HuffPostcard from London: Bush, Brown, Nannygate, and The Youthful Government in Waiting

LONDON - I didn't plan my trip to London to overlap with President Bush's, but that's how it worked out. (I'm actually here to speak at a women's conference sponsored by Deutsche Bank, and to meet with the editors of The Guardian and The Times to see what they are up to online.)

My reception has been decidedly less chilly than the one afforded Bush.

It is true that the British press gave style points to Bush compared to Gordon Brown during their joint press conference on Monday -- Bush described as "spry," "tanned," and "full of beans"; Brown derided as "grey and exhausted," "blotchy," and "thuggish." But that's where the kind words ended.

In America, Obama and the Democrats are the party of youth, dynamism, and forward thinking. In England, it's the Conservatives who lay claim to youth and the future -- led by David Cameron, who is 41 and looks 15, and who wears his web savviness on his sleeve, referring to Brown as "an analogue politician in a digital age." This week he declared that the UK has to "go green" in the face of rising oil prices.

I met many members of the Conservatives' "government in waiting" (as my old friend Simon Jenkins described them) at a cocktail reception held by the Policy Exchange, a conservative think tank. George Osborne, the 37 year old Shadow Chancellor of the Exchequer, promised to blog on HuffPost, very interested as he is in the power of the Internet to recast politics for the digital age: "We need to harness the Internet to help us become more accountable, more transparent and more accessible," he said.

Of course, it's not like the Conservatives are problem free. The party's chairman, Caroline Spelman, is currently embroiled in Nannygate, accused of using public funds to pay her nanny to look after her children.

I got all the details on the scandal in the green room waiting to go on Newsnight, the influential BBC show that broke the story. Michael Crick, Newsnight's political editor predicted that Spelman wouldn't survive the controversy. "She's claiming the nanny handled administrative duties for her," he told me. "Can she type?" I asked. (Here's a clip from the Newsnight appearance.)

The next morning, I was picked up at my hotel in a hybrid Lexus by James Harding, the editor of the London Times -- at 39, only 2 years older than the Shadow Chancellor of the Exchequer. As we drove to his office for a breakfast meeting with a great group of Times editors and columnists, he told me that when the paper puts Obama on its cover they see a significant jump in newsstand sales.

Among those I met over breakfast was Anne Spackman, editor-in-chief of Times Online, who has played a major role in schooling many of the paper's writers in the ways of the Internet. When I told her about HuffPost's OffTheBus running the raw audio of campaign conference calls, she practically jumped out of her seat, announcing: "We'll link to that as soon as we finish this meeting!" We talked about how the paper has recently digitized over 20 million articles from its archives. They date back to 1785 and include the paper's coverage of the Battle of Waterloo. It brought home in a dramatic way just how new a kid on the block HuffPost is -- delivering news and opinion since May 9, 2005.

Anne also told me about an interesting controversy when the Times reprinted an online discussion among their parenting bloggers in the paper's print edition: turns out the bloggers were outraged that their online discussion had been "made public." In their eyes, print was a public forum while online was private.

Daniel Finkelstein, a weekly columnist and Comment Editor of the Times, was also at the breakfast. One of his most recent pieces is a fascinating take on McCain, Obama and the role what he calls "the legacy" of the 1960s will play in the '08 race.

It includes laudatory words about both candidates. No one I met had anything laudatory to say about the man one of them will succeed. Indeed, just about the only person in England heaping praise on Bush was Brown, who thanked the president for being "a true friend of Britain," thanked him for his "friendship" and "leadership," and said, "I look forward to our continued friendship."

This encomium was described to me by one of Brown's detractors -- a rapidly expanding group -- as a perfect example of the replacement-Prime Minister's "political tone deafness." Brown and Bush are not really friends, so what does it gain Brown to talk as if they are?

Brown is struggling. He's received a lot of flack, even from within his own party, for his support of a controversial proposal that allows the government to hold terror suspects without charge for 42 days. The measure barely passed in the House of Commons last week and led to the protest resignation of Tory MP David Davis, the shadow home secretary.

And the Daily Mail's Daniel Martin reported that, according to official figures, "stress levels in government have soared since Gordon Brown became Prime Minister... Far more civil servants are taking time off for 'depression, anxiety and potential stress-related problems' than under Tony Blair." Not exactly a rave review for the new boss.

