克林顿和奥巴马领导力比较
领导科学——罗斯福
• 三、自信
• 追随者信赖领导者来解除疑虑，因此领导 者必须表现出自信，使得追随者相信目标 和方向的正确性
• 在罗斯福首次履任总统的1933年初，正值经济大萧条的风 暴席卷美国的时候，到处是失业、破产、倒闭、暴跌，到 处可见美国的痛苦、恐惧和绝望。罗斯福却表现出一种压 倒一切的自信，他在宣誓就职时发表了一篇富有激情的演 说，告诉人们：我们惟一害怕的就是害怕本身。在1933年 3月4日那个阴冷的下午，新总统的决心和轻松愉快的乐观 态度，“点燃了举国同心同德的新精神之火”。提出了旨 在实现国家复兴和对外睦邻友好的施政方针。为了推行新 政，罗斯福将一批具有自由主义色彩的律师、专家与学者 组成智囊团，征询方针政策问题；通过"炉边谈话"方式， 密切与人民群众的联系，与反对新政的最高法院进行坚决 的斗争并成功地改组最高法院。
历史一刻
二战期间与丘吉尔（左）、斯大林（右） 在雅尔塔会议上。
罗斯福很少坐在轮椅上让人拍 照，这是现存的一幅。
美国最佳总统评选罗斯福居首 奥巴马输给克林顿
• 据“中央社”报道，近日，美国前总统富兰克林•罗斯福再度于纽约西也纳学 院的最佳总统调查中排名第一，而目前就职未满18个月的奥巴马则排在第15 名。 据报道，西也纳学院2日表示，该校5度针对美国总统进行调查，富兰克林•罗 斯福均荣登最佳总统榜首。 此项评选调查了238名历史学家、总统学者与政治学家。结果显示，西奥多• 罗斯福、林肯、华盛顿与杰斐逊这4张刻在总统山上的脸孔，都不敌带领美国 经历两次世界大战和经济大萧条的富兰克林•罗斯福。 西也纳学院统计学教授与该研究发起人之一隆斯楚姆说：“近30年来，前5名 都被相同的5位总统占据，只有些许变动。” 奥巴马今年首次被纳入评选，他的支持率令人意外，跻身前1/3，超越排名第 18的里根。 不过，就仍在世的民主党籍总统而言，排名最高的是排在第13的克林顿，他 是美国史上2名任内被弹劾的总统之一。 另外，第17届总统约翰逊排名最末。
克林顿提名奥巴马演讲全文(英文)
克林顿提名奥巴马演讲全文We're here to nominate a President, and I've got one in mind.I want to nominate a man whose own life has known its fair share of adversity and uncertainty. A man who ran for President to change the course of an already weak economy and then just six weeks before the election, saw it suffer the biggest collapse since the Great Depression. A man who stopped the slide into depression and put us on the long road to recovery, knowing all the while that no matter how many jobs were created and saved, there were still millions more waiting, trying to feed their children and keep their hopes alive.I want to nominate a man cool on the outside but burning for America on the inside. A man who believes we can build a new American Dream economy driven by innovation and creativity, education and cooperation. A man who had the good sense to marry Michelle Obama.I want Barack Obama to be the next President of the United States and I proudly nominate him as the standard bearer of the Democratic Party.In Tampa, we heard a lot of talk about how the President and the Democrats don't believe in free enterprise and individual initiative, how we want everyone to be dependent on the government, how bad we are for the economy.The Republican narrative is that all of us who amount to anything are completely self-made. One of our greatest Democratic Chairmen, Bob Strauss, used to say that every politician wants you to believe he was born in a log cabin he built himself, but it ain't so.We Democrats think the country works better with a strong middle class, real opportunities for poor people to work their way into it and a relentless focus on the future, with business and government working together to promote growth and broadly shared prosperity. We think "we're all in this together" is a better philosophy than "you're on your own."Who's right? Well since 1961, the Republicans have held the White House 28 years, the Democrats 24. In those 52 years, our economy produced 66 million private sector jobs. What's the jobs score? Republicans 24 million, Democrats 42 million!It turns out that advancing equal opportunity and economic empowerment is both morally right and good economics,because discrimination, poverty and ignorance restrict growth, while investments in education, infrastructure and scientific and technological research increase it, creating more good jobs and new wealth for all of us.Though I often disagree with Republicans, I never learned to hate them the way the far right that now controls their party seems to hate President Obama and the Democrats. After all, President Eisenhower sent federal troops to my home state to integrate Little Rock Central High and built the interstate highway system. And as governor, I worked with President Reagan on welfare reform and with President George H.W. Bush on national education goals.I am grateful to President George W. Bush for PEPFAR, which is saving the lives of millions of people in poor countries and to both Presidents Bush for the work we've done together after the South Asia tsunami, Hurricane Katrina and the Haitian earthquake.Through my