British Government 'frantic' over Obama talks

[T_i_B]

Source: BBC

White House officials rejected repeated requests from Britain for a formal meeting between President Barack Obama and Gordon Brown, it has emerged.

The prime minister's team were "frantic" after being unable to secure the talks at the UN summit in New York, a diplomatic source has told the BBC.

However, the president held private meetings with the leaders of Japan, China and Russia.

Downing Street said reports of a snub were "completely without foundation". A spokesman said the men had had a "wide-ranging discussion following last night's climate change dinner".


Read more: http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/8272061.stm

[bluestateguy]

1. He's a busy man, and we all have to wait our turn.

Same thing is happening in this country. Everybody wants action NOW on their pet issue, but some people are just going to have to take a number, have a seat and wait their turn.

Queue up Mr. Brown.

[tocqueville]

6. is he some kind of royalty ?

it's a matter of priorities. I can imagine the outrage on this board if Obama had "to stand in line" in Paris, Berlin or London. Double standards.

[GrimReefa]

8. Of course there are double standards...

Like it or not, the United States is still the leader of the free world. We're bigger (and, yes, more important) than any individual countries in Europe, which means our problems are bigger, and everybody - EVERYBODY - wants a piece of Barack Obama, who is more popular in all of those countries than any domestic politician. If there was a President of Europe who was universally beloved here in America, then you can bet your bottom Euro that Obama or any other POTUS would fall all over themselves making room in their schedule for them.

As it is, though, Obama is the guy with whom everyone wants to be photographed, and so he can't go jetting back and forth across the Atlantic every time a European leader wants to be seen shaking hands with him.

[JonQ]

20. But britain is our strongest ally

you would think that would count for some consideration.

[Stella_Artois]

22. Really ?

I'd suggest that the US would be better off spending its time courting China, and that Europe in general and the UK particular are able to look out for ourselves.

I personally think that Europe has had enough superpower attention for the time being, and would be happy to see your troops sent elswhere.

[JonQ]

23. I would hesitate to call china an ally

Strong yes, ally, no.

And Britain has been the one nation to consistently support us with troops, material, and on the political stage.

The rest of europe really hasn't. If we had to pick one ally to keep at the expense of all the others (not that it's come to that) it would be Britain.

[Stella_Artois]

24. Who said Ally ?

Not I.

Partner at best. Never an ally though.

[JonQ]

25. Um I did, in the comment you were responding to

I said britain was our strongest ally, you disputed this by pointed out that china was more worthy of our attention, I then showed you that china was not an ally so that comparison falls flat.

[psychopomp]

35. They were before and may become one again

I know it has been the better part of a century but don't forget we came to the assistance of China before the Pacific War broke out and they remained our ally throughout the war.

I am disappointed that the US hasn't given our best ally any face-time with the president. China is important however our relationship with the UK is even more so.

[Captain Hilts]

26. And the current govt. has taken some real hits for supporting us overseas. nt

[tocqueville]

32. it wasn't question of a photo-op nt

[BlooInBloo]

2. Reminds me of The Godfather.

[Ken Burch]

3. Gordon Brown's comically misnamed "Labour" party will be overwhelmingly defeated

in next year's UK elections. It may simply be that President Obama felt that he had no reason wasting his time talking to a politically doomed head of government.

[LeftishBrit]

33. By people much worse.

As a Brit who is old enough to remember all the evils of the Thatcher regime, I am hoping that the election result is not as bad as now predicted.

[Ken Burch]

34. You're right that the Tories are worse

The problem is, Gordon has hewed SO close to the Blairite line, has made his party so indistinguishable from the Tories, and his so assiduously continued his predecessor's campaign to destroy the socialist movement and anything even vaguely resembling the left in your country, that he's made it all but impossible to run a "you have to stay with us because it's going to be a nightmare if THEY get in" campaign, which was the only kind of campaign that ever had any chance of saving him.

In some respects, it's the same path Callaghan led Labour down in the late '70s(minus, of course, any pretense of defending working-class British voters). In fact, just the other day Gordon announced austerity measures and cuts in civil service jobs that are so harsh that he has probably guaranteed Labour will win less than 200 seats.

You almost get the feeling that the Third Way crowd WANT to make sure that Labour is demolished at the next election.

Will YOU be voting Labour next time, Leftish? Or will you switch to the LibDems, the Greens, or a smaller left party?

And what do you think Labour will do when it's out of office and the Blairites have all accepted directorships at large corporations?

[T_i_B]

39. Our political parties are all advocating cuts

But Tories seem to be the ones who want to slash public services the most. So yes, it is likely that Labour will still try the "vote for us or it's the Tories" line.

What is more worrying is how little else they have to offer, and the other parties are little better. British politics is far too hung up on top-down triangulation. The whole debate about public service spending over here is actually very poor as all 3 main parties are talking generally rather then about specifics of what they want cut.

[LeftishBrit]

41. The last time I voted Labour in a General Election was (I think) 1992

I didn't trust Blair from the beginning. Also in my own constituency, the 'tactical' anti-Tory vote is is for our LibDem MP, who is pretty good and quite left-wing. In Euro-elections I normally vote Green.

I think Labour will get involved in lots of party infighting once they're out of office, but whether this will push them in a leftward direction is anybody's guess.

[Prometheus Bound]

4. They sent their young warriors to die for the empire so the leaders could get a seat at the table

And they aren't even invited to dinner.

