時事英語
[ リスト | 詳細 ]
![[11]](https://s.yimg.jp/i/jp/blog/p3/images/paging_for2.gif){kind=small}
コメント（0）
|
HANNITY: Why does Ted Cruz -- why do you, Senator, want to be president? It's a big decision, a big impact on your family. and how would a Cruz presidency differ from an Obama presidency?
CRUZ: Well, our country is in crisis. And we were talking just a minute ago. We've got to change the direction that we're on. One of the things I talked about this morning in the announcement speech is so many Americans across this country feel that the promise of America is drifting away from them, is unattainable. that, you know, the miracle that was this nation, that our rights we understand they come from God and not government, that government is limited and that any one of us can come, like your family, like my family, with nothing and achieve anything. That's slipping away. HANNITY: You think that's slipping away. Here are the numbers -- 92 million Americans not in the labor force. CRUZ: Yes. HANNITY: Highest number since the '70s. Almost 50 million Americans on food stamps. Almost 50 now in poverty. Almost 20 million more than when President Obama took office. $18 trillion in debt, $100 trillion in unfunded liabilities. Those are real, real economic problems. CRUZ: Yes. HANNITY: Specifically, how do you bring a budget in balance? How do you fix this economy? How do you get those people back in the labor force? CRUZ: Well, we can turn it around, and how you do it is all interconnected. My first and top priority is growth and jobs and opportunity. You know, if you look at the federal budget -- you're a numbers guy -- there is only one first order variable when it comes to the budget, and that is economic growth. Everything else is a second or third order variable. Everything else... HANNITY: Even spending? CRUZ: Even spending is a much smaller impact on the federal budget than growth. Historically in this country, we've averaged 3.3 percent growth a year since World War II. There have only been two four-year periods where growth has averaged less than 1 percent a year, 1978 to 1982 -- now, that was coming out of Jimmy Carter, same failed economic policies. And then 2008 to 2012, where GDP growth averaged 0.9 percent a year. If we can get back to historic levels of growth, 3, 4, 5 percent, suddenly, the federal budget picture transforms. Suddenly, we have the revenue to take care and support our troops and build our military to defend this nation. Suddenly, it becomes possible to step in and preserve and reform Social Security and Medicare. Suddenly, it becomes possible to turn the problems around. HANNITY: The way government works, you have baseline budgeting, where there's built-in increases every year. We've had -- this president will accumulate as much, if not more, debt than every other president before him combined. CRUZ: Yes. HANNITY: That's unsustainable, right? So spending has to be a part of it. Do you cut back -- do you curb spending? CRUZ: Absolutely, yes. You know, one of the things you have advocated is the penny plan. I think the penny plan has an awful lot of force to it. And I am an emphatic advocate of a balanced budget amendment, putting in the Constitution a strong balanced budget. HANNITY: Every year, it must be in balance. With the penny plan, it would cut one penny out of every dollar every year for six years, and you would get without growth a balanced budget in six years. Would you support cutting a penny out of every dollar, defense, Social Security, Medicare? CRUZ: You're going to be hard pressed to come up with a cost-cutting program that I'm not going to support. I do think the military -- we need to look at the growing national security threats and we need to make sure we take care of the men and women in the military and we provide what we need to protect this nation. And also, if you look at the budget, you cannot bring the budget into control without taking on entitlement reform. Two thirds of the federal budget is entitlements. So if you don't talk about entitlements, you can't do it. HANNITY: Entitlements. Means testing? CRUZ: Absolutely. HANNITY: Raise the age of eligibility? CRUZ: Sure. Yes. HANNITY: So somebody who paid in their whole life into Social Security, happens to have been successful, all that money that they were promised, No. CRUZ: Well, look, I think any Social Security reform that you do, for those people who are seniors, for those people who are near retirement, we need to honor the commitments we've made to them. HANNITY: You're talking about future generations. CRUZ: You're talking about future generations, people my generation. I'm 44. There are not a lot of people in my generation who think Social Security's going to be there for us. HANNITY: I'm 53. I'm close to your generation, probably one step ahead. Content and Programming Copyright 2015 Fox News Network, LLC. ALL RIGHTS RESERVED. Copyright 2015 CQ-Roll Call, Inc. All materials herein are protected by United States copyright law and may not be reproduced, distributed, transmitted, displayed, published or broadcast without the prior written permission of CQ-Roll Call. You may not alter or remove any trademark, copyright or other notice from copies of the content. |
|
This is a rush transcript from "The Kelly File," March 26, 2015. This copy may not be in its final form and may be updated.