foundation, in America and around the world, I work with Democrats, Republicans and Independents who are focused on solving problems and seizing opportunities, not fighting each other.When times are tough, constant conflict may be good politics but in the real world, cooperation works better. After all, nobody's right all the time, and a broken clock is right twice a day. All of us are destined to live our lives between those two extremes. Unfortunately, the faction that now dominates the Republican Party doesn't see it that way. They think government is the enemy, and compromise is weakness.One of the main reasons America should re-elect President Obama is that he is still committed to cooperation. He appointed Republican Secretaries of Defense, the Army and Transportation. He appointed a Vice President who ran against him in 2008, and trusted him to oversee the successful end of the war in Iraq and the implementation of the recovery act. And Joe Biden did a great job with both. He appointed Cabinet members who supported Hillary in the primaries. Heck, he even appointed Hillary! I'm so proud of her and grateful to our entire national security team for all they've done to make us safer and stronger and to build a world with more partners and fewer enemies. I'm also grateful to the young men and women who serve our country in the military and to Michelle Obama and Jill Biden for supporting military families when their loved ones are overseas and for helping our veterans, when they come home bearing thewounds of war, or needing help with education, housing, and jobs.President Obama's record on national security is a tribute to his strength, and judgment, and to his preference for inclusion and partnership over partisanship.He also tried to work with Congressional Republicans on Health Care, debt reduction, and jobs, but that didn't work out so well. Probably because, as the Senate Republican leader, in a remarkable moment of candor, said two years before the election, their number one priority was not to put America back to work, but to put President Obama out of work. Senator, I hate to break it to you, but we're going to keep President Obama on the job!In Tampa, the Republican argument against the President's re-election was pretty simple: we left him a total mess, he hasn't cleaned it up fast enough, so fire him and put us back in.In order to look like an acceptable alternative to President Obama, they couldn't say much about the ideas they have offered over the last two years. You see they want to go back to the same old policies that got us into trouble in the first place: to cut taxes for high income Americans even more than PresidentBush did; to get rid of those pesky financial regulations designed to prevent another crash and prohibit future bailouts; to increase defense spending two trillion dollars more than the Pentagon has requested without saying what they'll spend the money on; to make enormous cuts in the rest of the budget, especially programs that help the middle class and poor kids. As another President once said – there they go again.I like the argument for President Obama's re-election a lot better. He inherited a deeply damaged economy, put a floor under the crash, began the long hard road to recovery, and laid the foundation for a modern, more well-balanced economy that will produce millions of good new jobs, vibrant new businesses, and lots of new wealth for the innovators. Are we where we want to be? No. Is the President satisfied? No. Are we better off than we were when he took office, with an economy in free fall, losing 750,000 jobs a month. The answer is YES.I understand the challenge we face. I know many Americans are still angry and frustrated with the economy. Though employment is growing, banks are beginning to lend and even housing prices are picking up a bit, too many people don't feel it.I experienced the same thing in 1994 and early 1995. Our policies were working and the economy was growing but most people didn't