美国经典英文演讲100篇:A Time for Choosing
时间:2018-12-05 作者:英语课 分类:美国经典英文演讲100篇
Ronald Reagan: "A Time for Choosing" (aka "The Speech")
[AUTHENTICITY CERTIFIED 1: Text version below transcribed 2 directly from audio (2)]
Program Announcer: Ladies and gentlemen, we take pride in presenting a thoughtful address by Ronald Reagan. Mr. Reagan:
Reagan: Thank you. Thank you very much. Thank you and good evening. The sponsor has been identified, but unlike most television programs, the performer hasn't been provided with a script. As a matter of fact, I have been permitted to choose my own words and discuss my own ideas regarding the choice that we face in the next few weeks.
I have spent most of my life as a Democrat 3. I recently have seen fit to follow another course. I believe that the issues confronting us cross party lines. Now, one side in this campaign has been telling us that the issues of this election are the maintenance of peace and prosperity. The line has been used, "We've never had it so good."
But I have an uncomfortable feeling that this prosperity isn't something on which we can base our hopes for the future. No nation in history has ever survived a tax burden that reached a third of its national income. Today, 37 cents out of every dollar earned in this country is the tax collector's share, and yet our government continues to spend 17 million dollars a day more than the government takes in. We haven't balanced our budget 28 out of the last 34 years. We've raised our debt limit three times in the last twelve months, and now our national debt is one and a half times bigger than all the combined debts of all the nations of the world. We have 15 billion dollars in gold in our treasury 4; we don't own an ounce. Foreign dollar claims are 27.3 billion dollars. And we've just had announced that the dollar of 1939 will now purchase 45 cents in its total value.
As for the peace that we would preserve, I wonder who among us would like to approach the wife or mother whose husband or son has died in South Vietnam and ask them if they think this is a peace that should be maintained indefinitely. Do they mean peace, or do they mean we just want to be left in peace? There can be no real peace while one American is dying some place in the world for the rest of us. We're at war with the most dangerous enemy that has ever faced mankind in his long climb from the swamp to the stars, and it's been said if we lose that war, and in so doing lose this way of freedom of ours, history will record with the greatest astonishment 5 that those who had the most to lose did the least to prevent its happening. Well I think it's time we ask ourselves if we still know the freedoms that were intended for us by the Founding Fathers.
Not too long ago, two friends of mine were talking to a Cuban refugee, a businessman who had escaped from Castro, and in the midst of his story one of my friends turned to the other and said, "We don't know how lucky we are." And the Cuban stopped and said, "How lucky you are? I had someplace to escape to." And in that sentence he told us the entire story. If we lose freedom here, there's no place to escape to. This is the last stand on earth.
And this idea that government is beholden to the people, that it has no other source of power except the sovereign people, is still the newest and the most unique idea in all the long history of man's relation to man.
This is the issue of this election: Whether we believe in our capacity for self-government or whether we abandon the American revolution and confess that a little intellectual elite 6 in a far-distant capitol can plan our lives for us better than we can plan them ourselves.
You and I are told increasingly we have to choose between a left or right. Well I'd like to suggest there is no such thing as a left or right. There's only an up or down -- [up] man's old -- old-aged dream, the ultimate in individual freedom consistent with law and order, or down to the ant heap of totalitarianism. And regardless of their sincerity 7, their humanitarian 8 motives 10, those who would trade our freedom for security have embarked 11 on this downward course.
In this vote-harvesting time, they use terms like the "Great Society," or as we were told a few days ago by the President, we must accept a greater government activity in the affairs of the people. But they've been a little more explicit 12 in the past and among themselves; and all of the things I now will quote have appeared in print. These are not Republican accusations 13. For example, they have voices that say, "The cold war will end through our acceptance of a not undemocratic socialism." Another voice says, "The profit motive 9 has become outmoded. It must be replaced by the incentives 14 of the welfare state." Or, "Our traditional system of individual freedom is incapable 15 of solving the complex problems of the 20th century." Senator Fullbright has said at Stanford University that the Constitution is outmoded. He referred to the President as "our moral teacher and our leader," and he says he is "hobbled in his task by the restrictions 16 of power imposed on him by this antiquated 17 document." He must "be freed," so that he "can do for us" what he knows "is best." And Senator Clark of Pennsylvania, another articulate spokesman, defines liberalism as "meeting the material needs of the masses through the full power of centralized government."