MEGYN KELLY, HOST: Well, the players are famous, the charges are ugly and the backlash has already been fierce. A riveting new HBO documentary details what filmmakers call the dark side of the Church of Scientology. Here's a preview. (BEGIN VIDEO CLIP) UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Someone had told me there's this cult and it can make anything possible in your life. UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: I was deeply convinced that we were going to save the world. UNIDENTIFIED MALE: It was a transcendent experience. UNIDENTIFIED MALE: You feel euphoria. UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: Everything you do for endless trillions of years depends on what you do within scientology. UNIDENTIFIED MALE: They sell it all in the beginning as something quite logical. You take on a matrix of thought that is not your own. UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: It's so strong that it sticks you like glue. UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Very suggestible. UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: You just don't see it happening to you. You justify so much. UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: There is no logical explanation other than faith. (END VIDEO CLIP) KELLY: Mike Rinder is a former Scientologist who spent years defending Scientology. He's featured in the HBO documentary film "Going Clear: Scientology In The Prison Of Belief," which will debut on March 29th on HBO. Mark, thank you very much for being here. And so, it's interesting the prison of belief based on a book by a Pulitzer Prize winning author who's featured in the documentary as well shot by an academy award winner, and already the Church of Scientology has come out swinging against you, which we'll get to in a moment. What does that mean the prison of belief? MIKE RINDER, FORMER SCIENTOLOGIST: It means, Megyn, that Scientology has means or a way of getting people to believe that they have the answers to everything, that your very future depends upon your activities and commitment to Scientology and remaining a dedicated and committed member of the church. And to stray from it is something that will result in very dire consequences. KELLY: I watched the documentary and apologies for calling you Mark. I watched the documentary, Mike, and it talks about how there is allegedly abuse against members who want to leave the church, there's blackmail, there's allegedly tapping of people's phones who try to speak out against Scientology, that some are put in a sort of prison called the hole where they're not free to leave, monitoring by security guards, and an absolute commitment not to speak out against the religion, a commitment you say you were actually one of the enforcers of for years. RINDER: Yes, that's correct, Megyn. I mean, it's ugly. There is no question. And that's the reason why I and others are speaking out because we feel that the abuses that are ongoing within the Church of Scientology need to have the light of day shone on them and be seen for what they really are. Because there is a perception that the church tries to put forward that everything is all butterflies and unicorns with the church of Scientology. And yet on the other hand, there are a lot of things that happened that are very egregious violations of human rights. And things that. (CROSSTALK) KELLY: That would be illegal -- things that would be illegal as well. You're talking -- not you, but the film talks about Tom Cruise who's the most famous Scientologist, and his marriage to Nicole Kidman suggesting that marriage was divided by the church because she was not a Scientologist. Her father was a psychologist and they don't believe in that. At one point, her phones were tapped. All of which the church has denied. Did they engage in these tactics? RINDER: Yes, absolutely, Megyn. This is the patent and practice of the church in dealing with things and people that they feel are not in step with them, or in disagreement, or seeking to expose what's going on. I mean, you've seen the reaction that the church -- I'm sure you were flooded with all sorts of information about every single person that ever speaks out about... (CROSSTALK) KELLY: They're extreme litigious. The viewers should know about this. We did a segment on them a few years ago and we got threatened. I mean, they love to threaten if you say anything about them, even if you are not a Scientologist. But they're really upset with you. Moments before we came on the air, this comes at 8:46, "Dear Ms. Kelly, I hear you may be doing a program with Mike Rinder regarding the documentary. Why are you going ahead with a self-admitted liar who has admitted under oath he's paid $175 an hour by litigious plaintiffs attorney. He left the church in disgrace for severe and gross