feel it yet. By 1996, the economy was roaring, halfway through the longest peacetime expansion in American history.President Obama started with a much weaker economy than I did. No President – not me or any of my predecessors could have repaired all the damage in just four years. But conditions are improving and if you'll renew the President's contract you will feel it.I believe that with all my heart.President Obama's approach embodies the values, the ideas, and the direction America must take to build a 21st century version of the American Dream in a nation of shared opportunities, shared prosperity and shared responsibilities.So back to the story. In 2010, as the President's recovery program kicked in, the job losses stopped and things began to turn around.The Recovery Act saved and created millions of jobs and cut taxes for 95% of the American people. In the last 29 months the economy has produced about 4.5 million private sector jobs. Butlast year, the Republicans blocked the President's jobs plan costing the economy more than a million new jobs. So here's another jobs score: President Obama plus 4.5 million, Congressional Republicans zero.Over that same period, more than more than 500,000 manufacturing jobs have been created under President Obama –the first time manufacturing jobs have increased since the 1990s.The auto industry restructuring worked. It saved more than a million jobs, not just at GM, Chrysler and their dealerships, but in auto parts manufacturing all over the country. That's why even auto-makers that weren't part of the deal supported it. They needed to save the suppliers too. Like I said, we're all in this together.Now there are 250,000 more people working in the auto industry than the day the companies were restructured. Governor Romney opposed the plan to save GM and Chrysler. So here's another jobs score: Obama two hundred and fifty thousand, Romney, zero.The agreement the administration made with management, labor and environmental groups to double car mileage over thenext few years is another good deal: it will cut your gas bill in half, make us more energy independent, cut greenhouse gas emissions, and add another 500,000 good jobs.President Obama's "all of the above" energy plan is helping too – the boom in oil and gas production combined with greater energy efficiency has driven oil imports to a near 20 year low and natural gas production to an all time high. Renewable energy production has also doubled.We do need more new jobs, lots of them, but there are already more than three million jobs open and unfilled in America today, mostly because the applicants don't have the required skills. We have to prepare more Americans for the new jobs that are being created in a world fueled by new technology. That's why investments in our people are more important than ever. The President has supported community colleges and employers in working together to train people for open jobs in their communities. And, after a decade in which exploding college costs have increased the drop-out rate so much that we've fallen to 16th in the world in the percentage of our young adults with college degrees, his student loan reform lowers the cost of federal student loans and even more important, gives students the right to repay the loans as a fixed percentage oftheir incomes for up to 20 years. That means no one will have to drop-out of college for fear they can't repay their debt, and no one will have to turn down a job, as a teacher, a police officer or a small town doctor because it doesn't pay enough to make the debt payments. This will change the future for young Americans.I know we're better off because President Obama made these decisions.That brings me to health care.The Republicans call it Obamacare and say it's a government takeover of health care that they'll repeal. Are they right? Let's look at what's happened so far. Individuals and businesses have secured more than a billion dollars in refunds from their insurance