91热爆

People want simple answers and certainty. Sometimes the world isn't like that. I guess, this was one of those everything and nothing presentations. They can be pretty frustrating but, I think, anything more or less than what was delivered would've been unhelpful. It's important, in strategic terms, to shield your mind from the enemy. Informing the public and keeping terrorists in the dark can be a tricky business but this seems to have been pulled off skilfully.

I'm sure President Bush wishes to end his presidency well and a possibility of that does exist, if the surge and counter-insurgency goes according to plan. He made mistakes and is accountable for that and, however unwillingly, may end up delivering the result both public and international community have been calling for. Here, a certain amount of tongue biting may have to take place. This can be useful in keeping things moving forward whoever replaces him.

My gut-feeling is that Gordon Brown has got other priorities he wishes to focus on. Sure, the Iraq War will continue to demand his attention but domestic policy and other foreign affairs beckon, and I'm pretty sure he'll want to develop those. If the big decisions are made, there's little point in worrying it to death. Better to leave it in the hands of competent authority and set productive goals and build fruitful alliances for the future. After all, it's where we'll all be living.

How about something fun and frivolous for a change?

Hi Scoop, was the,"You better cover your bald head", comment by the President directed at you ?

For Bush and Brown to talk about human rights and democracy is a joke for all the obvious reasons. Same old talk with the usual directly opposite actions.

It is self-evident that nothing has really changed. As in the Gatopardo, something was changed, for everything to remain the same. What is worse, Brown has the likeability factor of a crocodile. We are facing difficult times in the international arena and Britain does not have one man able to stir Britain away from trouble. For all the talk about keeping our veto in Europe regarding foreign policy we do not have an independent foreign policy. I travel to Russia on a regular basis and Britain has become a laughing stock. We do not have an independent foreign policy and, what is more, we lost our credibility. I have just returned from Russia and I must say that I have had in recent weeks every reason to be ashamed of being British. We are behaving like a satellite country, reading from a script that somebody else wrote for us. Gordon Brown might know a lot about economics, but knows very little about foreign affairs and diplomacy. Our attitude towards British/Russian relations is childish to say the least.

I think the Golf Buggy was a lot more significant than you have reported.

As you say in diplomatic terms they have coded language.

This Golf Buggy "photo opp" was an almost certain deliberate event to greet Brown. It was designed to say, we acknowledge your recent actions...... But I (Bush) am the boss - I drive, you follow. Or as Bush once said "your either with us or your against us". Brown had to get in the Buggy and Bush drove him away - power politics in action.

Remember this is the first time the two have met in the capacity as PM and President. Whilst the US and the UK are still close, this was a message that Bush was sending. I am in charge; you are my passenger.

Yes Nick, you're right- "full and frank" is the key phrase here and many other correspondents haven't picked up on that yet. Also, the way he spoke of America the nation and the presidency rather than Bush himself was very revealing

This visit will prove that Brown will be a well respected World Leader less the spin and hype and present well constructive policies that are well thought out.Also continuing our close relationship with our good friends in the USA.

I think it was in the back of Gordon Brown's mind to publicly hint at a retreat of troops in Iraq. But whether he has the courage and grit to say it will be the thing that sets him apart from the last PM.
As to his wanting to untie the rope between Great Britain and the USA, Gordon's almost obvious lack of physical proximity with President Bush says it all. The golf buggy was entirely inappropriate for a meeting of two of the worlds most powerful men, Brown saw this, Bush didn't.

Gordon Brown represents the future. Bush has few friends, even in the American Congress. Brown had to meet with Bush but he has no long term dating plans with Bush and his failed foreign policies. Time is on Gordon's side while the sun is setting on Bush. Bob Mulholland, Chico, California, USA

It's typical of Bush to use a personal criticism when his brain can't manage a political one!

Nick

Have a care. One minute you're exchanging quips with George Dubya, the next you are a special rendition case.

By the way, can you give us a clue as to who might have given President Bush the wholly misleading impression that Gordon Brown was dour and awkward ? Next he'll be telling us he had expected him to psycholigcally flawed.