Well, I, for one, resent it when a representative of the people refers to you and me, the free men and women of this country, as "the masses." This is a term we haven't applied 18 to ourselves in America. But beyond that, "the full power of centralized government" -- this was the very thing the Founding Fathers sought to minimize. They knew that governments don't control things. A government can't control the economy without controlling people. And they know when a government sets out to do that, it must use force and coercion 19 to achieve its purpose. They also knew, those Founding Fathers, that outside of its legitimate 20 functions, government does nothing as well or as economically as the private sector 21 of the economy.
Now, we have no better example of this than government's involvement in the farm economy over the last 30 years. Since 1955, the cost of this program has nearly doubled. One-fourth of farming in America is responsible for 85% of the farm surplus. Three-fourths of farming is out on the free market and has known a 21% increase in the per capita consumption of all its produce. You see, that one-fourth of farming -- that's regulated and controlled by the federal government. In the last three years we've spent 43 dollars in the feed grain program for every dollar bushel of corn we don't grow.
Senator Humphrey last week charged that Barry Goldwater, as President, would seek to eliminate farmers. He should do his homework a little better, because he'll find out that we've had a decline of 5 million in the farm population under these government programs. He'll also find that the Democratic administration has sought to get from Congress [an] extension of the farm program to include that three-fourths that is now free. He'll find that they've also asked for the right to imprison 22 farmers who wouldn't keep books as prescribed by the federal government. The Secretary of Agriculture asked for the right to seize farms through condemnation 23 and resell them to other individuals. And contained in that same program was a provision that would have allowed the federal government to remove 2 million farmers from the soil.
At the same time, there's been an increase in the Department of Agriculture employees. There's now one for every 30 farms in the United States, and still they can't tell us how 66 shiploads of grain headed for Austria disappeared without a trace and Billie Sol Estes never left shore.
Every responsible farmer and farm organization has repeatedly asked the government to free the farm economy, but how -- who are farmers to know what's best for them? The wheat farmers voted against a wheat program. The government passed it anyway. Now the price of bread goes up; the price of wheat to the farmer goes down.
Meanwhile, back in the city, under urban renewal 24 the assault on freedom carries on. Private property rights [are] so diluted 25 that public interest is almost anything a few government planners decide it should be. In a program that takes from the needy 26 and gives to the greedy, we see such spectacles as in Cleveland, Ohio, a million-and-a-half-dollar building completed only three years ago must be destroyed to make way for what government officials call a "more compatible use of the land." The President tells us he's now going to start building public housing units in the thousands, where heretofore we've only built them in the hundreds. But FHA [Federal Housing Authority] and the Veterans Administration tell us they have 120,000 housing units they've taken back through mortgage foreclosure. For three decades, we've sought to solve the problems of unemployment through government planning, and the more the plans fail, the more the planners plan. The latest is the Area Redevelopment Agency.
They've just declared Rice County, Kansas, a depressed 27 area. Rice County, Kansas, has two hundred oil wells, and the 14,000 people there have over 30 million dollars on deposit in personal savings 28 in their banks. And when the government tells you you're depressed, lie down and be depressed.
We have so many people who can't see a fat man standing 29 beside a thin one without coming to the conclusion the fat man got that way by taking advantage of the thin one. So they're going to solve all the problems of human misery 30 through government and government planning. Well, now, if government planning and welfare had the answer -- and they've had almost 30 years of it -- shouldn't we expect government to read the score to us once in a while? Shouldn't they be telling us about the decline each year in the number of people needing help? The reduction in the need for public housing?
But the reverse is true. Each year the need grows greater; the program grows greater. We were told four years ago that 17 million people went to bed hungry each night. Well that was probably true. They were all on a diet. But now we're told that 9.3 million families in this country are poverty-stricken on the basis of earning less than 3,000 dollars a year. Welfare spending [is] 10 times greater than in the dark depths of the Depression. We're spending 45 billion dollars on welfare. Now do a little arithmetic, and you'll find that if we divided the 45 billion dollars up equally among those 9 million poor families, we'd be able to give each family 4,600 dollars a year. And this added to their present income should eliminate poverty. Direct aid to the poor, however, is only running only about 600 dollars per family. It would seem that someplace there must be some overhead.