malfeasance. These are vicious, strident falsehoods." RINDER: And that's par for the course for Scientology. And in fact, that sort of reaction and response is what proves much of what's shown in the film. Look, Megyn, they say that about every single person, Alex Gibney, an Academy Award winning documentarian has now become a bigot and propagandist. Lawrence Wright, a Pulitzer Prize winning author is also a bigot and gets everything wrong. Nobody who says anything about scientology that they don't like. (CROSSTALK) KELLY: They go after you. (CROSSTALK) KELLY: I'm up against a hard break. I've got 30 seconds. Tell us why we should care. Why should people care? RINDER: You should care because there are people that are being hurt. And there are abuses that are going on. And they're being hidden behind the First Amendment. The church claims all sorts of religious protection, which certainly is a good thing or a great thing in this country. But it's bad when abuses and people are abused and that is covered up by reason of nobody being willing to take it on. KELLY: The church denies the allegations in the film and that the film is shocking. It airs on Sunday night. Mike, thank you. We'll be right back. RINDER: Thank you, Megyn. Content and Programming Copyright 2015 Fox News Network, LLC. ALL RIGHTS RESERVED. Copyright 2015 CQ-Roll Call, Inc. All materials herein are protected by United States copyright law and may not be reproduced, distributed, transmitted, displayed, published or broadcast without the prior written permission of CQ-Roll Call. You may not alter or remove any trademark, copyright or other notice from copies of the content. |
|
Philip > RisingSun • 3 days ago
RS, it seem like you did a bit of history lessons. This actually worries me more, since you are only learning the one-sided story that the right-wingers teach you. If you and PoliticallyIncorrect are the typical products of Japanese education system, then your country is doomed to repeat your country's past mistakes. And I can most certainly assure you that China, Russia, or N. Korea will not be a forgiving conquerer like the U. S. was during WW2 if Japan decides to tackle them in the future. Regardless, the typical Japanese must think that Japan was just a benevolent power that simply managed its neighboring countries like Korea and Japan, and through its security blanket that it provided these nations by "annexation" and legal claims, that it actually provided a means for these nations to economically develop and flourish. I guess you see Japan as kind of like what the U. S. doing for modern day Japan today; simply providing regional security so that local populace can go about develping its nation economically. Since you are living in this dreamland, let's expore this fantasy land of yours a bit more. There are many Japanese who want the U. S. troops to leave Japan. What if the Emporor's family was one of them. And since this is contrary to the U. S. government's interest, what is the U. S. Navy SEAL team snuck into Edo castle, raped and killed Empress Michiko, and burned her body on the castle grounds? Would that be OK? (look up Eulmi incident) While they were at it, what if they turned the Edo castle into a public zoo filled with monkeys, since that is what is what the royal family home deserves to be. (look up Changgyeonggung)What if the U. S. State Department and the DOD decided to systematically round up Japanese school girls from smaller regional prefecture and shipped them to places like Iraq and Afghanistan, to ensure our troops had local "comfort" and entertainment. Some of these girls come from poor farming or fishing towns anyways, what better opportunities we would be giving them. What if the U. S. Marines marched into National Diet, proclaimed that only English and U. S. history will be taught in all Japanese schools, all students must register using American names only, Hinomaru will be outlawed, singing of Kimigayo will be an offense punishable by death? All that is acceptable by you, since in exchange for all this, the U. S. will provide national security to Japan, while average Japanese can keep making Toyota cars and Sony electronics. Right? RisingSun > Philip • 3 days ago > since you are only learning the one-sided story that the right-wingers teach you. I don’t mind people call me whatever they like, but knowing the truth isn’t really “right-wing” or “nationalist”. Those are typical rhetoric used by the communist China or Anti-Japanese Koreans, and I bet you are a Korean immigrant who cannot even appreciate or understand freedom of learning, expression, and belief yet in the US. Just like the US, or unlike China, Japan has numerous history textbooks (I think 16 approved for high schools) that education committees in each district can choose from. But I must say 99% of students won’t learn anything