premiums because the new law requires 80% to 85% of your premiums to be spent on health care, not profits or promotion. Other insurance companies have lowered their rates to meet the requirement. More than 3 million young people between 19 and 25 are insured for the first time because their parents can now carry them on family policies. Millions of seniors are receiving preventive care including breast cancer screenings and tests for heart problems. Soon the insurance companies, not the government, will have millions of new customers many ofthem middle class people with pre-existing conditions. And for the last two years, health care spending has grown under 4%, for the first time in 50 years.So are we all better off because President Obama fought for it and passed it? You bet we are.There were two other attacks on the President in Tampa that deserve an answer. Both Governor Romney and Congressman Ryan attacked the President for allege dly robbing Medicare of 716 billion dollars. Here's what really happened. There were no cuts to benefits. None. What the President did was save money by cutting unwarranted subsidies to providers and insurance companies that weren't making people any healthier. He used the saving to close the donut hole in the Medicare drug program, and to add eight years to the life of the Medicare Trust Fund. It's now solvent until 2024. So President Obama and the Democrats didn't weaken Medicare, they strengthened it.When Congressman Ryan looked into the TV camera and attacked President Obama's "biggest coldest power play" in raiding Medicare, I didn't know whether to laugh or cry. You see, that 716 billion dollars is exactly the same amount of Medicare savings Congressman Ryan had in his own budget.At least on this one, Governor Romney's been consistent. He wants to repeal the savings and give the money back to the insurance companies, re-open the donut hole and force seniors to pay more for drugs, and reduce the life of the Medicare Trust Fund by eight years. So now if he's elected and does what he promised Medicare will go broke by 2016. If that happens, you won't have to wait until their voucher program to begins in 2023 to see the end Medicare as we know it.But it gets worse. They also want to block grant Medicaid and cut it by a third over the coming decade. Of course, that will hurt poor kids, but that's not all. Almost two-thirds of Medicaid is spent on nursing home care for seniors and on people with disabilities, including kids from middle class families, with special needs like, Downs syndrome or Autism. I don't know how those families are going to deal with it. We can't let it happen.Now let's look at the Republican charge that President Obama wants to weaken the work requirements in the welfare reform bill I signed that moved millions of people from welfare to work.Here's what happened. When some Republican governors asked to try new ways to put people on welfare back to work, theObama Administration said they would only do it if they had a credible plan to increase employment by 20%. You hear that? More work. So the claim that President Obama weakened welfare reform's work requirement is just not true. But they keep running ads on it. As their campaign pollster said "we're not going to let our campaign be dictated by fact checkers." Now that is true. I couldn't have said it better myself – I just hope you remember that every time you see the ad.Let's talk about the debt. We have to deal with it or it will deal with us. President Obama has offered a plan with 4 trillion dollars in debt reduction over a decade, with two and a half dollars of spending reductions for every one dollar of revenue increases, and tight controls on future spending. It's the kind of balanced approach proposed by the bipartisan Simpson-Bowles commission.I think the President's plan is better than the Romney plan, because the Romney plan fails the first test of fiscal responsibility: The numbers don't add up.It's supposed to be a debt reduction