[tocqueville]

5. fits into the pattern, Obama isn't interested in Europe except for photo ops

it has been noticed before (similar snubs in Germany, France...)

These days, the continent is just for photo-ops and speech-making.
By Anne ApplebaumPosted Monday, Sept. 21, 2009, at 8:19 PM ET

Let's be brutally frank: The 60th anniversary of the NATO alliance, celebrated in April, was a bore. The American president was visibly uninterested. His European counterparts, though more accustomed to "celebrations" consisting of somnolent speeches delivered in multilingual bureaucratese, were no more enthusiastic. The affair closed with a limp American request for more troops in Afghanistan, which had almost no echo whatsoever.

Let's be franker still: It is impossible to escape the impression that, at least in its relations with Europe, the Obama administration is following directly in the footsteps of the Bush administration. For the past decade, the old continent has been treated as a great photo opportunity—the Obama campaign even used the Brandenburg Gate as a backdrop for a speech last summer—and as an excellent place to talk about the stirring deeds of the past. But neither Republicans nor Democrats seem to consider Europe worthy of experienced ambassadors—Obama, like Bush, has sent a notable number of campaign donors—or of serious diplomacy.

All of which makes for a paradox: In Europe, President Obama is still the most popular U.S. leader in recent memory. Yet he has failed to capitalize on this popularity, in part because he has failed to use it. His only message in Europe so far—"send more troops to Afghanistan"—has been clouded by his own ambivalence about the Afghan mission. He has not tried to convince anyone that he has rethought Afghanistan, and he hasn't come up with any other joint security tasks for the world's largest and most powerful democracies. Just for starters, he could tell his European friends that he won't appear in any more photographs with them unless they agree to talk about the contingency plans and NATO joint exercises that the alliance abandoned years ago.

http://www.slate.com/id/2229089/

big words, little change

[katkat]

9. pattern

Obama isn't interested in much of anything anywhere. Europe is just catching on.

[Name removed]

12. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[groundloop]

15. somebody's been watching too much faux news

[No Elephants]

36. +1

[Schema Thing]

19. 4wd

[No Elephants]

37. You must be confusing Obama with Incurious George Dummya Bush.

The man never left the country before he became President--and he lived in frickin' Texas.

[Blandocyte]

10. Indeed. Soon We'll Call English Toffee "Freedom Toffee"

Putting "English" on a ping pong ball hit will soon be referred to as putting "freedom" on it. Then there'll be the names of the English classes...

Then there'll be the "old England" and the, wait, we already have the New England. OMG!



:sarcasm:

[Name removed]

16. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[pundaint]

7. Sounds line Britain has a Fox network too

[T_i_B]

11. Not really the same

The UK press is more interested in bashing Gordon Brown then Obama here.

And the story above is from the BBC, which right-wingers loathe on principle as it's state owned, regardless of what they put out.

Here's the story from different UK sources. First off, the left-leaning Guardian

http://www.guardian.co.uk/politics/2009/sep/23/barack-obama-gordon-brown-talks

And the right leaning Telegraph

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/newstopics/politics/gordon-brown/6224813/Barack-Obama-rebuffs-Gordon-Brown-as-special-relationship-sinks-to-new-low.html

And the Murdoch owned Times isn't giving the story the same emphasis

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/politics/article6846771.ece

[and-justice-for-all]

13. He is a busy guy, take a number...nt

[hileeopnyn8d]

14. I don't get it

Both Brown and the WH deny that Brown was snubbed, so where's the story?

[quakerboy]

31. Because it comes on the heel of the DVDs

Soon we will enter world war III, US VS the UK.

[FlaGranny]

17. Last night I saw Brown interviewed.

He said there was no snub and he had already met with Obama the evening before, and another meeting was scheduled for today. Where do these "stories" come from?

Edit: I believe I saw it on MSNBC or NBC - not certain which one.

[Captain Hilts]

27. The White House needs to squelch these rumors. nt

[marshall]

18. Britain's days of a "special relationship" with the US are OVER!

We've inexplicably maintained a symbiotic tethering to the former "mother country", often to our detriment. Thank goodness Obama is ready to rip those apron strings loose.

[Stella_Artois]

21. I'm British

and I agree.

This strange obession with this "special" relationship is needy and frankly unbecoming. We are a modern European nation and the modern Europe should look to itself and not America.

America can choose to focus on China, or whoever it pleases. Hopefully not Europe because honestly apart from being the preferred location to fight WWIII and latterly a source for troops i'm not clear on what the US wants from us. Either way i'm not interested.

Time for us to go apart like old friends moving on.

[ArbustoBuster]

28. Your statements make no sense.

The US and UK have a number of goals and interests in common and we share common methods of governance (democracy, etc.). Being allies with a nation like that is standard international politics. Breaking up one of the best alliances in the world would be stupid for both parties.

[Psephos]

29. This is no way to treat a friend...and Britain is an old and true friend. n/t

[truebluecollar]

30. Let's swap straight up

We take the Football Hooligans, Britain takes the Tea-Baggers.

[No Elephants]

38. Brown and Obama spoke the night before Both say "no snub." Wtf is the BBC's agenda?

[T_i_B]

40. As per post #11, it's not just the Beeb

A large section of the UK press has gone after this story.

Mind you, most people I speak to are more interested in the 7th centry treasure found in Staffordshire then Gordon Brown.