Now -- so now we declare "war on poverty," or "You, too, can be a Bobby Baker 31." Now do they honestly expect us to believe that if we add 1 billion dollars to the 45 billion we're spending, one more program to the 30-odd we have -- and remember, this new program doesn't replace any, it just duplicates existing programs -- do they believe that poverty is suddenly going to disappear by magic? Well, in all fairness I should explain there is one part of the new program that isn't duplicated. This is the youth feature. We're now going to solve the dropout 32 problem, juvenile 33 delinquency, by reinstituting something like the old CCC camps [Civilian Conservation Corps], and we're going to put our young people in these camps. But again we do some arithmetic, and we find that we're going to spend each year just on room and board for each young person we help 4,700 dollars a year. We can send them to Harvard for 2,700! Course, don't get me wrong. I'm not suggesting Harvard is the answer to juvenile delinquency.
But seriously, what are we doing to those we seek to help? Not too long ago, a judge called me here in Los Angeles. He told me of a young woman who'd come before him for a divorce. She had six children, was pregnant with her seventh. Under his questioning, she revealed her husband was a laborer 35 earning 250 dollars a month. She wanted a divorce to get an 80 dollar raise. She's eligible 36 for 330 dollars a month in the Aid to Dependent Children Program. She got the idea from two women in her neighborhood who'd already done that very thing.
Yet anytime you and I question the schemes of the do-gooders, we're denounced as being against their humanitarian goals. They say we're always "against" things -- we're never "for" anything.
Well, the trouble with our liberal friends is not that they're ignorant; it's just that they know so much that isn't so.
Now -- we're for a provision that destitution 37 should not follow unemployment by reason of old age, and to that end we've accepted Social Security as a step toward meeting the problem.
But we're against those entrusted 38 with this program when they practice deception 39 regarding its fiscal 40 shortcomings, when they charge that any criticism of the program means that we want to end payments to those people who depend on them for a livelihood 41. They've called it "insurance" to us in a hundred million pieces of literature. But then they appeared before the Supreme 42 Court and they testified it was a welfare program. They only use the term "insurance" to sell it to the people. And they said Social Security dues are a tax for the general use of the government, and the government has used that tax. There is no fund, because Robert Byers, the actuarial head, appeared before a congressional committee and admitted that Social Security as of this moment is 298 billion dollars in the hole. But he said there should be no cause for worry because as long as they have the power to tax, they could always take away from the people whatever they needed to bail 43 them out of trouble. And they're doing just that.
A young man, 21 years of age, working at an average salary -- his Social Security contribution would, in the open market, buy him an insurance policy that would guarantee 220 dollars a month at age 65. The government promises 127. He could live it up until he's 31 and then take out a policy that would pay more than Social Security. Now are we so lacking in business sense that we can't put this program on a sound basis, so that people who do require those payments will find they can get them when they're due -- that the cupboard isn't bare?
Barry Goldwater thinks we can.
At the same time, can't we introduce voluntary features that would permit a citizen who can do better on his own to be excused upon presentation of evidence that he had made provision for the non-earning years? Should we not allow a widow with children to work, and not lose the benefits supposedly paid for by her deceased husband? Shouldn't you and I be allowed to declare who our beneficiaries will be under this program, which we cannot do? I think we're for telling our senior citizens that no one in this country should be denied medical care because of a lack of funds. But I think we're against forcing all citizens, regardless of need, into a compulsory 44 government program, especially when we have such examples, as was announced last week, when France admitted that their Medicare program is now bankrupt. They've come to the end of the road.
In addition, was Barry Goldwater so irresponsible when he suggested that our government give up its program of deliberate, planned inflation, so that when you do get your Social Security pension, a dollar will buy a dollar's worth, and not 45 cents worth?
I think we're for an international organization, where the nations of the world can seek peace. But I think we're against subordinating American interests to an organization that has become so structurally 45 unsound that today you can muster 46 a two-thirds vote on the floor of the General Assembly among nations that represent less than 10 percent of the world's population. I think we're against the hypocrisy 47 of assailing 48 our allies because here and there they cling to a colony, while we engage in a conspiracy 49 of silence and never open our mouths about the millions of people enslaved in the Soviet 50 colonies in the satellite nations.
I think we're for aiding our allies by sharing of our material blessings 51 with those nations which share in our fundamental beliefs, but we're against doling 52 out money government to government, creating bureaucracy, if not socialism, all over the world. We set out to help 19 countries. We're helping 53 107. We've spent 146 billion dollars. With that money, we bought a 2 million dollar yacht for Haile Selassie. We bought dress suits for Greek undertakers, extra wives for Kenya[n] government officials. We bought a thousand TV sets for a place where they have no electricity. In the last six years, 52 nations have bought 7 billion dollars worth of our gold, and all 52 are receiving foreign aid from this country.