I generally like your writing, Nick. But you should be either severely punished or highly lauded for giving Dubya a chance to look quick-witted... I can't decide which.

The media seem to be presenting this as a renewal of the "lap-dog" relationship. I hope that is not true. I hope Gordon Brown will put some distance betweeen himself and Bush and abandon this tragic enterprise in Iraq and let the Iraqis determine their own destiny.

#10 Gordon Brown 'represents' a country, 'Britain' that barely exists, except through political inertia, and via devolution, is now coming apart at the seams.

It realy amazes me how the British political establishment continues to remain stubbornly stuck in some official 'fantasy land', where the myth is peddled that we still have considerable influence in the world.

Those who can see through it, such as the Russians, simply laugh.

You can't bluff them.

I'm fairly confident that the American politicians have had us pinned as fools, but useful, mostly willing fools, for at least the last few decades.

You might have noticed that the Aussies have been considerably smarter than 'our' politicians in dealing with the Americans, especially over Iraq.

Privately, many European politicians know and resent the fact that the Americans have been calling the shots for so long, hence their drive to generate a 'United States of Europe' to act as some sort of counter-balance to American hegemony.

One day, we English will accept our reduced standing in conventional political world affairs and be more comfortable in our own skins for it.

We know that we're living a lie, or more accurately, our politicians are.

A better man in Gordon Brown's position would, by way of making it clear to his 'home audience' and, perhaps, happen gain the respect of US Democrat voters in Louisana and Mississippi and beyond, have declined the summit, claiming extraneous circumstances (ie the Flood) and asked to reschedule. (No big diff. What's a week or two between friends?) This would have given Brown the 'distance' he needs from Bush and shown (albeit belatedly) his concern for UK residents. His ratings would have improved - at last, a man of principle. Instead, by attending at Bush's behest, he shows he is in as much thrall (at least Blair was enthusiastically, if adolescently, honest about his Stateside celebrity status)as every previous incumbent (with the possible exception of Wilson). More than a quarter of a million people in the UK have had no running water for more than a week - and what's Brown's response? Allow Mr Healey, the minister appointed to oversee recovery, to go on a trip to France, which had been "booked for months", and then take himself for talks with a straw man. Bush (New Orleans), Aznar (Prestige/Galicia), and now Brown and the Yorkshire and Glos/Worcs/Oxon floods. Proof, by their actions, that they (all) think they inhabit another plane or planet.The labour movement was built on the foundation of solidarity. Solidarity is not dead - it merely slumbers - Brown knows that but doesn't believe it, or, more likely, is advised to ignore it.

Wow Nick.... have you finished pampering your ego yet?
Interesting article you linked to. A couple of sentences caught my eye:

"high-quality, sophisticated global news coverage芒鈧�渢he very brand of journalism, it so happens, they [British journalists] **think** they provide."

Indeed. They do seem to possess rather an over-inflated view of their own self-importance, don't they?

"[Nick Robinson] thinks the fact that his question was at all remarkable reflects a fairly fundamental cultural difference in how British and American reporters see their relationship to public officials, and how seriously they take their role as watchdogs. 'The stakes are high,' says Robinson. 'It seems to me this is about holding people to account.'"

That's what **you'd** like to think. I don't think most people care what journalists think. My own opinion of the British press - yourself and the pompous 91热爆 included - is that they're permanently looking for their next headline, at the expense of the very thing they're supposed to be provide us with: the truth.

I've lost count of the number of marine biologists I've seen on TV today telling us categorically there is no great white shark off the Cornish coast; I've also lost count of the number of headlines proclaiming there might be one there after all! You carry on telling us what you think is important, we'll just keep on ignoring you and your perpetual cynicism.

As for "holding people to account". Who holds YOU to account? 91热爆 journalists have to be some of the laziest I've ever seen. The relevant facts, history, connections and contexts that go unstated in every 91热爆 article are astounding; I am frequently amazed at how biased, inaccurate, dumbed-down, pointless and downright shoddy their work is, to the point where I no longer consider the 91热爆 a reliable source of news.