plan but it begins with five trillion dollars in tax cuts over a ten-year period. That makes the debt hole bigger before they even start to dig out. They saythey'll make it up by eliminating loopholes in the tax code. When you ask "which loopholes and how much?," they say "See me after the election on that." People ask me all the time how we delivered four surplus budgets. What new ideas did we bring? I always give a one-word answer: arithmetic. If they stay with a 5 trillion dollar tax cut in a debt reduction plan – the – arithmetic tells us that one of three things will happen: 1) they'll have to eliminate so many deductions like the ones for home mortgages and charitable giving that middle class families will see their tax bill go up two thousand dollars year while people making over 3 million dollars a year get will still get a 250,000 dollar tax cut; or 2) they'll have to cut so much spending that they'll obliterate the budget for our national parks, for ensuring clean air, clean water, safe food, safe air travel; or they'll cut way back on Pell Grants, college loans, early childhood education and other programs that help middle class families and poor children, not to mention cutting investments in roads, bridges, science, technology and medical research; or 3) they'll do what they've been doing for thirty plus years now – cut taxes more than they cut spending, explode the debt, and weaken the economy. Remember, Republican economic policies quadrupled the debt before I tookoffice and doubled it after I left. We simply can't afford to double-down on trickle-down.President Obama's plan cuts the debt, honors our values, and brightens the future for our children, our families and our nation.My fellow Americans, you have to decide what kind of country you want to live in. If you want a you're on your own, winner take all society you should support the Republican ticket. If you want a country of shared opportunities and shared responsibilities – a "we're all in it together" society, you should vote for Barack Obama and Joe Biden. If you want every American to vote and you think its wrong to change voting procedures just to reduce the turnout of younger, poorer, minority and disabled voters, you should support Barack Obama. If you think the President was right to open the doors of American opportunity to young immigrants brought here as children who want to go to college or serve in the military, you should vote for Barack Obama. If you want a future of shared prosperity, where the middle class is growing and poverty is declining, where the American Dream is alive and well, and where the United States remains the leading force for peace and prosperity in a highly competitive world, you should vote forBarack Obama. I love our country – and I know we're coming back. For more than 200 years, through every crisis, we've always come out stronger than we went in. And we will again as long as we do it together. We champion the cause for which our founders pledged their lives, their fortunes, their sacred honor –to form a more perfect union.If that's what you believe, if that's what you want, we have to re-elect President Barack Obama.God Bless You – God Bless America.。
隐藏在美国背后的五大家族,真相惊人
美国政治的周期性现象——从最初控制美国的60个家族，到现在已成标签的美国版“四大家族”乃至新近形成的“五大家族”，家族政治的隐性影响力，从这个国家建立之初就已经被接受，存在于美国独特的政治生态当中超过百年。
这种存在与美国对外展示的民主形象是如此迥异，但这种长期形成的特殊制度，才是美国政治最真实的棱镜面之一。
如果用一句话来形容政治豪门控制美国政治的百年历史，就是美国人用一种山寨自英国的姿态，通过美国式的讨价还价，形成一笔笔看似公平公开，但不乏偷步暗算的交易。
美国的政治运行规则许多直接来源于英国，这一点少有疑问。
许多史料研究表明，美国家族政治的形成，也直接与英国特有的贵族政治有关。
“政治流淌在一个家庭的血液中，就像煤垢永存在矿工家族的指甲缝里一样。
”“记得我21岁时，倘若有人对我说，我无法成为议会一员，我会觉得那是天大的笑话，因为我是来自那样的家庭。
”以上两段独白分别出自英国女议员、下院前议长贝蒂·布思罗伊德，以及英国前首相丘吉尔。
相似的思维也被美国开国领袖们所认同。
虽然美国的开国元勋一致认为政府不应在一个家族手中代代相传，但是他们并不反对将政治作为家族事务。
斯坦福大学的历史学家戴维·肯尼迪也认为，开国元勋“期望‘天生的贵族’或他们所谓的‘弗吉尼亚最早移民后裔的家族’能担当可以胜任的职务”。
所以在这种时代背景下，美国自建国之后很长一段时间，总统或主要的政府高层领导人，最初都几乎出现在组成美国最初的13个州的政治家族当中。
到后来陆续形成了60个政治家族——1937年，费尔南德·伦德伯格就在《美国六十个家族》一书中，阐述美国由60个最有权势的家族统治。
于是，亚当斯、汉密尔顿、塔夫脱、哈里森、罗斯福、肯尼迪，这些姓氏伴随着美国的200多年历史。
值得注意的是，这种政治豪门的力量角逐，在1952年大选，也就是二战之后美国的第一次大选中发生过巨大变化。
