Friday, 18 April 2008

Brown Meets Bush

Americans, don't be alarmed because that shabby looking Scotsman following your President about is actually with us. We sent Gordon over to you with the hope of being able to change the locks before he came back but we have all been too busy shaking our heads and tutting that he can't even arrange a trip to the States without landing slap bang in the middle of a papal visit. The dullard.
These trips take months to set up and I find it hard to believe that at some point someone didn't realise that a birthday celebrating Pope was going to be around at the same time as our Prime Minister and that is where my theory begins that far from being some sort of plank, Brown has actually managed to pull off a sly, but brilliantly clever, coup.
To a World leader, Bush is what kryptonite was to Superman. To actively be seen mixing with the man is enough to send your ratings into a fatal nosedive as Tony Blair, John Howard and José Aznar found out.
On his first visit to George's side last year, Gordon was generally praised in the UK media for his lack of gushing and refusal to return the platitudes Bush bestowed upon him. But that was then.
Brown couldn't be so cold and standoffish this time around and he knew it but he would be committing political suicide if he cosied up to one of the the most unpopular American Presidents to ever grace the White House, not only with his own party who dumped Blair for those same reasons but also with whoever finally takes over from Bush.
So he chose the one time that he can slip quietly in and slip back out again relatively unnoticed and while the focus is on the Pope rattling off apologies about paedophile priests and other churchly matters.
Nobody was really interested when Brown said that 'the world owed Bush a great deal of gratitude for helping to root out terrorism' or were paying that much attention when he stated that he stood 'shoulder to shoulder with the president in the battle against terrorism.'
Downing Street said that the Prime Minister's trip has been a great success and officials are laughing off suggestions that the prime minister was upstaged by the Pope but i agree that for Brown it has been a huge success.
He managed to get in, say the things that would see him metaphorically hung drawn and quartered any other time and get out again while everybody was looking the other way.
Not as dumb as some seem to think our Prime Minister.


Cheezy said...

"that he stood 'shoulder to shoulder with the president in the battle against terrorism.'"

Better shoulder to shoulder than face to groin, as was the situation when George had Tony over for a slumber party.

Anonymous said...


I think you are on to something. Have you considered a career in political analysis?


Noah "Nog" M. said...

I don't quite get the Labor Party these days. Aren't they nominally socialists?

And if Blair nearly wanted to marry Bush, what are the Conservative Party guys doing? If the Labor men are bomb Iraq guys, do the conservatives want to get the Queen to reclaim the throne of France and declare war on the whole world? Maybe your "conservatives" aren't the war fellows that our "conservative" Republicans are.

I just don't get it. Pro-Bush pinkos? Does the Socialist Party of China want to cut taxes and allow private property now (wait, I think they do)? Is this just some sly move to cannibalize the whole conservative side of things? What is Labor for nowadays?

Lucy said...

Labour hasn't been Socialist since Blair dragged them to the right in the late 90's so now the Conservatives and Labour are shamefully fighting on the same right of centre ground.

Noah "Nog" M. said...

Let me try to get it straight:

-Guns: nonissue (meaning almost the same)
-Government Health Plan: nonissue
-War: ?
-Lords Reform: Labor's a bit more aggressive on it
-Monarchy: nonissue
-Privatization: trivial differences
-Trade: trivial differences
-EU: Conservatives are a bit more "Euro-sceptical"
-Scotland & Wales Jumping Ship: nonissue

Am I of the correct understanding on these things? They would really be just different factions of the same party/movement here wouldn't they? What are the LDs for? I thought they were more "libertarianish" but someone told me they're not really much of anything insofar as they're not terribly "pro-market" (at least by American standards).

Wow, I just Wikipediaed the LDs again and this political chart has the Conservatives and the Labor fellows nearly on top of each other.

How does anyone make up their minds?

Noah "Nog" M. said...

I've gotta post over on my end on this...

ZenYenta said...

That's brilliant, Lucy. I didn't even realize he was here. And that's probably just the way he wanted it. You're so right.

Lucy said...

See zenyenta, it worked.