And don't even get me started on the relentless anti-American, anti-Israel, even anti-Western drip feed. Imagine trying to fight WW2 with the 91热爆 we have today - who needs the Germans as enemies? What sickens me most is I am forced to pay for it!

You should have asked Bush if he had remembered to put his brain in today.

Was it deliberate that Gordon Brown repeated twice (maybe thrice?) that all "areas for which we are responsible" in Iraq have been handed over barring one, thereby clearly demonstrating the 'policy-space' between the current UK thinking and the continuing "denial" by GWB? The fact that this led to GWB is his usual awkward style to spin about "result oriented" action was the only substantial message from the entire press conference to me. Either the Foreign Office briefings for Gordon Brown have stepped up several notches or he is more of a pragmatic person than we have seen so far as Chancellor.

Thanks for your precious report as most other journalists I've read haven't really stressed the "full and frank" aspect of their meeting, giving the impression Brown was fully agreeing on most of Bush's statements. I suppose the two, at their first meeting, were testing the waters and taking measures, but it seems to me the distance between them on international issues and on the basic interpretation of key concepts such as terrorism and crime is quite evident. Luckily.

Keep asking those difficult , awkward Questions Nick... your audience appreciates a 91热爆 that is apolitical in every which way!

Gordon Brown should be asked, whilst enjoying his bounce,(sounds like one of those castles kids have in their back gardens)to get back here quickly & sort out those unpaletable debacles, the NHS ,Prisons, Immigration, Floods payments,EU referendum?,pensions,justice,security,Education....et al!the bounce would become a stagger.Yes Nick...you've guessed it... I'm a Tory.

The personal disdain of a President is a precious thing. Cherish it, Nick.

All politics are local, and in this case it has two very different 'locls' to play in simultaneously. It sounds like they did it very well.

Gordon Brown failed to stand up to George Bush, the "full and frank" comment has been exposed as a Brown lie.

So nothing changed, nothing will change until the senior partner in this special relationship says so.

Same US lead and collar, different but the same UK dog.

You should have responded to the original "you still hanging around?" with "funny, I was about to ask you the same thing".

After Bush insulted Nick, Bush and Brown walked away as the conference had finished.

But Bush couldn't help looking back over his shoulder to the reporters with the most idiotic smirk on this face - directed to Nick i think. And Bush is the most powerful man on the earth - dreadul.

#6Andrew Jones I quite agree with you about the golf buggy, I thought Gordon Brown though got his own back when he did not turn around as Bush did after the conference. Nick maybe Bush turned back to let you know he cares, why else would he do that?

Broadly, I am an admirer of the Americian political system, the Founding Fathers devised a system that has been so successful that today America is the worlds only true superpower.

However, the Presidental system does not seem to work very well at all, being mostly dominated by a handful of 'political' families over the last few decades i.e. the Bushes, Kennedys and Clintons.

George W Bush was a very inexperienced Presidental candidate in terms of foreign affairs, but he was supposedly guided by some 'wise men', Cheney, Rumsfeld, et al.

Who unfortunately, turned out to be anything but.

Especially Don Rumsfeld, who made three crucial errors in Iraq, which has lead directly to the current disaster there.

The Americans and the world are stuck with George W. for the time being but I hope that whoever comes next as President is somebody who captures the true spirit of America, bold, caring, generous, freedom-loving democrats, a people who overall have done the world far, far more good than harm.

Nick,

I can't help agreeing with the earlier post regarding how low the 91热爆 has sunk. I listened to the prepared statement read out by Brown, and couldn't wait until the questions started. Unfortunately, the response by Brown to the first question was simply to pretend that a different question had been asked. Where is this in your account, or that of the many other 91热爆 journalists? Simply put, these summits present journalists with a few photo opp's, a chance to travel at the licence payers expense, and endless hours of meaningless prattle. I would respect your institution much more if the effort that went in to grilling Cameron about Conservative grumbles (5 Live this morning) went in to holding Brown and his henchmen to account. If they don't answer a straight question, then stop the interview rather than allow them to spout the party line (which is in any event usually a work of fiction).

Remember to keep applying the sun screen.

So the Special Relationship is in good order?