John Cusack, who is in London shooting a new film, was going to swing by for a drink before a dinner hosted by Alan Rusbridger, editor of The Guardian, at the Garrick club, a historic haunt for theater and literary types -- until he heard that he would have to put on a tie to come in. "I don't even have a tie with me," he told me with a laugh.

So we met at the National Gallery, which was showing an exhibit dedicated to the work of Italy's "divisionist" painters between 1891 and 1910. The exhibit is called Radical Light. And as we took in the paintings and talked about the latest happenings with War, Inc, I was struck that even at the National, political overtones -- Radical Right, divisionists -- were very much in the British air.

Or perhaps it was just my politically obsessed mind.

Follow Arianna Huffington on Twitter: www.twitter.com/ariannahuff

Comments

[macbabe]

Good article Arianna thanks...
enjoyed John Cusack on Larry King last night too, as tired as he was.

[ianrthorpe]

I say old girl, steady on!

I've been in several Beeb establishments and though there are, as you say, food outlets everywhere, finding something one would actually dare to eat is a very different matter.

http://greenteeth.blog.co.uk/2008/06/20/first-a-change-of-religion-then-a-change-4340931

[3Ons]

Panegyric divisionist praise of the radical left? (I don't know how to use that word, either).

:lol:

See, Robert S. Meuller is faced with the same thing. But it's the people doing the work that always take the blame. That didn't happen over-night. It took over a decade. And the 'same-crowd' is installing their own to setup the next decade for 'more-of-t­he-same.'

Trillions out of economy as a result -- and tens-of-trillions in pledges/liabilities tangentially.

The problem is a branch. The trunk and top are 'okay..'

That would be a 'panegyric' of Arianna's intelligence, richly deserved.

Kind Regards,
3Ons

[dawlishgal]

I used to be more informed about British politics when I watched the PM's question time on C-Span. I stopped doing that when Tony Blair became Bush's poodle and Paddy Ashdown disappeared from the public political scene. I wish that the Liberal Democrats could find a strong leader and give the Tories a run for their money. Maybe they have already done that???? It has been a while since I paid attention. Labour seems to have painted itself into a corner, thanks to Blair.

[mossey]

Unfortunately while Nick Clegg, the current Liberal Democrat leader, is perfectey ok, the LibDems are firmly ensconsed in their 3rd party position. The Tories are resurgent, as evidenced by recent resounding victories in recent local and by elections, and Boris Johnson's election as Mayor of London. Look forward to a decade of Conservative rule in the UK.

[only1Demvoter]

I really love you, Arianna.

" Can she type ? "

( ... heh... )


PRICELESS ! -ralph

[andj]

I saw you being interviewed by Jeremy Paxman on BBC Newsnight. Unfortunately I only caught the second half.

You were great. In part of the interview, Jeremy Paxman body language was very strange, very defensive. Don’t know what was going on there.

And yes we are obsessed with Obama. Sigh. I don’t know what is going on with UK politics but I’m well informed about the latest in the US scene and players via Huffington Post.

[BlackWidowPilot]

andj,

my wife and I caught the interview in its entirety. To be blunt, Paxman was just short of rude and overtly hostile in his line of questioning, but Ms. Huffington is clearly a lady of the old school and unflappable in the face of such pit bull questioning, answering his accusatory and frankly red herring questions with a calm, firm delivery of the facts of the matter. So IMHO what you saw was the aftermath, where Paxman had just been hoist on his own petard, and made to look the complete corporate fool by his own combative nonsense.

I also suspect that what Ms. Huffington represents -news reporting in the age of the internet supplanting traditional media- is taken as a direct threat to the validity of the mainstream media and its for-profit driven agenda, including the BBC and Mr. Paxman's cushy job.

Cheers!

Leland R. Erickson

Citizen

[afed27]

Obama & his entourage may be the candidates of youth [ youth meaning the immature, the naive, the unschooled ], dynamism [ I say rashism ], forward thinking? I would say that if their thinking is "forward thinking", then they should backtrack a bit. Obama's judgements in his dealings, as well as his proposals for his plans should he be elected, are wrought with danger . His past judgements of his associations for 23 years with Wright, Ayers, Rezko, & others speak badly of his ability to make wise decisions. Or, is this an indication of Obama's true political leanings? If so, the situation is more dire. Obama has "misspoken" on a number of issues, his claim for when he has been ctriticized. Most of the time , tho, he blames us for twisting or misinterpreting, or misunderstanding his words. Can we afford to have a President whose words constantly have to corrected? McCain has other faults. Neither one of these men is qualified to be our President. Is there an Independent in the house?