No government ever voluntarily reduces itself in size. So.governments' programs, once launched, never disappear.
Actually, a government bureau is the nearest thing to eternal life we'll ever see on this earth.
Federal employees -- federal employees number two and a half million; and federal, state, and local, one out of six of the nation's work force employed by government. These proliferating 54 bureaus with their thousands of regulations have cost us many of our constitutional safeguards. How many of us realize that today federal agents can invade a man's property without a warrant? They can impose a fine without a formal hearing, let alone a trial by jury? And they can seize and sell his property at auction 55 to enforce the payment of that fine. In Chico County, Arkansas, James Wier over-planted his rice allotment. The government obtained a 17,000 dollar judgment 56. And a U.S. marshal sold his 960-acre farm at auction. The government said it was necessary as a warning to others to make the system work.
Last February 19th at the University of Minnesota, Norman Thomas, six-times candidate for President on the Socialist 57 Party ticket, said, "If Barry Goldwater became President, he would stop the advance of socialism in the United States." I think that's exactly what he will do.
But as a former Democrat, I can tell you Norman Thomas isn't the only man who has drawn 58 this parallel to socialism with the present administration, because back in 1936, Mr. Democrat himself, Al Smith, the great American, came before the American people and charged that the leadership of his Party was taking the Party of Jefferson, Jackson, and Cleveland down the road under the banners of Marx, Lenin, and Stalin. And he walked away from his Party, and he never returned til the day he died -- because to this day, the leadership of that Party has been taking that Party, that honorable Party, down the road in the image of the labor 34 Socialist Party of England.
Now it doesn't require expropriation or confiscation 59 of private property or business to impose socialism on a people. What does it mean whether you hold the deed to the -- or the title to your business or property if the government holds the power of life and death over that business or property? And such machinery 60 already exists. The government can find some charge to bring against any concern it chooses to prosecute 61. Every businessman has his own tale of harassment 62. Somewhere a perversion 63 has taken place. Our natural, unalienable rights are now considered to be a dispensation of government, and freedom has never been so fragile, so close to slipping from our grasp as it is at this moment.
Our Democratic opponents seem unwilling 64 to debate these issues. They want to make you and I believe that this is a contest between two men -- that we're to choose just between two personalities 65.
Well what of this man that they would destroy -- and in destroying, they would destroy that which he represents, the ideas that you and I hold dear? Is he the brash and shallow and trigger-happy man they say he is? Well I've been privileged to know him "when." I knew him long before he ever dreamed of trying for high office, and I can tell you personally I've never known a man in my life I believed so incapable of doing a dishonest or dishonorable thing.
This is a man who, in his own business before he entered politics, instituted a profit-sharing plan before unions had ever thought of it. He put in health and medical insurance for all his employees. He took 50 percent of the profits before taxes and set up a retirement 66 program, a pension plan for all his employees. He sent monthly checks for life to an employee who was ill and couldn't work. He provides nursing care for the children of mothers who work in the stores. When Mexico was ravaged 67 by the floods in the Rio Grande, he climbed in his airplane and flew medicine and supplies down there.
An ex-GI told me how he met him. It was the week before Christmas during the Korean War, and he was at the Los Angeles airport trying to get a ride home to Arizona for Christmas. And he said that [there were] a lot of servicemen there and no seats available on the planes. And then a voice came over the loudspeaker and said, "Any men in uniform wanting a ride to Arizona, go to runway such-and-such," and they went down there, and there was a fellow named Barry Goldwater sitting in his plane. Every day in those weeks before Christmas, all day long, he'd load up the plane, fly it to Arizona, fly them to their homes, fly back over to get another load.
During the hectic 68 split-second timing 69 of a campaign, this is a man who took time out to sit beside an old friend who was dying of cancer. His campaign managers were understandably impatient, but he said, "There aren't many left who care what happens to her. I'd like her to know I care." This is a man who said to his 19-year-old son, "There is no foundation like the rock of honesty and fairness, and when you begin to build your life on that rock, with the cement of the faith in God that you have, then you have a real start." This is not a man who could carelessly send other people's sons to war. And that is the issue of this campaign that makes all the other problems I've discussed academic, unless we realize we're in a war that must be won.
Those who would trade our freedom for the soup kitchen of the welfare state have told us they have a utopian solution of peace without victory. They call their policy "accommodation." And they say if we'll only avoid any direct confrontation 70 with the enemy, he'll forget his evil ways and learn to love us. All who oppose them are indicted 71 as warmongers 72. They say we offer simple answers to complex problems. Well, perhaps there is a simple answer -- not an easy answer -- but simple: If you and I have the courage to tell our elected officials that we want our national policy based on what we know in our hearts is morally right.
