Evermore

4．3
grit  n.细石子, 砂粒等，勇气和毅力，vt.以沙砾覆盖(某物); 撒沙砾于       
ingenuity  n.足智多谋, 心灵手巧
special drawing rights   特别提款权
chip in  插嘴, 插话，共同出钱, 捐助, 凑钱
manoeuvre  n.调动; 演习，谨慎而熟练的动作，vt. & vi.(使某物)移动, 运动vt.
熟练而巧妙地引导
reboot  n.重新启动
fillip   刺激
rebound  vi.弹回; 反弹，产生反作用; 未能奏效
standard setters   标准制订者
water down  掺水于, 用水把…冲淡        ，削弱; 使缓和
reprieve   缓刑，暂缓
mark-to-market  n.市场决定期货价格

Evermore

The G20 summit
The Obama effectApr 2nd 2009
From The Economist print edition
The disarming charm of Barack Obama at the G20 in London
Reuters
BARACK OBAMA had difficulty pronouncing the name of his Russian counterpart, Dmitry Medvedev, but people forgave him. In fact, they forgave him for almost everything: his aura seemed to glow ever brighter as he made his first foray into global, crisis-busting diplomacy.
A general willingness to give Mr Obama the benefit of the doubt was palpable even among the exuberant anti-capitalist demonstrators jamming the streets of London’s financial district—a minority of whom turned violent and clashed with police as they attacked a branch of the Royal Bank of Scotland. “He’s got good morals,” conceded a graffiti artist called Monkey, while helping his friend scale a traffic light and drape a banner: it depicted a grim reaper clutching fistfuls of banknotes.

[url=http://ad.doubleclick.net/click;h=v8/3805/0/0/%2a/h;211701568;0-0;62;31658731;4307-300/250;30702586/30720462/1;;~aopt=2/1/a/0;~sscs=%3fhttp://www.newwavemarkets.com][/url]

Nico, a French resident of London who sported a cardboard box over his head (to denounce climate-change denial), said in muffled tones that he was “not sure about Obama—but he can’t be worse than George Bush.” Anyway, he opined, “the problem is the madness of the economic system—growth wrecks the environment.”
Even the Russians, so determined to wrong-foot America for the past few years, were gracious after the two presidents met and agreed to seek deeper cuts in their strategic arsenals than those foreseen by an existing treaty, which could slash each side’s stockpile to 1,700 warheads by 2012. Negotiators were told to set new goals by July, when Mr Obama will visit Moscow.
Recent strains in American-Russian relations had not been good for either country, said Mr Medvedev, as he and Mr Obama vowed to begin a “constructive dialogue” on everything from curbing terrorism to economics. Konstantin Kosachev, head of the Russian parliament’s foreign-affairs committee, claimed that the two presidents had broken a “closed circle” in which each side felt the need to respond forcefully to a perceived provocation by the other. These upbeat noises from a hitherto grumpy Russian official marked a change of tone.
These days, America’s ties with China probably matter more to the world than the remnants of superpower diplomacy. And on that front, too, the chemistry was good. With China’s President Hu Jintao, Mr Obama agreed that his treasury secretary, Timothy Geithner, would start a Sino-American “strategic and economic dialogue” beginning in Washington, DC, this summer. The Americans said Mr Hu assured them of his commitment to boosting demand as well as improving economic management.
Visiting Downing Street earlier in the day, Mr Obama was at once emollient, self-critical and articulate, in a way that put an initially bashful Gordon Brown at his ease. “I came here to put forward ideas but I also came here to listen and not to lecture,” the president said, setting the tone—one that subtly combined humility with firmness about the responsibilities of others—for his meeting with the leaders of 19 developed and emerging economies.
The president admitted that the United States “has some accounting to do” over the failures in its regulatory system. He said the world had become used to viewing American consumers as the engine of global growth—with a clear hint that his country could no longer play this role, and that spenders in other countries should now be doing their bit. But he rejected the idea of American decline, saying that was an old theory, which had been repeatedly belied by the existence of “a vibrancy to our economic model, a durability to our political model, and a set of ideals that has sustained us through difficult times.”
If any of the participants arrived in London spoiling for a fight, it was the leaders of France and Germany, who were at pains from the beginning to stress their absolute accord with one another and their differences with everybody else. At a splashy joint appearance, President Nicolas Sarkozy and Chancellor Angela Merkel said Europe had done a lot already to provide economic stimulus. What was needed was far tougher regulation, whose targets would include hedge funds, traders’ pay, rating agencies and tax havens. Both of them seemed keener on trying to prevent financial crises in future than on dealing with the one that is raging now.
But Mr Obama was anxious not to let the Franco-German duo spoil the party. Instead he stressed the “enormous consensus” that existed on the need to reinvigorate the sagging world economy. Among governments, anyway: Nico the box-wearer might beg to disagree.
Elsewhere on the sidelines, more conventional voices were stressing that there could be limits to Mr Obama’s ability to dissolve global problems at a stroke: the warming of the American-Russian atmosphere was not a breakthrough comparable with the one achieved by Mikhail Gorbachev in the last days of the cold war.
Dmitri Trenin, director of the Moscow Carnegie Centre, a think-tank, said Messrs Obama and Medvedev had merely “plucked some low-hanging fruit” by signalling that rows over Georgia were no longer the central to their relationship. It was now conceivable, Mr Trenin said, that Russia and America could talk business over NATO expansion and possible Russian help to America over Iran. But Russia might not really want American-Iranian ties to improve too much—and the mood of anti-Americanism which was fanned under ex-President Vladimir Putin (now prime minister) would not disappear from the Russian scene. There are some tricks that even Obama magic cannot pull off.