[Indubio]

OK so neither man is qualified but guess what one of them will be president. The question then is which one? Obama is light years ahead of McCain in virtually every measurable and qualitative category and if you doubt this take the time to read about McCain. I can tell that what;s being printed isn't pretty. The guy's pretty scummy.

[castlerider]

Actually, it seems you have not been enlightened properly concerning Obama having association with people that the right have been calling troublesome, where actually, they are very little more then acquaintances. Obama was a professor teaching Constitutional law. He has associated with hundreds of people, but it is actually quite inaccurate and unfair to imply by any scope of the imagination that he is associated with anyone of questionable character as if he was joined at the hip with these people, in his dealings. he bought a house from one person who is also a realtor, may have even had him over for dinner, but goodness, it is not a person he has made money with, or any other escapade. The other is also a professor who had a colorful past in dissent, but it was not a past that involved Obama whatsoever.
So your idea that Obama's associations are "wrought with danger" are actually silly, and on the face of it, quite laughable, after one has been educated as to the true and real properties involved. he is a man of impeccable integrity, and will be an excellent president that will see that our economies flourish, and America stands strong and peaceful, respected abroad like it has not been in years under the current president, whom we more likely refer to as our chimp.

[brokenarrow]

"True political leanings," indeed. From your past posts, you state that HRC should run on the Independent ticket....­....and that that is our only hope.

So you knock Obama every step of the way? What is that about? What exactly are HRC's true political leanings..­..........­...sheesh!­!!

IMHO, this post of yours is quite off topic. I don't suffer embittered, back-stabbing, opportunistic fools very well.

[BardEric]

Psst..... HRC is irrelevant­..She lost, Obama won...We need to move on. as I believe you may have noticed that there is an election to be won? Please, just dont take the bait.

PS:This from a STAUNCH HRC supporter, and Admirer.

[habajebe]

"Can we afford to have a President whose words constantly have to corrected?"

Earth to afed23... have you been paying attention for the last seven and a half years? We were blessed by Poppy's buddies on the Supremes with a pitiful excuse for a president who is incapable of stringing a few words together to make a coherent sentence. He can't even pronounce "nuclear."

"His past judgements of his associatio­ns..."

Ever heard of David Addington? How about John Yoo? Supposedly "brilliant" lawyers who, at the behest of their corrupt masters, twisted the law to allow kidnapping, torture and murder, all in the name of national security. Dead Eye Dick Cheney and Little Dubya surrounded themselves with sycophants and yes men who told them exactly what they wanted to hear.

But Obama is dangerous.

Try as we might, it remains impossible to make the right wing look any more ridiculous than they regularly make themselves. I believe it has to do with their subject matter... no boys kissing, low (or no) taxes, no abortion, let's go shoot somebody, damn Bill Clinton for these gas prices, etc. There's only so much you can do with that crap before it starts to get stale. Like afed23

[letsmakesense]

Obama is dangerous. Ziggy is his advisor. Wife sits on CFR. He attended Biddleburg Virginia meeting this month. Vote to legalize illegal wiretaping a few days ago. Voted for every war app ropreation. He would bomb Iran(of course after talking) What kind of bull is this? We need a Pres who says NO MORE WARS OF AGGRESSION>Pon Paul/Jess Ventura

[rockgrrl]

Here's a great blog on Blurt-online.com talking about the writers experience as an American in Europe and how Obama has changed their perspective quite a bit!! Definitely makes me feel hopeful...

http://www.blurt-online.com/blogs/view/127/

[KoolBreez]

rockgrrl ,

I just read the blog on your link. Pretty good..That seems to be the sentiment everywhere, not Just in Europe..El­ecting Obama is the first step towards America's redemption­..

[bluff]

That does sound hopeful but why in the hell did even the Queen, the bloody Pope, Merkel and the rest welcome George with smiles and open arms and even kudos? Weren't they in essence condoning his behavior, condoning his murderous deeds, his not so long ago utter disdain of them and their views?

Of course it is an accepted historical fact that when the people of any nation threaten the survival of their ruler, rulers of other nations flock to his rescue - even when they can't stand his guts. It's the old 'them' against 'us' syndrome.

[research]

Typical British conservatives are more liberal then American DLC.ORG dems.

[BardEric]

Very True!

[Indubio]

Ne careful about such statements­....

