in mainland China. In fact, most of the protesters against Chen’s visit were partisan-motivated, many of whom, deep in their hearts, supported increasing cross-strait exchanges because such a development is in their best interest.
There is a well-known saying that all humans are made of flesh, meaning people are easily moved by tender acts. And this will particularly apply to the psychology of down-to-earth Taiwanese people, who are scrupulously taught by Chinese culture to be grateful to whomever is nice to them. It was reported that several residents in southern Taiwan, considered a stronghold of the Taiwan independence movement, expressed deep regret that they could not see Chen Yunlin to say “thank-you” for the hospitality he extended to them while sightseeing in mainland China.
2008年11月5日 星期三
Questions for the "smart pill" news article
1.Why does the so-called “smart pills” get so popular among students today?
2.What are the two most popular brand-name drugs used by the students as “smart pills”?
3.What are the original functions indicated by “Adderall”?
4.what are the major side effects of those popular “smar pills”?
5.What do you think if we should use these kinds of medicine to enhance our performance either on academics or career?
2.What are the two most popular brand-name drugs used by the students as “smart pills”?
3.What are the original functions indicated by “Adderall”?
4.what are the major side effects of those popular “smar pills”?
5.What do you think if we should use these kinds of medicine to enhance our performance either on academics or career?
訂閱：
文章 (Atom)