当时出身豪门的杜鲁门卸任，以平民身份奋斗到二战盟军总司令的艾森豪威尔接棒——以1952年大选为分野，此前的美国政坛，被称为“古典政治时代”，总统绝对是新英格兰的白人世家(信奉基督教新教，来自盎格鲁-撒克逊血统)才有资格候选，而且选上谁，是门阀们关门博弈的结果。
克林顿的演说：一个拥抱的力量
Bill Clinton's Democratic Convention Speech: The Power of a Hug 克林顿的演说：一个拥抱的力量文章出自：纽约客Clinton started with a favorite subject of his: the coöperation that he sees among parties trying to solve problems around the world through his work at the Clinton Global Initiative. However, here in the U.S., despite President Obama’s best effo rts, an unreasonable and ideological political faction has made coöperation impossible. From there he pivoted to recent history, making a seemingly dispassionate case for why no President, even Clinton himself, could ever have repaired in four years all the damage Obama found when he arrived in the White House in 2009. But despite that, Obama’s record, told with excruciating but powerfully persuasiv e detail, has been far better than is popularly understood. Now he just needs his contract renewed to finish the job. Clinton made it all sound so simple.This was the anti-Michelle speech. While she naturally gave personal testimony about Barack Obama’s character and urged voters to support him on that basis, in the story Clinton told Obama was an ephemeral figure. There were few personal details or anecdotes about the President because Clinton isn’t particularly close to Obama. It was a speech about facts and three and a half years of decisions made and outcomes achieved. By the end of it, the only logical conclusion, Clinton argued, is that Obama would do a better job than the alternative.In a sense, Clinton’s reluctance to embrace Obama personally, and his own fraught history with the President, which I explore d in a piece for The New Yorker this week, makes him the ideal spokesman to appeal to those skeptical former Obama voters that his campaign is trying to win back. In an interview with Brian Williams earlier in the day, Clinton said of Obama, “We haven’t be en closefriends a long time or anything like tha t, but he knows that I support him.” I found it an amazingly honest statement considering that politicians often go out of their way to exaggerate their fondness for one another.And it was exactly their lack of personal chemistry and failure to become “close friends” that gave Clinton’s speech its lift. A subtext of the address was that, just like Bill Clinton, wavering voters need not love Obama to understand that he’s a better choice tha n Romney. When the two Presidents came together and hugged after the speech was (finally) over, the distance between them made their embrace all the more powerful.For more of The New Yorker’s convention coverage, visit The Political Scene. You can also read Ryan Lizza on Julián Castro’s keynote address and the relations hip between President Obama and Bill Clinton; John Cassidy on Michelle Obama’s convention speech and Obama’s and Paul Ryan’s false statements about the economy; Amy Davidson on what Bill Clinton didn’t say; the First Lady’s sp eech, the gay-rights platform, and whether Democrats are better off than they were four years ago; Hendrik Hertzberg on renewed Democratic enthusiasm; and Alex Koppelman on Obama and the American Dream.Photograph by Alex Wong/Getty Images.克林顿的演说：一个拥抱的力量克林顿的口才无语伦比，其演说才能也极具天赋，看看在前几天的民主党全国大会的演讲上，他会带给我们什么呢？克林顿的演说：一个拥抱的力量作者：Ryan Lizza我认为，无论从哪方面来讲，在几天前晚上的民主党全国大会上，相比朱利安•卡斯特罗可谓弱暴了的表现，克林顿的演说堪称完美。
奥巴马将如何改变美国？
奥巴马如何改变美国2009-01-13 17:04分类：默认分类字号：大中小我们如何从演讲中去认识奥巴马？他的上台是否能够挽救美国经济?他的经济政策对中国有着什么样的影响? 在奥巴马的执政纲要中他强调的是改变，而他发表的《更完美的联邦》演讲和林肯的就职宣言是一样的伟大！奥巴马是一个什么样的人？奥巴马是一个非常深奥的一个人,我们把他看的太简单了,我举个例子, 他从竟选的第一天到他当选总统值得欢呼的那一天,我没有看他笑过,我也没有看他哭过,也就是他的喜怒不形于色,随时随地都是非常稳定的个性,当他受到别人攻击的时候,包括别人攻击他的牧师,他的反映简直让我感到震惊,像他这种冷酷的性格,如果他选不上总统话,他做基金经理最适合.尤其在中国做基金经理最适合.而且这个人很幽默,上次他去美国南达科他州,有四个总统雕像在那里,记者问他:你想不想当第五个雕像呀?他想了半天说:不行,我的耳朵太大,可能挂不住.另外他曾经遭到一个最大的挫败.那就是他的一个黑人牧师,像疯子一样的说“911事件是上帝对于美国的诅咒！”这个牧师与奥巴马的关系非常好,他的两个女儿信基督教的时候也是这个牧师替他洗礼的.但是这个牧师非常痛恨美国白人的牧师,天天在骂,说非洲的爱滋病是美国人带进去的. 911事件是上帝对于美国的诅咒!等等之类的话, 等到奥巴马出来竞选总统的时候,就被对方给突然宣布出来,奥巴马是如何来处理这个问题的?按照我们一般人的做法,就会说“我错了, 对不起.....!我本来就讨厌那个牧师…..!切断关系,划清界线!”。