Margaret Thatcher was a conservative and she was hardly less conservative than the DLC. She was well to the right of Reagan on most issue and much of the economic woes facing Britain today can be traced to some of her Draconian deregulation. I would argue that on the whole European Conservatives are more akin to American conservatives of the 1950s. Modern American conservatives are in a class all by themselves.

[Veronica]

That's true about Margaret Thatcher; her economic policies were even more disastrous for the British working class than Reagan's were for ours, but the British Conservative Party is far, far more liberal now than they were in the 80s. In fact, as the Conservatives go to the left, Labor trudges consistently to the right. Gordon Brown, in addition to getting down on his knees for Bush, has made re-demonizing marijuana a top priority while the Tories are talking about "going green" and how to harness the powers of the internet for the common good.

You are right about American conservatives being in a class all their own, though!

[squander123]

Very true - my family are long-time Conservatives, from Thatcher on (what can you do?!), but they're supporting Obama. Interestingly, as British conservatives, they don't see any real connection between themselves and US Republicans - economically perhaps some, but socially absolutely not. I think the difference is that the UK has absolutely no equivalent of the US religious right. The UK conservatives are not religious, or if they are, it's a kind of vague old-fashioned idea that helping the vicar run the Harvest Festival is a properly 'English' thing to do. Such activities don't require a belief in 'god', which only something like 5% of the British population actually express. So abortion, gay marriage, contraception and stem-cell research aren't in any way flash points in British politics. People have differing views on those issues, but not across party lines, and the two major parties don't campaign on those topics.

[telebob59]

Thanks, Arianna and fellow UK HuffPo users; insightful dispatches from the mother country are always welcome. I was in the Midlands with my significant other four Summers ago for an all-too-brief sojourn in that green and pleasant land (sorry, two cliches already but it is Blake, after all). I, too was "sans cravat" but the only place I might have worn one was where they weren't required -- the RSC theater in Stratford.

[MJCole]

Actually the term: "government in waiting" is not at all new. It describes the official (largest) opposition party in any Westminster system. For example in Canada it was frankly a bit of an embarrassment that though the 90's our 'government in waiting' was first the Sovereigntist (Quebecois who wanted out of Canada) then the polar opposites from Alberta and had absolutely zero competence in and around government for the first three or four years.

There was also more than a little irony in the fact that the proper title between the Autumn of 1993 and the Spring of 1997 for the Canadian government in waiting was “Her Majesty's Loyal Opposition, Le Bloc Quebecois”.

[wmbear]

BRITISH CONSERVATI­VES...

Are several cuts above American ones, being, I think, on average, a lot more honest and less given to "dirty tricks." However, conservatives are conservatives, and I, for one, refuse to read "The Economist" for the same reason I refuse to read "National Review." At least NR makes no bones about being conservative where a some liberals I know here don't seem to realize that The Economist practices a sneakier kind of journalistic conservativism by simply not calling attention to the fact that this is their basic political stance. (In fact, I'm willing to bet that I get a couple of responses claiming that I don't know what I'm talking about re The Economist. But I do.)

[squander123]

You're absolutely right. The Economist cut its ideological teeth in the 1840s when it fiercely opposed the payment of a living wage/survival-level food for Irish Famine relief projects, on the grounds that if Famine victims received a living wage for this, it would divert them from all the 'real' jobs supposedly out there, and therefore distort the market...

...and essentially it's never changed its position ever since!

[acv]

The digital age has either passed John McCain by or he hasn't bothered to be part of it, why? John McCain doesn't know how to use a computer. See for yourself, do a search - McCain PC or Mac.

[Rockwell]

Arianna, since the Conservatives are the party-in-waiting in Britain, I'd love to see you compare and contrast them with Democrats, the American party in waiting. I was shocked that Blair's government was such a lapdog to Bushco. I'm hoping the opposite is true, that British Conservatives have a progressive mind-set that will be compatable with our new Obama administration (please God!).

[erathwomen]

Considering that the Conservatives are the British version of Republicans, I doubt it. Brown's cow-towing to Bush is disgusting. Blair had promised that British troops would come out of Iraq and Brown refused to honor the promise. Brown is likely to be ousted in a vote of no confidence and they'll bring in someone who will stand up to Bush. Brown is a wuss.

[doofmann02]

The same positive response to Obama is occuring in Germany, based on what my in-laws are telling me and from polling data that I have seen. Of course, anybody other than Bush would evoke a positive response, as it should. We sort of blew it with our much needed European allies. We need them to counter the growing forces in Asia, not just on a military plane, but economically and diplomatically.