Here Gordon! (Woof woof, wag wag!)

Let's make some statement about the War on Terror and shared values eh? Always best to get the bullshit out of the way first!

Sure Boss! (Woof, woof, wag wag!)

Nothing has changed.

It's all very well to bask in the glory of your "insightful, probing and impertinent" questioning of Bush; that's easy when it is practically a 91热爆 bye law to demonstrate your anti Bush, anti American credentials.

I just wish you could be a bit more probing and challenging with Brown.
How about "Prime Minister are you the same Mr Brown who destroyed the UKs Pension structure, has lied about every new tax you have raised and who has presided over the catastrophic decline in education, health and law and order standards even as you pumped more and more of our money into these services? Or was that a different Mr Brown?"

But then you wouldn't get a pat on the back and a glow of self righteousness for that, would you?

The high-speed golf cart getaway was indeed significant. It almost came across as brusque to the point of bullying- a "Yo Blair" moment.

What an interesting counter-factual if the PM had fallen out of the golf cart. Would he have got up and nutted Bush I wonder? Magical days.

PS- The CJR article is also worth reading, although the title and early tone are quite at odds with the overall message of the piece, which seems to be that the US and UK press have differing strengths and weaknesses that wind up more or less complementing one another. The lack of UK deference to the PM is obviously because the concept of national personification or figurehead is here devolved to the Queen, who even at that (Gor bless 'er) is more or less only tolerated in an almost tongue-in-cheek way as a useful constitutional anachronism rather than being recognised as fundamental to the political process, as the US president is. Anyway, one only has to walk around any big city in the US and have a look at the number of flags to realise that Americans are sometimes a bit loopy about these things. By the same token, I highly recommend subscribing (for free) to the New York Times via their daily emailed headlines edition- a refreshing alternative take on events (without being overloaded with pop-culture crap as many "serious" UK "broad" sheets are) and some refreshing journalism (including the long investigative pieces often alluded to). Quite the opposite to American sterotypes, the editorial narrative is in fact generally very dry and dispassionate, by stark contrast to the shrieking diuretic style exemplified by the Monbiot-Phillips Axis of Stupidity. (PPS- Don't know what kind of subs they employ at Colombia, but decades (e.g. 1990s) are plural, not possessive.)

Did Dubya's personal double-insult to Nick put anyone else in the mind of the classic playground bully - scared of a greater intellect so going personal instead?

Did Dubya's personal double-insult to Nick put anyone else in the mind of the classic playground bully - scared of a greater intellect so going personal instead?

Yes.

President Bush's character type is very narrow minded, inflexible, and prone to acting like a bully if they have the opportunity. This character type rarely rises above the post room, makes for a poor middle manager, and is an absolute disaster as a CEO. Good workhorrse and lobby fodder but quite useless in all other respects.

I have a local councillor like this. *sigh*

Whoever said Brown knows very little about foreign affairs knows very little about Brown- his knowledge of America past and present is encyclopedic.

But good for you, Nick, for making an impression on Bush. He was right, though, your head did look very red on the evening bulletin. I hope you put some aftersun on it!

It is obvious from many of the comments here that people have been CONNED already into thinking that Brown is OK - the guy who singlehandedly wrecked peoples lives by destroying their pensions, sold UK gold for peanuts, taxed us to death and beyond, and WAS a member of a Cabinet for 10 years yet NEVER argued or resigned over ANYTHING - people GET REAL - SMELL THE COFFEE.

#39 Who do you choose to be conned by? I think you should give people credit...

Nick Robinson, really! You where close enough to the President that you could actually speak to him and yet you never did the free world a favour by punching him square in the face?

What a disapointment! If I was ever to get that close I would take his hand in a firm handshake and then say, this is from the founding fathers who's message and legacy you have defiled and then punch him really hard on the nose.

Talk about a wasted opportunity. I mean how many more chances are you likely to get.

At the end of today's briefing, the president looked at me, sweating in the swampy conditions, and said, "next time you should cover your bald head". I made the fatal error of answering a quip with a quip: "I didn't know you cared". To which the president said, quick as a flash, "I don't".