全世界的人都期望他会开个记者招待会,进行道歉。
可是他没有,奥巴马3月18号在费城,就是我读书的那个地方,奥巴马发表一篇文章叫做《更完美的联邦》.他开头的第一名话就是“对不起,我不能跟那个黑人牧师切断关系”。
这话讲出来之后,全场愣了他说“正如我不能切断我和我白人外祖母的关系是一样的,从小我父母离异.我爸爸是黑人,我妈妈是白人,所以我的外祖母从小把我带大,她是个白人,她将一生的爱都放在我身上,可是我的外祖母也告诉过我,她最害怕上街的时候,有黑人在她旁边走过,她怕黑人抢他,而且我的外祖母也常常告诉我她有多痛恨黑人,因此我要接受我的外祖母,我就要接受我的牧师,因为那就是美国的一部分,我不可能脱离的.但是这个牧师最大的错误不是非常偏激的种族言论,而是他忘了美国是一个不断进步的国家,因此美国是一个会改变的国家”。
奥巴马为什么能当上总统
奥巴马为什么能当上总统挪威诺贝尔委员会2009年诺贝尔和平奖授予奥巴马，以表彰他在促进国际外交和各国人民合作所作出的非凡努力。
为什么奥巴马能当上总统，以下就是店铺做的整理，希望对你们有用。
奥巴马能当上总统的原因一来他较年轻而且他的参政计划很多年轻人支持二者他是非洲裔的美国人三来一般总统是两大政党轮流来而且人们认为布什做的不好然而麦凯恩的政策基本上与布什一样并且经济危机的问题所以美国人希望有一个改变奥巴马的个人介绍贝拉克·侯赛因·奥巴马(Barack Hussein Obama)[1]，1961年8月4日出生于美国夏威夷州檀香山，美国民主党籍政治家，第44任美国总统，为美国历史上第一位非洲裔总统。
1991年，奥巴马以优等生荣誉从哈佛法学院毕业，而后在著名的芝加哥大学法学院教授宪法长达12年(1992年-2004年)。
2008年11月4日，正式当选为美国总统。
2009年10月9日，获得诺贝尔委员会颁发的诺贝尔和平奖。
2012年11月6日，第57届美国总统大选中，奥巴马击败共和党候选人罗姆尼，成功连任。
2014年11月10日，奥巴马出席亚太经合组织领导人非正式会议并对中国进行国事访问;12月，奥巴马参加由非盈利组织举办的编程大会，成美国史上首位会编程总统。
11月4日名列《福布斯》全球最有权力人物排行榜第三。
12月22日，奥巴马在最受欢迎的领导人排名中名列第一。
奥巴马的政坛经历总统竞选第一任期2008年11月4日，美国各大电视网公布的初步统计结果显示，美国民主党总统候选人、伊利诺伊州国会参议员贝拉克·奥巴马在2008年11月4日举行的总统选举中击败共和党对手、亚利桑那州国会参议员麦凯恩，当选第44任(第56届)美国总统已成定局。
初步统计结果，奥巴马已获得297张选举人票，超过当选总统所需的270张选举人票;麦凯恩仅获得145张选举人票。
成功当选美国第44任总统后的奥巴马在芝加哥发表讲话，表示“这是属于大家的胜利(this is your victory)，美国开始改变(change has come to America)”。
2011美国务卿克林顿与总统奥巴马向海外美国人发表的2011年国庆节致辞
2011美国国务卿克林顿与总统奥巴马向海外美国人发表的2011年国庆节致辞Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton:美国国务卿希拉里·罗德海姆·克林顿：Hello, everyone, and happy Independence Day.诸位好，祝各位独立纪念日快乐。
At home, the Fourth of July means fireworks, barbeques, family and friends. But for all of you Americans living and working overseas, this day takes on a whole new meaning. It’s an opportunity to share our culture and our spirit, to open our doors and welcome new friends and partners. I want to thank you for representing the American people so well on this and every other day.在国内，7月4日意味着燃放烟火、烧烤野餐、家人和朋友。
但对你们所有在海外生活和工作的美国人来说，这一天具有一层新的意义。
这一天提供了一个机会，可以分享我们的文化和我们的精神，敞开我们的大门，欢迎新朋友和新伙伴。
我感谢你们成为美国人民的优秀代表，不仅在这一天，而且天天如此。
Today is a time to celebrate the birth of our nation and the values that have sustained us for 235 years — equality, opportunity, the rights enshrined in our founding documents. This year, we have been reminded again that these are not just American values; they are truly universal values. And as people across North Africa, the Middle East and around the world risk their lives to claim these universal human rights and freedoms, Americans are proud to stand with them. We are united by our common hopes and aspirations for a better world.今天是值得纪念的日子，庆祝我国诞生和维系我们235年之久的价值观——建国文献阐明的平等、机会和权利。
【名人故事】克林顿成近40年来最富裕美国总统
【名人故事】克林顿成近40年来最富裕美国总统
,
克林顿
据媒体5月31日报道，克林顿是近40年来最富裕的美国总统，他卸任后在全球巡回
演说带来巨额收入，出版自传先收1500万美元订金，估计其身家高达3800万美元，远高
于现任总统奥巴马，奥巴马家财仅500万美元。
1993年1月，克林顿从阿肯色州――美国出名的穷乡僻壤的州长官邸搬进了白宫，当时他和妻子希拉里口袋里没几个钱。
8年后离开白宫时，夫妻俩的财产不但没有增加，反
而变成了负数――因为“白水”地产官司、莱温斯基丑闻调查和两人的竞选活动，他们欠
下了一屁股债务，据估计总额高达1200万美元。
神奇的是，退休后，克林顿的身家却迅速膨胀，不仅还清了所有欠债，而且摇身变成
一个千万富豪。
他们的赚钱途径除了离开白宫不久后各自签署的数百万美元出书合同之外，最重要的一项就是克林顿到处发表演讲的收费。
克林顿的收费演讲足迹遍布全球六大洲的
数十个国家，听众大多是商界人士，每场收费几乎都在10万美元以上。
仅2021年10月
18日一天，在加拿大多伦多市发表的两场演讲就为他赚进47.5万美元，比他当总统时辛
苦一年挣的薪水高出一倍多。
不过，在过去43任美国总统之中，财富称冠的是第1任总统华盛顿，他不但是一众
总统中薪酬最高──薪金占1789年美国财政预算总值的2%，也是精明的奴隶主，在弗吉
尼亚州拥有8000英亩农场、300名奴隶，种植烟草和酿制威士忌酒，并从太太的家族继承大片土地。
经通胀调整后，估计其家财净值高达 5.25亿美元。
感谢您的阅读，祝您生活愉快。
- 1、下载文档前请自行甄别文档内容的完整性，平台不提供额外的编辑、内容补充、找答案等附加服务。
- 2、"仅部分预览"的文档,不可在线预览部分如存在完整性等问题,可反馈申请退款(可完整预览的文档不适用该条件!)。
- 3、如文档侵犯您的权益，请联系客服反馈,我们会尽快为您处理(人工客服工作时间：9:00-18:30)。
克林顿和奥巴马领导力比较上周，哈佛大学教授拉里·萨默斯（Larry Summers）接受了阿斯本研究所（Aspen Institute）所长兼CEO沃尔特•艾萨克森（Walter Isaacson）的采访。
这是一次别开生面的访谈，尽管萨默斯关于文克莱沃斯（Winklevoss）双胞胎兄弟的评点非常有趣，他对克林顿和奥巴马不同领导风格的评论更是妙趣横生。
萨默斯曾效力过两位总统，他对两人领导风格的思考解释了为什么克林顿的办事成效远远高于奥巴马。
我的对此的理解是，奥巴马采用的完全是教科书式的做法——他雇佣自己认为最优秀的人手，尊重他们的付出，猜透他们的想法，给出自己的看法，然后让他们去执行各自的提议。
相比之下，克林顿也雇佣非常优秀的人才，但他绝对不尊重他们的时间与付出，开会之前从来不考虑他们可能的想法，而是花大量时间考虑问题，引入各种各样的重要洞察，推进目标的达成——而这一目标往往远远超过手下的能力范围。
萨默斯从四个层面将这两位总统进行了对比：• 遵守日程安排——奥巴马。
萨默斯明确指出，奥巴马会严格按照日程安排进行白宫会议。
这些会议通常在安排的时间内开始和结束，误差不超过几分钟。
相比之下，克林顿则是出了名的“老迟到”。