Evermore

4．4
aura  n.特殊气氛; 氛围
glow  vi.(无焰地)燃烧; 发炽热; 烧红，脸红, 身体发热，n.光亮, 光辉，脸红, (身体)发热，热情; 强烈的感情
foray  n.突袭, 袭击，从事非本行的短暂尝试活动vi.(为了掠夺而)进行突袭
exuberant  adj.兴高采烈的; 活跃的; 愉快的，茁壮的, 繁茂的
jamming  n.干扰台,人为干扰
graffiti  n.在墙上的乱涂乱写
drape  vt.将(衣物、帘等)悬挂, 披，遮盖或装饰某人或某物，将某物随便围在或放在另一物上
Grim Reaper  死神
fistful   一把，一撮
put a foot wrong   犯错误，做错事，行差踏错
on the wrong foot   以不好的方式开始，出师不利
wrong-foot 失足
stockpile   贮存
warhead  n.(尤指导弹的)弹头
grumpy  adj.脾气坏的, 生气的
remnant  n.剩余部分, 残余，零料, 零头布
emollient  adj.使柔软的，安慰性的, 起镇静作用的n.润滑剂, 润肤剂
articulate  adj.表达能力强的，口齿清楚的, 发音清晰的，vt. & vi.清楚地表达
形成关节; (用关节)连接
bashful  adj.羞怯的，缺乏自信的
emerging economies   新兴经济，新兴国家的经济，新兴经济体
do one's bit  做自己分内的事, 做有益的贡献
spoil for  一心想某事
tax haven  n.避税场所(指税率很低的国家或地区)
duo  n.成对的表演者
signalling   信令
pluck  n.勇气, 精神，vt.采; 摘; 拔，弹, 拔vi.拉, 拽

Evermore

International adoptions
Madonna and no childApr 4th 2009
From Economist.com
International adoptions are not always for the best
AP
MADONNA seems like a person used to getting her own way. So the pop star must have been dismayed when a court in Malawi refused to her request to adopt a three-year-old girl, Chifundo James. A judge ruled on Friday April 3rd that the adoption of Chifundo could not go ahead because Madonna had not fulfilled residency requirements. The last time Madonna tried to adopt a Malawian child she met with more success and a heap of criticism.
By plucking David Banda from grinding poverty in Malawi in 2006 she provoked mixed reactions. Some praised the singer for offering a child an escape from a life of misery. Others suggested that the pop queen might have used her wealth and stardom to bypass usual procedures and jump the queue. Detractors also suggested that it was wrong to take David away from his country of birth and his remaining family. The criticisms grew louder when it emerged that David was not, in fact, an orphan.