We cannot buy our security, our freedom from the threat of the bomb by committing an immorality 73 so great as saying to a billion human beings now enslaved behind the Iron Curtain, "Give up your dreams of freedom because to save our own skins, we're willing to make a deal with your slave masters." Alexander Hamilton said, "A nation which can prefer disgrace to danger is prepared for a master, and deserves one." Now let's set the record straight. There's no argument over the choice between peace and war, but there's only one guaranteed way you can have peace -- and you can have it in the next second -- surrender.
Admittedly, there's a risk in any course we follow other than this, but every lesson of history tells us that the greater risk lies in appeasement 74, and this is the specter our well-meaning liberal friends refuse to face -- that their policy of accommodation is appeasement, and it gives no choice between peace and war, only between fight or surrender. If we continue to accommodate, continue to back and retreat, eventually we have to face the final demand -- the ultimatum 75. And what then -- when Nikita Khrushchev has told his people he knows what our answer will be? He has told them that we're retreating under the pressure of the Cold War, and someday when the time comes to deliver the final ultimatum, our surrender will be voluntary, because by that time we will have been weakened from within spiritually, morally, and economically. He believes this because from our side he's heard voices pleading for "peace at any price" or "better Red than dead," or as one commentator 76 put it, he'd rather "live on his knees than die on his feet." And therein lies the road to war, because those voices don't speak for the rest of us.
You and I know and do not believe that life is so dear and peace so sweet as to be purchased at the price of chains and slavery. If nothing in life is worth dying for, when did this begin -- just in the face of this enemy? Or should Moses have told the children of Israel to live in slavery under the pharaohs? Should Christ have refused the cross? Should the patriots 77 at Concord 78 Bridge have thrown down their guns and refused to fire the shot heard 'round the world? The martyrs 79 of history were not fools, and our honored dead who gave their lives to stop the advance of the Nazis 80 didn't die in vain. Where, then, is the road to peace? Well it's a simple answer after all.
You and I have the courage to say to our enemies, "There is a price we will not pay." "There is a point beyond which they must not advance." And this -- this is the meaning in the phrase of Barry Goldwater's "peace through strength." Winston Churchill said, "The destiny of man is not measured by material computations. When great forces are on the move in the world, we learn we're spirits -- not animals." And he said, "There's something going on in time and space, and beyond time and space, which, whether we like it or not, spells duty."
You and I have a rendezvous 81 with destiny.
We'll preserve for our children this, the last best hope of man on earth, or we'll sentence them to take the last step into a thousand years of darkness.
We will keep in mind and remember that Barry Goldwater has faith in us. He has faith that you and I have the ability and the dignity and the right to make our own decisions and determine our own destiny.
Thank you very much.
- Doctors certified him as insane. 医生证明他精神失常。
- The planes were certified airworthy. 飞机被证明适于航行。
- He transcribed two paragraphs from the book into his notebook. 他把书中的两段抄在笔记本上。
- Every telephone conversation will be recorded and transcribed. 所有电话交谈都将被录音并作全文转写。
- The Democrat and the Public criticized each other.民主党人和共和党人互相攻击。
- About two years later,he was defeated by Democrat Jimmy Carter.大约两年后,他被民主党人杰米卡特击败。
- The Treasury was opposed in principle to the proposals.财政部原则上反对这些提案。
- This book is a treasury of useful information.这本书是有价值的信息宝库。
- They heard him give a loud shout of astonishment.他们听见他惊奇地大叫一声。
- I was filled with astonishment at her strange action.我对她的奇怪举动不胜惊异。
- The power elite inside the government is controlling foreign policy.政府内部的一群握有实权的精英控制着对外政策。
- We have a political elite in this country.我们国家有一群政治精英。
- His sincerity added much more authority to the story.他的真诚更增加了故事的说服力。
- He tried hard to satisfy me of his sincerity.他竭力让我了解他的诚意。
- She has many humanitarian interests and contributes a lot to them.她拥有很多慈善事业,并作了很大的贡献。
- The British government has now suspended humanitarian aid to the area.英国政府现已暂停对这一地区的人道主义援助。
- The police could not find a motive for the murder.警察不能找到谋杀的动机。