Heh. Nick was pwned by The Man.

No Christmas card for me from Washington, then.

You celebrate Christmas? Best not say that too loud, as you might offend the murdering Islamicist thugs you (and yours) are so hot to appease.

It is further the cause of Republicanism to restore a clear understanding of the tyranny of man over man in the world at large. It is our cause to dispel the foggy thinking which avoids hard decisions in the illusion that a world of conflict will somehow mysteriously resolve itself into a world of harmony, if we just don't rock the boat or irritate the forces of aggression - and this is hogwash.

Today, as then, but more urgently and more broadly than then, the task of preserving and enlarging freedom at home and safeguarding it from the forces of tyranny abroad is great enough to challenge all our resources and to require all our strength. Anyone who joins us in all sincerity, we welcome. Those who do not care for our cause, we don't expect to enter our ranks in any case. And let our Republicanism, so focused and so dedicated, not be made fuzzy and futile by unthinking and stupid labels.

I would remind you that extremism in the defense of liberty is no vice. And let me remind you also that moderation in the pursuit of justice is no virtue.

Barry Goldwater

Whats this I hear...???
The President of the U.S.A. dosen't care about Nick..!!!!. Like Nick I am from Macclesfield ( Nick's Birth Place )and Good Old George Dubya had better think twice about picking on one of Our very Own...!!!!!!!.

President Bush's character type is very narrow minded, inflexible, and prone to acting like a bully if they have the opportunity. This character type rarely rises above the post room, makes for a poor middle manager, and is an absolute disaster as a CEO.

Yes - funny how in the richest, most highly advanced and highly educated country in the world, these types of people keep getting voted to the top of the tree. Something wrong with the electoral system there, surely.

Nick - Although you are not entirely bald, the President was right in that you should wear a hat on really hot days. Try wowing them with something really stylish. Look after your head: if anything goes wrong with it, bang goes all our political wit!

In that occasion, why was it a fatal error to answer a quip with a quip?

Hey Nick,

"I didn't know you cared". To which the president said, quick as a flash, "I don't".

Point out he's in denial of that too next time ;)

It was a mistake to answer a quip form the more powerful G Bush because Bush would have to cap that jocular remark with another to maintain face (social ascendancy).

To do so without a minor humiliation for our hero would require social skills, self assurance and a generous soul which Mr Bush may possibly lack . . . as most of us would in his situation, I suspect.

Yes - funny how in the richest, most highly advanced and highly educated country in the world, these types of people keep getting voted to the top of the tree. Something wrong with the electoral system there, surely.

It's the way of the world. President Bush has his pluses and minuses, like everyone else. Individual and collective wobble is the price of playing the game. In spite of our knowledge and skill we can all monumentally screw up. Understanding this and working towards perfect is at the core of Zen Buddhism. The kicker? I'm part of the problem as well.

It was a mistake to answer a quip form the more powerful G Bush because Bush would have to cap that jocular remark with another to maintain face (social ascendancy). To do so without a minor humiliation for our hero would require social skills, self assurance and a generous soul which Mr Bush may possibly lack . . . as most of us would in his situation, I suspect.

Games of power, relationships, competition, wowing audiences, stamping your ego over everything, and accumulating as much capital as possible are routine in life. As unedifying as this discussion could be considered it is an opportunity to learn. This is where a playful attitude and patience can help things slide by and improvement develop.

A smile and a hug is a useful weapon of war for a strategist, yes?

Why is it wrong to respond to such a remark. Bush should have more on his mind, and more class, than to start such a conversation. Quietzapple is unfortunately correct, but he is surely too generous in his appraisal of Bush's character. There again, we have the episode highlightingthe difference between brass and class.

With regard to President Bush's treatment of Nick Robinson, is this the communication level of the leader of the Western world? Not only does he make an insulting, puerile remark to a journalist, but he obviously thinks that press conference discussions about the Iraq War merit flippancy.

What hope is there for the world while such a moron is President of the United States? US citizens need to ask questions about the state of their democracy, as to how their system can produce such a disastrous leader, especially at a time when the world needs a leader with lucidity, perception and vision.