That circumstance is not particularly uncommon. Children given up for adoption often do have a surviving parent but one who cannot provide adequate care. David’s father was still alive but gave him up to an orphanage where he hoped his offspring would have a better life.
According to Unicef, the UN children’s fund, the number of families from rich countries wanting to adopt children from poor countries has grown substantially in the past 30 years. Demand is strong, and there is little shortage of children who need additional help. In 2005 Unicef estimated that there were 132m children who had lost at least one parent in sub-Saharan Africa, Asia, Latin America and the Caribbean. Around 13m of these had lost both parents, although most of them lived with extended family.
But difficulties abound. Parents (or would-be parents) typically want to adopt a healthy, young, orphan, usually a small baby. Older children, or those who suffer chronic illnesses, are not in demand. Some countries do have many young orphans. For example in China, after decades of a “one-child” policy that put a great premium on male children, huge numbers of girls are available for adoption. But China makes it difficult to whisk its daughters away. Instead many prospective parents go to countries such as Guatemala or Vietnam, where the adoption process has, in the past at least, been easier.
Governments are understandably uneasy about outsiders removing their citizens. And as demand for children to adopt has grown, so have examples of abuse, including cases of children who have been abducted or parents who have been coerced or bribed. The absence of effective international regulation also allows middle-men to profit from the demand for children to adopt.
The Hague Convention on Inter Country Adoptions is intended to regulate international adoptions. It states that these can only go ahead if the parents’ consent, where applicable, has been obtained without any kind of payment or compensation. Costs and expenses can be paid, and a reasonable fee may go to the adoption agency involved, but nothing more. The document is clear: wads of cash may not change hands in return for poor motherless mites.
That rules look fine on paper but are difficult to enforce. Incidents abound of vulnerable children being whisked away with profit in mind rather than their wellbeing. In 2007, Zoe’s Ark, a French charity, was accused of kidnapping more than 100 children from Chad and Sudan for adoption in France. In 2008, a scam was uncovered in which children in India were kidnapped, given new identities and dispatched to new parents in the West.
The process of adoption is difficult to police. When corruption becomes clear in the adoption process in one country, and agencies are shut down, those involved look around for another country that is not so fussy. The result is that individual countries increasingly toughen their laws on adoption. Ensuring that only legitimate candidates for adoption find their way to the West will be tricky when such powerful human instincts as thos of the childless seeking a baby are involved. But getting more countries to sign up to the Hague Convention would probably help.

Evermore

North Korea
Launching a rowApr 5th 2009 | TOKYO
From Economist.com
North Korea's Kim Jong Il joins the space age

AP
IF IT were a child, then North Korea’s hardline regime under Kim Jong Il would be described as suffering from an extreme attention-seeking disorder. So even if the three-stage rocket launched on Sunday April 5th had fizzled like the only other firing of a Taepodong-2 long-range missile, three years ago, the exercise would still have been deemed a success when measured by all the agitation of its neighbours and the United States. In the event, according the Japanese government, which had huffed and puffed the most, a North Korean projectile sailed high over Japan before noon, apparently shedding its booster over the Sea of Japan and its second-stage rocket in the Pacific Ocean.
If the launch of what the regime describes as an experimental communications satellite proves to have been successful, then perhaps grateful North Koreans can look forward to listening to patriotic songs beamed back from space. Japan called the launch “regrettable”. America warned that North Korea “cannot threaten the safety and security of other countries with impunity.” But Mr Kim can claim to have brought North Korea into the space age.