- He had some motive in telling this fable.他讲这寓言故事是有用意的。
- We stood on the pier and watched as they embarked. 我们站在突码头上目送他们登船。
- She embarked on a discourse about the town's origins. 她开始讲本市的起源。
- She was quite explicit about why she left.她对自己离去的原因直言不讳。
- He avoids the explicit answer to us.他避免给我们明确的回答。
- There were accusations of plagiarism. 曾有过关于剽窃的指控。
- He remained unruffled by their accusations. 对于他们的指控他处之泰然。
- tax incentives to encourage savings 鼓励储蓄的税收措施
- Furthermore, subsidies provide incentives only for investments in equipment. 更有甚者,提供津贴仅是为鼓励增添设备的投资。 来自英汉非文学 - 环境法 - 环境法
- He would be incapable of committing such a cruel deed.他不会做出这么残忍的事。
- Computers are incapable of creative thought.计算机不会创造性地思维。
- I found the restrictions irksome. 我对那些限制感到很烦。
- a snaggle of restrictions 杂乱无章的种种限制
- Many factories are so antiquated they are not worth saving.很多工厂过于陈旧落后,已不值得挽救。
- A train of antiquated coaches was waiting for us at the siding.一列陈旧的火车在侧线上等着我们。
- She plans to take a course in applied linguistics.她打算学习应用语言学课程。
- This cream is best applied to the face at night.这种乳霜最好晚上擦脸用。
- Neither trickery nor coercion is used to secure confessions.既不诱供也不逼供。
- He paid the money under coercion.他被迫付钱。
- Sickness is a legitimate reason for asking for leave.生病是请假的一个正当的理由。
- That's a perfectly legitimate fear.怀有这种恐惧完全在情理之中。
- The export sector will aid the economic recovery. 出口产业将促进经济复苏。
- The enemy have attacked the British sector.敌人已进攻英国防区。
- The effect of this one is going to imprison you for life.而这件事的影响力则会让你被终身监禁。
- Dutch colonial authorities imprisoned him for his part in the independence movement.荷兰殖民当局因他参加独立运动而把他关押了起来。
- There was widespread condemnation of the invasion. 那次侵略遭到了人们普遍的谴责。
- The jury's condemnation was a shock to the suspect. 陪审团宣告有罪使嫌疑犯大为震惊。
- Her contract is coming up for renewal in the autumn.她的合同秋天就应该续签了。
- Easter eggs symbolize the renewal of life.复活蛋象征新生。
- The paint can be diluted with water to make a lighter shade. 这颜料可用水稀释以使色度淡一些。
- This pesticide is diluted with water and applied directly to the fields. 这种杀虫剂用水稀释后直接施用在田里。
- Although he was poor,he was quite generous to his needy friends.他虽穷,但对贫苦的朋友很慷慨。
- They awarded scholarships to needy students.他们给贫苦学生颁发奖学金。
- When he was depressed,he felt utterly divorced from reality.他心情沮丧时就感到完全脱离了现实。
- His mother was depressed by the sad news.这个坏消息使他的母亲意志消沉。
- I can't afford the vacation,for it would eat up my savings.我度不起假,那样会把我的积蓄用光的。
- By this time he had used up all his savings.到这时,他的存款已全部用完。
- After the earthquake only a few houses were left standing.地震过后只有几幢房屋还立着。
- They're standing out against any change in the law.他们坚决反对对法律做任何修改。
- Business depression usually causes misery among the working class.商业不景气常使工薪阶层受苦。
- He has rescued me from the mire of misery.他把我从苦海里救了出来。
- The baker bakes his bread in the bakery.面包师在面包房内烤面包。
- The baker frosted the cake with a mixture of sugar and whites of eggs.面包师在蛋糕上撒了一层白糖和蛋清的混合料。
- There is a high dropout rate from some college courses.有些大学课程的退出率很高。
- In the long haul,she'll regret having been a school dropout.她终归会后悔不该中途辍学。
- For a grown man he acted in a very juvenile manner.身为成年人,他的行为举止显得十分幼稚。
- Juvenile crime is increasing at a terrifying rate.青少年犯罪正在以惊人的速度增长。
- We are never late in satisfying him for his labor.我们从不延误付给他劳动报酬。
- He was completely spent after two weeks of hard labor.艰苦劳动两周后,他已经疲惫不堪了。
- Her husband had been a farm laborer.她丈夫以前是个农场雇工。
- He worked as a casual laborer and did not earn much.他当临时工,没有赚多少钱。
- He is an eligible young man.他是一个合格的年轻人。
- Helen married an eligible bachelor.海伦嫁给了一个中意的单身汉。
- The people lived in destitution. 民生凋敝。 来自《现代汉英综合大词典》
- His drinking led him to a life of destitution. 酗酒导致他生活贫穷。 来自辞典例句
- He entrusted the task to his nephew. 他把这任务托付给了他的侄儿。
- She was entrusted with the direction of the project. 她受委托负责这项计划。 来自《简明英汉词典》
- He admitted conspiring to obtain property by deception.他承认曾与人合谋骗取财产。
- He was jailed for two years for fraud and deception.他因为诈骗和欺诈入狱服刑两年。
- The increase of taxation is an important fiscal policy.增税是一项重要的财政政策。
- The government has two basic strategies of fiscal policy available.政府有两个可行的财政政策基本战略。
- Appropriate arrangements will be made for their work and livelihood.他们的工作和生活会得到妥善安排。
- My father gained a bare livelihood of family by his own hands.父亲靠自己的双手勉强维持家计。
- It was the supreme moment in his life.那是他一生中最重要的时刻。
- He handed up the indictment to the supreme court.他把起诉书送交最高法院。
- One of the prisoner's friends offered to bail him out.犯人的一个朋友答应保释他出来。
- She has been granted conditional bail.她被准予有条件保释。
- Is English a compulsory subject?英语是必修课吗?