after the Meiji Restoration (19th century) due to the end of the semester, as well as purposefully avoiding touchy subjects like WW2. Most Japanese including myself have to learn in universities or by oneself, and historians are usually politically neutral. You have to write “what is one-sided story” or “right-wing” about my comments, in order to convince me that I’m those. Otherwise, you are a typical liberal ignorant. > then your country is doomed to repeat your country's past mistakes. Japanese know far more about China,South Korea, the US or any parts of the world. “Know your enemy” as Sin Tzu said, right? Do you know anything about South Korea or Japan, or wherever you are from? I doubt, since you are just busy discrediting me or Japan. > its security blanket that it provided these nations by "annexation" and legal claims The European/American imperialists during the 19th and the first half of 20th century thought it was duty for enlightened to enlighten those who were not. That’s the Manifest Destiny. Did Japan take the part of it? Most certainly. But that doesn’t mean that Japan conducted savagely acts during the Japanese administration era in Korea. Simply put, Japan didn’t take anything from Korea, but planted modernization and modern spirits. > Since you are living in this dreamland, Here you go again, with “dreamland”. No, Japan wasn’t like the US for Japan. Japan for Korea was the US for Texas. Let me know what your fact is, not with your imaginations from the dreamland. > There are many Japanese who want the U. S. troops to leave Japan. What if the Emporor's family was one of them Exactly who and how many does you think? I hope these in Okinawa included. Japanese political system is called Constitutional Monarchy, and the imperial family cannot intervene, or make any comments, on political affairs. Your example is just stupid but I’ll go with your flow.
> Eulmi incident I know it very well. But you are making the crucial mistake. The Empress Min was a very bad person, using her extended families to control the nation. She and Kojong was a lazy king and queen, having parties all night, spending the national budget (=the asset for the dynasty) , and the works of the ministers had to be done in the evening. Min was into the cult, and priestesses were always at the court, dancing and doing rituals and whatnot. She gave away tons of money to those priestesses if they made Min happy, and soon, Joseon was riddled with unpaid wedges and harsh taxation to peasants. George Trumbull Ladd describes in his book about her that she was smart but very cruel to put the throne to the shame, and the personal grudges against Taewongun spilled the bloodshed like greetings every year”. > While they were at it, what if they turned the Edo castle into a public zoo filled with monkeys, since that is what is what the royal family home deserves to be The Joseon king didn’t need the palace anymore. It was in fact a good idea to make a public park filled with animals (not just monkeys but many exotic ones), as well as botanic garden, museum, and skate-link that every citizens could have accessed. It’s incredibly biased to say “that is what is what the royal family home deserves to be”. Another one-sided stupid thinking I must say. > Japanese school girls from smaller regional prefecture and shipped them to places like Iraq and Afghanistan, to ensure our troops had local "comfort" and entertainment. I don’t know what you are really dreaming, but the first of all, you are confusing Teishintai (Teenage Volunteer Works) with Ianhu (Comfort Women). Teishintai was a work duty that every school boys and girls, from Japan, Korea and Taiwan, to work in the factories and farms after schools, under the Labor Draft Ordinance passed in July 1939 in Japan, and March 1944 elsewhere including Korea. The many local Koreans were rumoring that these girls would be taken away and protested, so the Japanese administration announced in August 1944 that none of Korean-born Korean citizens would be applied to this, but only Japanese citizens living in Korea. So from March to August of 1944, only about 4,000 Korean girls had worked at the local factories. Lazy citizens. Comfort women is the another issue. They are simply prostitutes who chose to work abroad. In 1944, the US troop captured the Japanese citizens in Burma and War Information Office had interviewed 20 Korean comfort women. They are simply described “war camp followers”. You can read it here. http://www.exordio.com/1939-19... > What if the U. S. Marines marched into National Diet, proclaimed that only English and U. S. history will be taught Japan is the one taught Hangul to every Korean citizens very first time in its history. Japanese actually printed very first Hangul “dictionary”, and published newspaper written in Hangul for the very first time. |