For weeks, American military intelligence, using its own satellite images, had followed launch preparations at the Musudan-ri missile site near North Korea’s eastern seaboard. Given that a brand-new missile complex is nearly finished on the western seaboard from which the next Taepodong-2 launch had been expected, the timing and place of these preparations caused some experts to scratch their heads. Yet South Korea is due to launch its first satellite into space this summer, so from the North’s viewpoint, a space race is on. Other international factors probably played a part, of which the most important was to test President Barack Obama’s new administration. Marginalisation ranks high among the regime’s fears.
At home, plenty might explain some rocket nationalism, no matter the cost to the impoverished country. Last year the 66-year-old Mr Kim apparently suffered a stroke, and a launch may be intended to send the signal that all is well. Not unconnected, rumours are swirling that a leadership transition is underway in Pyongyang as Mr Kim settles—at last—on a successor for when he is gone. His third son is said to be the favourite among an unimpressive family, but no matter who the candidate, the military will want to send a firm message that it is a strong and loyal escort to the transition. Rocket shows might help with that message.
As for the outside world, it is hard to know collectively what it can do in the face of the launch. The UN Security Council has agreed to request from Japan for an emergency session later on Sunday. The United States, South Korea and Japan are members of the six-party process meant to get North Korea to scrap its nuclear programmes and to bring about peace on the divided Korean peninsula. They all say the launch breaches UN resolutions that imposed sanctions on North Korea after missile firings and a nuclear test in 2006. Yet as the International Crisis Group, a think-tank, points out, if it offends the spirit of the sanctions, it does not appear to break the letter, which talks of a ban on “missile” launchings, not satellites.
As it is, Russia and China are little ruffled, in contrast to three years ago. This time, China was told well ahead of what was in prospect and appears to have given the nod. North Korea has behaved better than previously. It joined the Outer Space Treaty in March and alerted commercial airlines and the International Maritime Organisation to the launch schedule. With permanent seats on the UN Security Council, Russia or China can veto any attempts at fresh sanctions. At best, existing sanctions, including over proliferation, might be better monitored. That would not be hard.
Before the launch, America, South Korea and Japan deployed destroyers equipped with Aegis anti-missile systems to nearby waters. Japan had also threatened to shoot down the rocket with land-based batteries if it endangered Japanese territory. But the Taepodong-2 is still far from accurate. South Korea and Japan still have reason to be much more concerned about North Korea's big number of short- and medium-range missiles. North Korea said that shooting down its rocket would be an act of war. Official rhetoric has long claimed that Japan is bent on reconquest.
Calmer voices will now urge all sides to restart the six-party process, which has stalled since last autumn because North Korea has failed to commit to adequate verification of the nuclear programmes it has declared. Not for the first time, engaging with North Korea after yet another of its provocations will now stick in the craw for many. Yet as with a child throwing hissy-fits, sometimes indifference is the best response.

Evermore

Barack Obama and nuclear weapons
Peace, love and understandingApr 6th 2009 | PRAGUE
From Economist.com
Barack Obama proposes a world free of nuclear weapons
AFP/Shutterstock
AMERICA has the “moral responsibility” to lead a campaign to rid the world of all nuclear weapons, Barack Obama told a cheering crowd in Prague on Sunday April 5th. He offered the world a goal of eradicating nuclear weapons, although he admitted that it might not be achieved in his lifetime.
Two decades earlier, in the Velvet revolution of 1989, Czechs brought down a nuclear-armed empire without a shot, Mr Obama told an audience of some 20,000 people who had gathered in the shadow of Prague castle. Most of the youthful spectators, who had waited since before dawn to hear the American president, were too young to remember the cold war or the Prague Spring of 1968.

He described a 21st century in which nuclear powers agreed to reduce arsenals, countries without nuclear weapons pledged not to acquire them and all countries enjoyed the right to civilian nuclear power, ideally drawing their fuel from a tightly controlled “international fuel bank”.
He drew rather louder applause when he echoed the soaring rhetoric of his presidential campaign, suggesting that his election to office is the achievement that most inspired his audience. He earned resounding cheers when he talked about the turns of history that had allowed “someone like me” to become America’s president.
Mr Obama said that America would seek a legally binding treaty with Russia on reducing stockpiles of strategic arms by the end of the year. His administration would also “immediately and aggressively” seek American ratification of the Comprehensive Test-Ban Treaty.
As a first step towards outlawing nuclear weapons, America should seek a new treaty that verifiably ended the production of fissile materials “intended for use in state nuclear weapons”. Existing non-proliferation agreements should be buttressed with beefed up inspections and “real and immediate consequences” for countries caught breaking the rules.
The president told the crowd that al-Qaeda wanted to obtain a nuclear bomb and described the prospect of nuclear-armed terrorists as the “most immediate and extreme threat to global security”. This hawkish talk did not impress his audience, who reacted with silence.
Working with Russia, Mr Obama went on, America would launch a new international effort to secure all vulnerable nuclear material around the world and work to thwart those smuggling such materials. America would host a summit on nuclear security within the next 12 months. But as long as nuclear weapons existed, America would maintain an arsenal powerful enough to deter any adversary and guarantee that defence to allies.
Other details were left distinctly vague. Mr Obama did not spell out what the “consequences” for rule-breaking nations might include. Hours before Mr Obama spoke in Prague, North Korea, the secretive Stalinist state, launched a long-range rocket apparently capable of being used as a missile. Mr Obama told the crowd this “provocation” underscored the need for (unspecified) action at the United Nations Security Council.
Czechs in the crowd were divided in their reactions when the American leader reiterated his support for an anti-missile defence system designed to ward off the threat from Iranian ballistic missiles.
“As long as the threat from Iran persists, we will go forward with a missile-defence system that is cost-effective and proven,” Mr Obama said, using wording that seemed to allow him wriggle room should missile-defence technology not prove its worth. If the Iranian threat were eliminated, the driving force for missile defence-construction in Europe would be “removed”, Mr Obama added.
He continued his day in Prague by meeting the 27 leaders of the European Union’s member nations for a brief summit hosted by the Czech government, which holds the rotating six-month presidency of the EU, a task somewhat complicated by the collapse of that same government in a failed confidence vote late last month. Tensions showed. A plea from Mr Obama to “anchor” Turkey in Europe by pressing ahead with talks on admitting Turkey to the EU earned a public rebuke from Nicolas Sarkozy, who said that was a matter for members of the EU. In line with his country’s public opinion, he believes Turkey should never be given full membership of the European club.