• 会议前阅读内阁成员备忘录——奥巴马。
萨默斯指出，克林顿只有三分之一的时间会读他的备忘录，而奥巴马则会会近乎虔诚地阅读它们，如果萨默斯试图阐释的内容是他读到过的部分，奥巴马还会打断他的讲话。
• 委托手下——奥巴马。
萨默斯分析说，奥巴马不会干预萨默斯执行自己提出的意见——比如，他会让萨默斯自行决定如何为自己提议的一项财政支援计划提供资金。
而克林顿则会寻根究底地询问计划背后的政策思路，让萨默斯觉得克林顿是在教他如何更好地把工作做好。
• 带入新的思路——克林顿。
在这最后一个方面，克林顿将自己和奥巴马明显区分开来。
萨默斯指出，克林顿会预先阅读大量著名经济研究期刊，以及提供突破性经济思维的材料，并将这些思路带入会议中。
而奥巴马则会问一些问题稍作检验，谈谈这一政策如何切合他的观点，然后休会。
当比尔·克林顿就任总统时，美国经济正从衰退中复苏。
他离任时美国新增2,220万就业岗位，财政预算盈余，国家债务保持在低位。
奥巴马是在美国发生几十年来最严重的金融危机的当下接管这个国家的，时至今日，他还没有任何影响深远的新思路能够切实促进就业率。
而随着美国在跌跌撞撞中试图化解其政治对手所遗留的债务危机，很明显，奥巴马所找来的那些最优秀的人没有实现他们的价值，为其设定好计划——这一计划必定是有关化解就业危机的——并为美国达到这一目标确定路线。
做一个照本宣科的专业经理人可能对于增长稳定、没有遭遇问题的公司来说是一件好事，但管理美国需要的是创造性的思维，为新的困难的挑战带来有效的解决方案。
比尔·克林顿具备这种技能，这就是为什么他的领导能力超越了奥巴马。
那么，领导力究竟是什么？有人说领导力就是领导能力。
那么能力又是什么？众说不一。
我们翻开《领导科学》一书，把领导的职能归结为决策、用人、政治思想工作。
著名企管专家谭小芳老师表示，我国古代就非常重视用人的技巧和规律，最典型的案例就是汉高祖刘邦。
相传高祖在总结其战胜项羽的原因时，他说论出谋划策我不如张良，论带兵打仗我不如韩信，论安邦治国我不如萧何，这三个人都是人中之杰，但我能够用他们才能够成功；而项羽虽有范曾，却不能为己所用，所以失败。
著名企管专家谭小芳老师表示，我国自古以来对人的思想和行为研究很多，古代有很多思想家，如孔孟、老庄、程朱等，他们提出了很多国家管理、社会管理、家庭管理及个人管理的思想，至今还对世界发挥着巨大的影响。
现代的伟大领袖毛泽东主席提出的“全心全意为人民服务”等思想，值得领导者和管理者借鉴。
中国传统文化对于领导的定义，大致可分为三个视角：一是从价值取向角度来界定领导内涵，中国古代“尧舜心传”的故事就是典型。
尧禅让帝位于舜，告其治国之精妙：“惟精惟一，允执厥中”（《尚书·大禹谟》），即只有持中道，公正、公平地处理问题，才能当领导，强调了领导者应有的价值取向；二是从领导能力、领导功能角度来界定领导内涵。
韩非子曾以“造父御马”的寓言提出自己对领导的看法。
造父正在锄地，有父子乘车而过，马惊不走，儿子下车在前拉车，父亲紧随其后用力推车，还请正在锄地的造父帮忙推。
造父收起农具，跳上车子，坐在驾车的位置上，理顺缰绳，扬鞭策马，驾车而去。
在韩非看来，领导是对国家或某种局面具有驾驭能力的人。
三是从领导者必备的素质、素养角度来界定领导内涵。
孔子提出：“政者，正也。
”就是强调只有“克己”、“正身”、有道德的人，才有资格当领导。
孔子又进一步强调：“道千乘之国，敬事而信，节用而爱人，使民以时”（《论语·学而》）。
即作为一个大国的领导者，要忠于职守，取信于民，勤俭节约，爱护下属，根据他们的时间来安排工作。
在我的讲座中，领导力其实是分三个层面，首先是领导自己，其次是领导他人，还有就是领导组织。
那么什么是“领导”呢？我觉得这两个字拆开来说，“领”代表着引领和拉动，要用力完成，要用很多管理的技巧，领着一群人能够实现一个目标。
“导”就是说尤其当这个目标是比较高远的，比较虚的，不太容易看到的，前面那个地方是大家没有去过的一个地方，这个时候需要做一些激发、推动和导向工作的沟通，这是需要用心完成的，包括你影响的也是员工的心，所以我把这个领导简单的做这样一个分解。
我听到有些培训师说，领导是解决困难的，是干别人不能干与干不了的事情的人。
我也听到我的学员给我说，领导是做决策和用好人的人。
我们一起来说说，领导是什么？著名企管专家谭小芳老师表示，当今世界，每一个企业和组织都处在永久不断的变革之中，正因如此，以上的这些问题几乎每天都在被问及。
然而，直到19世纪末期，“领导”这一词汇才出现在商业辞典中。
在这之前，领导者们很大程度上享有继承的权利和权威，然而这属于国王和暴君统治的时代。
“领导”作为一个课题，在商业界得到发展和研究并真正受到关注，是伴随着在20世纪初期工业世界的兴起而出现的。
领袖并非天生，而领导力是可以培养的。
谭小芳老师表示，没有人天生就是伟大的领导者——成功的CEO也都是通过学习，经年累月的经验累积才发展出领导者的永恒特质。
你无需具备世界级领导人的性格或机会，但你可以从他们的先见之明中悟出新的契机，从他们的成功经验的学习中实现理想的谋略与勇气，效法他们成就非凡的领导特质。
为什么有些人能够带领团队打硬仗，却不容易留住核心员工？面对巨大的决策压力和市场挑战，哪一类管理者更容易带领团队走向成功？管理者并不需要样样都行，但一定要具备综合领导能力。
比如，下面曾国藩的案例：湘军在镇压太平天国起义初期所打的几次败仗，都是他本人亲自指挥的。
可见曾国藩本人的临阵指挥能力并不高，他对此也很有自知之明，所以后来凡是重大的战役，他都会尽量避免亲自指挥。
就连1863年到1864年湘军在攻打太平天国的首都南京时，他都没有亲临前线。
但没有站在战争的最前沿并没有影响到曾国藩的威信。
湘军将帅，自胡林翼以下，即使与他地位差不多的，都对他毕恭毕敬，或始终尊他为主帅，或把他当做是自己的老师。
如才华横溢、心高气傲、成就卓著的李鸿章就一辈子都对曾国藩非常敬崇："过去我跟过几位大帅，糊糊涂涂，不得要领；现在跟着曾帅，如同有了指南针。
"毛泽东也是如此，很多将领最爱跟随毛主席，为什么？杰出的领袖有超常的领导能力——就是北斗星、指南针啊。
现新任重庆市市长黄奇帆曾概括过21世纪的优秀CEO应具备的6大基本素质，其中有两点是：1、具有吸引人、感召人的指挥能力和领导魅力，充满正义感和责任感；2、具有高超的协调控制能力，善于通过交流、沟通，建立高效团队。
著名领导力专家谭小芳老师以为，伟大CEO 必须具备以下9点能力，简称CEO领导力的九力模型：1、影响力。
一个伟大的CEO，必须具备强大影响力，否则还难成为伟大的CEO，因为要改革、要推进新的管理措施，必然会引来强大的阻力或者是不和谐的声音，这时，CEO如果缺乏对他人的影响能力，必将使改革受阻，或者是良好的管理措施不能得到有效的贯彻和实施。
2、目标力。
美国前国务卿基辛格博士说：“领导就是要让他的人们，从他们现在的地方，带领他们去还没有去过的地方。
”谭老师认为，卓越领导力必须要有效认清现在，同时制定切实可行的目标，并且带领团队有效达到目标，这是领导力三个核心因素的真实写照，缺一不可。
3、信念力。
一个没有坚定信任的人，是不可能成为伟大CEO的，因为到达胜利的目标或者终点的路上，是不可能一帆风顺的。
因为在通往成功的路上，有可能会碰上这样、或者那样的问题或者阻碍，这时如果没有坚定的信念，是很难战胜困难，勇往直前的。
4、沟通力。
谭小芳老师表示，沟通是一种自我推销能力，是一种良好的口头表达能力，作为一个伟大CEO，须具备卓越的沟通能力，因为只有沟通才能消除隔阂，消除不理解，最终达成默契，最终在执行的过程中，大家步调一致、统一行动。
5、规划力。
作为团队的CEO，你得有能力结合组织所处行业与发展阶段向团队描绘未来的愿景，你得有能力规划出吸引人的未来，你得有能力清晰地指出整个团队未来能达成什么目标，有能力够激起员工参与的热情，让成员与组织的双赢成为可能，成员才会努力工作。
6、表达力。
可以说：中国企业的CEO对于怎么发展企业？怎么寻找客户？怎么开展业务？怎么跟政府打交道？怎么跟银行打交道？哪些位置上需要用什么能力的员工？他们比企业中的任何一个人都清楚要如何去处理！但是，作为CEO怎样将这些信息传递给团队，怎样用最通俗的语言，让员工来理解？CEO必须具备这样的表达能力：能够将组织中复杂的目标和议题，以简单通俗易懂的方式解释给员工听，确保大家对目标和议题的了解一致，才能更容易进行讨论与计划。
7、人际力。
谭老师表示，CEO要愿意投资在建立与保持人际关系上，有能力让团队成员信服，带得动工作团队，而且需要的时候，找得到人帮忙。
8、包容力。
对我们自己而言，有时候舌头和牙齿也会“打架”。
更何况是企业的人，身为企业的CEO，有时候也会被下属、客户、供应商，甚至社区等误会。
作为企业的CEO，是继续冲撞对抗，还是停下来找出口？CEO得有包容能力。
正所谓宰相肚中能撑船！否则，企业就很难运作下去了！9、读人力。
CEO必须有所为有所不为，做自己应该做的事情比如战略的确定、团队的配置以及制度的制定，将自己不应该做的事情授给下属，而不要学诸葛亮的那种“鞠躬尽瘁死而后已”的状态。
要想使授出去的权力发挥应有作用的前提是CEO没看错这个人，一旦读人发生错误，授出去的权力根本就不会发生作用甚至对企业产生致命性的影响。
总之，谭小芳老师表示，作为CEO，必须努力学习，不断地吸取新知识，增长才干和能力，从而具备多谋善断的决策才能、知人善任的组织才能、运筹帷幄的指挥能力、顺应时代的创新能力以及必要的应变能力等。