- Compulsory schooling ends at sixteen.义务教育至16岁为止。
- The house roof was (structurally) unsound. 这屋顶(结构)不牢固。
- Pinhole on shot-hole damage is never structurally significant. 针孔和蛀洞所造成的危害对结构的影响不大。
- Go and muster all the men you can find.去集合所有你能找到的人。
- I had to muster my courage up to ask him that question.我必须鼓起勇气向他问那个问题。
- He railed against hypocrisy and greed.他痛斥伪善和贪婪的行为。
- He accused newspapers of hypocrisy in their treatment of the story.他指责了报纸在报道该新闻时的虚伪。
- Last-minute doubts were assailing her. 最后一分钟中的犹豫涌上心头。 来自辞典例句
- The pressing darkness increased the tension in every student's heart, assailing them with a nameless fear. 黑暗压下来,使每个人的心情变得更紧张。 来自汉英文学 - 家(1-26) - 家(1-26)
- The men were found guilty of conspiracy to murder.这些人被裁决犯有阴谋杀人罪。
- He claimed that it was all a conspiracy against him.他声称这一切都是一场针对他的阴谋。
- Zhukov was a marshal of the former Soviet Union.朱可夫是前苏联的一位元帅。
- Germany began to attack the Soviet Union in 1941.德国在1941年开始进攻苏联。
- Afflictions are sometimes blessings in disguise. 塞翁失马,焉知非福。 来自《简明英汉词典》
- We don't rely on blessings from Heaven. 我们不靠老天保佑。 来自《现代汉英综合大词典》
- "What are you doling?'she once demanded over the intercom. 有一次他母亲通过对讲机问他:“你在干什么? 来自英汉非文学 - 科学史
- Many scrollbars are quite parsimonious in doling out information to users. 很多滚动条都很吝啬,给用户传递的信息太少。 来自About Face 3交互设计精髓
- The poor children regularly pony up for a second helping of my hamburger. 那些可怜的孩子们总是要求我把我的汉堡包再给他们一份。
- By doing this, they may at times be helping to restore competition. 这样一来, 他在某些时候,有助于竞争的加强。
- Computerized data bases are proliferating fast. 计算机化的数据库正在激增。
- Crown galls are cancerous growths composed of disorganized and proliferating plant cells. 冠瘿是无组织的正在不断增殖的植物细胞所组成的癌状物。
- They've put the contents of their house up for auction.他们把房子里的东西全都拿去拍卖了。
- They bought a new minibus with the proceeds from the auction.他们用拍卖得来的钱买了一辆新面包车。
- The chairman flatters himself on his judgment of people.主席自认为他审视人比别人高明。
- He's a man of excellent judgment.他眼力过人。
- China is a socialist country,and a developing country as well.中国是一个社会主义国家,也是一个发展中国家。
- His father was an ardent socialist.他父亲是一个热情的社会主义者。
- All the characters in the story are drawn from life.故事中的所有人物都取材于生活。
- Her gaze was drawn irresistibly to the scene outside.她的目光禁不住被外面的风景所吸引。
- Confiscation of the property of all emigrants and rebels. 没收一切流亡分子和叛乱分子的财产。 来自英汉非文学 - 共产党宣言
- Confiscation of smuggled property is part of the penalty for certain offences. 没收走私财产是对某些犯罪予以惩罚的一部分。
- Has the machinery been put up ready for the broadcast?广播器材安装完毕了吗?