Evermore

4.6
agitation  n.鼓动, 煽动
huff  vi.深呼吸, 吹气, n.怒气冲冲; 发怒
shedding   脱落, 开口
scratch one's head   搔头皮,挠挠脑袋        ,
escort to  护送〔押送〕(某人)去(某地)
stick in sb.'s craw 使人难以消化，使人难以接受


4.7
Prague   布拉格
ratification  批准
buttress  n.扶壁, 扶垛vt.支撑, 加固
thwart  vt.阻挠
ward off  v.避开,挡住

Evermore

South Africa
Dropping the chargesApr 7th 2009 | JOHANNESBURG
From Economist.com
Jacob Zuma is poised to become president of South Africa
AFP
IT HAD been widely expected. Barely two weeks before South Africa’s general election, the National Prosecuting Authority (NPA) announced on Monday April 6th that all charges for corruption, racketeering, money-laundering and fraud against Jacob Zuma, who leads the ruling African National Congress (ANC), have been dropped. That seems to bring to an end a tortured legal drama that has held South Africans in thrall for the past eight years. It also appears to clear away any lingering doubt that Mr Zuma will be South Africa’s next president.
The charges were dismissed at an odd time and for a curious reason, concerning the timing of the announcement of the charges against Mr Zuma. The prosecutors did not suggest that the evidence against Mr Zuma had been manipulated. Nor did they suggest, as Mr Zuma had long claimed, that a fair trial would be impossible because of a political conspiracy against him. Nor did the prosecutors worry that prosecuting the likely new president would tarnish South Africa’s image abroad or provoke violence from his enraged supporters.

Instead the NPA’s acting head, Mokotedi Mpshe, suggested that the legal process had been subject to “intolerable abuse” by investigators who were loyal to Mr Zuma’s rival, the previous president, Thabo Mbeki. A set of charges against Mr Zuma had been released at precisely the moment—just after elections for the leadership of the ruling party in December 2007—that would cause maximum embarrassment for him, and thus most gain for Mr Mbeki. It did not matter that the prosecuting team itself had acted “properly, honestly, fairly and justly throughout”. The prosecuting authority felt it was “neither possible nor desirable” to continue the prosecution.
Anticipating the chorus of outraged complaints that greeted his announcement, Mr Mpshe said that in reaching such a difficult and painful decision, the NPA realised that it would be “damned if it did” drop the charges and “damned if it didn’t”. If the trial had been allowed to go ahead, the public would have felt that the criminal-justice system condoned malpractice by law-enforcement agencies, he said. If, on the other hand, it was stopped, the criminal-justice system would be accused of failing to protect the public from serious crime.
The charges against Mr Zuma were serious. He was accused of taking more than 4m rand in bribes in return for agreeing to use his influence to help secure part of a $5 billion arms deal and other government contracts, notably for his friend and former financial adviser, Schabir Shaik. In 2005, Mr Shaik, who used to pay all the former vice-president’s bills from his parking fines to his designer suits and children’s education, was sentenced to 15 years in jail. He was released last month on disputed “medical parole” after serving just two years and four months. Mr Zuma said on Tuesday that he had “paid back” what was always considered only a loan, although he did not say how much he had paid back.
On Tuesday the Durban High Court confirmed the withdrawal of charges against Mr Zuma, but explained that this was not the same as an acquittal. Mr Zuma, speaking on the same day, nevertheless insisted that “there never was a case against me…I was innocent”.
None of this is likely to affect the elections on April 22nd. Asked in a recent opinion poll if they believed the ANC leader to be guilty of corruption, most of the South Africans polled, black and white, said yes. They also believed he should stand trial. But for the vast majority of poor black South Africans what matters most are bread-and-butter issues, such as housing, health and education, not the niceties of the law. They would therefore have turned out in very large numbers to support Mr Zuma whatever the NPA decided. The latest opinion polls, taken before Mr Zuma's charges were dropped, indicated that the ANC would romp home to renewed victory with just under two-thirds of the vote.
The effect on South Africa’s image is a different matter. The country prides itself on its standards of democracy, civil liberties and good governance. But doubts are growing abroad about the ANC’s full-blooded commitment to the independence of state institutions and perceptions of corruption in the country are hardening.

