political commentator * author * publisher * bookseller * radio presenter * blogger * Conservative candidate * former lobbyist * Jack Russell owner * West Ham United fanatic * Email iain AT iaindale DOT com
Friday, March 06, 2009
Gordon Brown: America Did It
I didn't see Gordon Brown's speech to Congress. But having now viewed this one minute YouTube clip, I think I can see why his trip bombed so badly... :)
Sheesh. Why can't be just be honest with ourselves here? Is that too much to ask?
The trip was not an astonishing historical milestone - but nor was it a "complete bomb".
Brown is trying to bask in the fictional reflected glory of Obama. But the British Media (this now includes you, Iain) are playing exactly the same game: trying to bask in the fictional "failure" of Brown's trip.
All told, it was a very ordinary trip in which Brown gave a better-than-expected speech. So it was "OK-plus". Can we move on?
If I may just repeat myself from an earlier post elsewhere here (I did watch the speech live, as it happens):
Very good speech in Washington. He must have surprised himself. He certainly surprised everyone else.
The speech to the joint session of Congress wasn’t to British tastes but was absolutely right for a sentimental and schmaltzy US audience. (I believe he is mates with House Speaker Nancy Pelosi - hence the invite.)
He really rose to the occasion. Why doesn’t he rise to the occasion here?
And if the British “commentators” are saying otherwise (I hadn’t noticed) then they are emphatically wrong. It was very well judged for his US audience. Of course it didn’t suit a British audience; but it was aimed squarely at the US. It was just right. And it was very well delivered too.
You'd have thought (hoped) that Brown would have chosen to stay where he was popular. If he's going down (advisedly!) so well in America perhaps we could persuade the Americans to take him on some sort of lease lend basis.
Actually the whole purpose of Brown going to Washington was to get him some sort of credibility at home. In that, it has been disastrous.
Unfortunately for him Simon, what the American audience thought of it is irrelevant. It's us, the british voters who will (some of us increasingly impatiently!) decide his fate. I wonder if those boyscouts would have applauded so often if they'd heard him blame America over the last few months for the crisis.
I actually found the way he tried to toady up to 'Barack' quite nauseating. Obama knows Brown's problems here. He's not committing to anything with Brown when he knows he'll be dealing with Cameron by mid 2010.
Uncle Bob said... “Unfortunately for him Simon, what the American audience thought of it is irrelevant.”
Very possibly. But he’s always loved the place and constantly holidayed (sp?) there. He has tons of friends in US politics.
If he wanted his speech to go down well with his audience there, he got it absolutely right. I completely agree that meant it wouldn’t go down as well here.
And I don’t think anyone in the US is presuming anything about whether they will or will not be dealing with Cameron. I seem to recall Iain Dale is still mooting a hung parliament...
10 comments:
Exactly as he should have. Then he saw the young and innocent faces of his press ganged audience of boy scouts and bottled out.
What a heart!
Errm. His trip and speech to the joint session of Congress in particular went very well actually - surprisingly.
You must be inhabiting an alternative universe or something. (I hold no brief whatsoever for Gordon Brown, but credit where credit is so clearly due.)
Simon, "I hold no brief for Gordon Brown" LolLolLol
Virtually every commentator has described his trip in very negative terms.
The guy played up expectations. This was the make or break move.
Is it any wonder it got trashed?
(Personally I find it a tad degrading that Brown clung to this idea of clinging to Obama for a poll boost.)
Sheesh. Why can't be just be honest with ourselves here? Is that too much to ask?
The trip was not an astonishing historical milestone - but nor was it a "complete bomb".
Brown is trying to bask in the fictional reflected glory of Obama. But the British Media (this now includes you, Iain) are playing exactly the same game: trying to bask in the fictional "failure" of Brown's trip.
All told, it was a very ordinary trip in which Brown gave a better-than-expected speech. So it was "OK-plus". Can we move on?
If I may just repeat myself from an earlier post elsewhere here (I did watch the speech live, as it happens):
Very good speech in Washington. He must have surprised himself. He certainly surprised everyone else.
The speech to the joint session of Congress wasn’t to British tastes but was absolutely right for a sentimental and schmaltzy US audience. (I believe he is mates with House Speaker Nancy Pelosi - hence the invite.)
He really rose to the occasion. Why doesn’t he rise to the occasion here?
And if the British “commentators” are saying otherwise (I hadn’t noticed) then they are emphatically wrong. It was very well judged for his US audience. Of course it didn’t suit a British audience; but it was aimed squarely at the US. It was just right. And it was very well delivered too.
You'd have thought (hoped) that Brown would have chosen to stay where he was popular. If he's going down (advisedly!) so well in America perhaps we could persuade the Americans to take him on some sort of lease lend basis.
Actually the whole purpose of Brown going to Washington was to get him some sort of credibility at home. In that, it has been disastrous.
Unfortunately for him Simon, what the American audience thought of it is irrelevant. It's us, the british voters who will (some of us increasingly impatiently!) decide his fate. I wonder if those boyscouts would have applauded so often if they'd heard him blame America over the last few months for the crisis.
I actually found the way he tried to toady up to 'Barack' quite nauseating. Obama knows Brown's problems here. He's not committing to anything with Brown when he knows he'll be dealing with Cameron by mid 2010.
Uncle Bob said... “Unfortunately for him Simon, what the American audience thought of it is irrelevant.”
Very possibly. But he’s always loved the place and constantly holidayed (sp?) there. He has tons of friends in US politics.
If he wanted his speech to go down well with his audience there, he got it absolutely right. I completely agree that meant it wouldn’t go down as well here.
And I don’t think anyone in the US is presuming anything about whether they will or will not be dealing with Cameron. I seem to recall Iain Dale is still mooting a hung parliament...
Though I’m not.
then why is he blaming British Bankers?
Post a Comment