- Machinery ought to be well maintained all the time.机器应该随时注意维护。
- I am trying my best to prosecute my duties.我正在尽力履行我的职责。
- Is there enough evidence to prosecute?有没有起诉的足够证据?
- She often got telephone harassment at night these days.这些天她经常在夜晚受到电话骚扰。
- The company prohibits any form of harassment.公司禁止任何形式的骚扰行为。
- In its most general sense,corruption means the perversion or abandonment.就其最一般的意义上说,舞弊就是堕落,就是背离准则。
- Her account was a perversion of the truth.她所讲的歪曲了事实。
- The natives were unwilling to be bent by colonial power.土著居民不愿受殖民势力的摆布。
- His tightfisted employer was unwilling to give him a raise.他那吝啬的雇主不肯给他加薪。
- There seemed to be a degree of personalities in her remarks.她话里有些人身攻击的成分。
- Personalities are not in good taste in general conversation.在一般的谈话中诽谤他人是不高尚的。
- She wanted to enjoy her retirement without being beset by financial worries.她想享受退休生活而不必为金钱担忧。
- I have to put everything away for my retirement.我必须把一切都积蓄起来以便退休后用。
- a country ravaged by civil war 遭受内战重创的国家
- The whole area was ravaged by forest fires. 森林火灾使整个地区荒废了。
- I spent a very hectic Sunday.我度过了一个忙乱的星期天。
- The two days we spent there were enjoyable but hectic.我们在那里度过的两天愉快但闹哄哄的。
- The timing of the meeting is not convenient.会议的时间安排不合适。
- The timing of our statement is very opportune.我们发表声明选择的时机很恰当。
- We can't risk another confrontation with the union.我们不能冒再次同工会对抗的危险。
- After years of confrontation,they finally have achieved a modus vivendi.在对抗很长时间后,他们最后达成安宁生存的非正式协议。
- The senator was indicted for murder. 那位参议员被控犯谋杀罪。
- He was indicted by a grand jury on two counts of murder. 他被大陪审团以两项谋杀罪名起诉。
- The speech hits out at warmongers. 演讲猛烈地抨击了战争贩子。 来自《简明英汉词典》
- The imperialist warmongers stand condemned by the people of the whole world. 帝国主义的战争贩子受到全世界人民的谴责。 来自互联网
- All the churchmen have preached against immorality. 所有牧师都讲道反对不道德的行为。
- Where the European sees immorality and lawlessness, strict law rules in reality. 在欧洲人视为不道德和无规则的地方,事实上都盛行着一种严格的规则。 来自英汉非文学 - 家庭、私有制和国家的起源
- Music is an appeasement to shattered nerves. 音乐可抚慰受重创的神经。
- There can be no appeasement with ruthlessness. 对残暴行为是不能姑息的。 来自演讲部分
- This time the proposal was couched as an ultimatum.这一次该提议是以最后通牒的形式提出来的。
- The cabinet met today to discuss how to respond to the ultimatum.内阁今天开会商量如何应对这道最后通牒。
- He is a good commentator because he can get across the game.他能简单地解说这场比赛,是个好的解说者。
- The commentator made a big mistake during the live broadcast.在直播节目中评论员犯了个大错误。
- Abraham Lincoln was a fine type of the American patriots. 亚伯拉罕·林肯是美国爱国者的优秀典型。
- These patriots would fight to death before they surrendered. 这些爱国者宁愿战斗到死,也不愿投降。
- These states had lived in concord for centuries.这些国家几个世纪以来一直和睦相处。
- His speech did nothing for racial concord.他的讲话对种族和谐没有作用。
- the early Christian martyrs 早期基督教殉道者
- They paid their respects to the revolutionary martyrs. 他们向革命烈士致哀。 来自《现代汉英综合大词典》
- The Nazis worked them over with gun butts. 纳粹分子用枪托毒打他们。 来自《简明英汉词典》
- The Nazis were responsible for the mass murder of Jews during World War Ⅱ. 纳粹必须为第二次世界大战中对犹太人的大屠杀负责。 来自《简明英汉词典》
- She made the rendezvous with only minutes to spare.她还差几分钟时才来赴约。
- I have a rendezvous with Peter at a restaurant on the harbour.我和彼得在海港的一个餐馆有个约会。