Evermore

Italy's earthquake
Death in the mountainsApr 7th 2009 | L’AQUILA
From The Economist print edition
Silvio Berlusconi announces reconstruction plans after an earthquake kills over 200 people in Italy
AFP
THE earthquake that struck the Abruzzo region soon after 3.30am on Monday April 6th was a gruesome reminder of how vulnerable Italy is to natural disasters. The tremors were felt as far away as Naples and damaged the ancient Caracalla baths in Rome.
L’Aquila, high up in the Apennine mountains that form the backbone of Italy, was a few miles from the epicentre. By the following day, when most of its population had fled, it looked like a city that had been extensively shelled. Almost the only sounds were those of house alarms, ambulance sirens and rescue workers’ earth movers. The deployment of heavy machinery after more than 24 hours of painstakingly restrained digging and prodding indicated that, in most places, the rescuers had given up hope of finding survivors.

[url=http://ad.doubleclick.net/click%3Bh=v8/3809/3/0/%2a/h%3B213378349%3B0-0%3B0%3B31658731%3B4307-300/250%3B30819071/30836947/1%3B%3B%7Eaopt%3D2/1/a/0%3B%7Esscs%3D%3fhttp://clk.atdmt.com/SJK/go/140865493/direct/01/6568600][/url]

It is Italy’s most lethal earthquake for almost 30 years. More than 200 people have died and over 1,000 are injured. And, in perhaps the biggest challenge for Silvio Berlusconi’s government, around 17,000 were left homeless.
Mr Berlusconi seemed fully aware of the dangers and opportunities that accompany disasters. His reaction was vigorous. He cancelled a trip to Moscow, rushed to the area and toured it in a helicopter. The following day he returned to announce that tents to accommodate 14,000 people had been made ready and said that he intended to divert to L’Aquila and the surrounding area some of the money set aside for construction projects as part of Italy’s response to the economic crisis. In particular he said he would like to build the first of a batch of new towns alongside L’Aquila for those whose homes were beyond repair. The town could be ready in two years, he said.
Locally, the news was greeted with as much scepticism as hope. Italy has a record of botching recovery programmes. The performance of the authorities following the last big earthquake, in Umbria and Le Marche 12 years ago, is encouraging. By last September, 92% of houses that been damaged had been made habitable again. But what haunts the survivors of the latest disaster is the Irpinia earthquake of 1980. It was the prelude to scandalous waste and corruption. Cash was diverted to the Camorra, the Neapolitan mafia, and even today some of the victims are still living in what was intended as temporary accommodation.

Evermore

4.8
Silvio Berlusconi  意大利总统 西尔维奥•贝卢斯科尼
Apennine Mountains   亚平宁山脉
epicentre   震中
siren  n.汽笛, 警报器，迷人的女人, 妖妇
painstaking  adj.极小心的; 辛勤的, 辛苦的
batch  n.一炉，一批, 一组, 一群
botch  修补
Irpinia   伊尔皮尼亚

money laundering  洗黑钱
thrall  奴隶  束缚
tarnish  vt. & vi.(通常指金属)(使)失去光泽
malpractice  n.〈律〉玩忽职守, 渎职, 不法行为
law enforcement  法律的实施
rand  n.鞋后根与鞋底中间的垫皮,边缘
(on) medical parole  保外就医
acquittal  n.宣告无罪
bread-and-butter 基本生活所需，生计
nicety   美好  细节
romp home   轻易取胜
romp   蹦跳游戏，嬉闹玩耍
full-blooded   全面的