by Mark Silva
President Bush appeared chipper last evening as he welcomed the chopper of British Prime Minister Gordon Brown to Camp David, with the host greeting his guest at the helipad with a golf cart labeled “Golf Cart One.’’
Before the two leaders spun the cart and left, the Fox News camera and sound crew on the scene for pool duty could overhear the new prime minister telling the old president: “It’s a great pleasure to be at Camp David. It has so much history associated with it. Do you come here quite a bit?"
“I do – a lot,’’ said Bush, who retreats to the presidential retreat in the mountains of Maryland almost as often as he goes to his own ranch in the low rolling grasslands of Texas.
At Camp David this morning, the president is meeting with the newest leader of the most important U.S. ally in the “global war on terror,’’ a leader who faces considerable pressure at home to change a course that his predecessor, Tony Blair, set with his commitment of British forces to the military mission in Iraq.
London and Washington remain focused on "the biggest single and immediate challenge the world has to defeat: global terrorism," Brown told reporters traveling with him. "In this century it has fallen to America to take center stage," Brown said. "America has shown by the resilience and bravery of its people from Sept. 11 that while buildings can be destroyed, values are indestructible.
"And we should acknowledge the debt the world owes to the United States for its leadership in this fight against international terrorism," he said, downplaying speculation that the bilateral relationship is cooling.
In London, The Sunday Times reported that Simon McDonald, Brown's chief foreign policy adviser, recently traveled to Washington ahead of the prime minister's visit and discussed the possibility of an early British military withdrawal from Iraq.
Brown's spokesman Michael Ellam told reporters on Sunday that McDonald had made it "very clear" to U.S. officials there had been no change to British government policy over Iraq.
Military chiefs in London have said Britain is likely to hand over control of the southern Iraqi city of Basra to local forces by the end of the year. About 500 of Britain's 5,500 troops in Iraq are due to hand over the Basra Palace city center base within weeks, defense officials have said. Brown has not outlined plans for the remaining 5,000 personnel, stationed at an airport on the fringes of the city.
Ellam said there was no plan to withdraw British troops before the Iraqi army is deemed capable of maintaining security. Asked whether Brown intended to discuss with Bush plans for British troops once they withdraw to the fringes of the city, Ellam said: "Clearly decisions have to be made on all of these matters."
The prime minister landed in a grassy area of the retreat that adjoins a shooting range next to a wooden Camp David sign used for outdoor appearances before the cameras. The president wore a blue shirt, red tie, dark blue jacket and casual shoes, the prime Minister a dark suit, light blue tie, white shirt and wingtips.
A color guard of three Marines bearing the U.S. flag and three Navy sailors bearing the Union Jack greeted them, with an honor guard of 10 Marines and 10 sailors forming two rows which the leaders walked between as they left the chopper and headed for a private dinner.
The two will hold a press “availability’’ this morning at about 11:30 am EDT, which generally means two reporters each from the U.S. and British press. But it won’t be held in the open forum of the East Room availabilities at the White House that Bush often staged with Blair. This one, at Camp David, will be staged for a small pool of reporters assigned for the day.
The pool reports a Camp David hangar ready for the event, with four Union Jacks in front of a dark drape. Podiums are ready, with the U.K. flag over one and a U.S flag over the other. Framed on the wall is a pair of olive branches labeled, "The Middle East Peace Summit at Camp David," in English, Arabic and Hebrew.
A restroom just off the hangar displays a photo of the president sitting on the edge of the Oval Office desk and chatting with his father, the former President George H.W. Bush, showing off his watch.
With thanks to the pool reporting of Mike Allen of Politico, the watchful ears of Fox and credit to the Associated Press as well.
• 
• 
• 
Comments
I'm glad someone has the brains to get their troops out of Iraq, I just wish it was us.
We'll see what President Petraeus has to say in September.
Posted by: Doug Zook | July 30, 2007 7:48 AM
Yer doin' a great job, Brownie.
Posted by: [INSERT CLEVER POST NAME HERE] | July 30, 2007 8:22 AM
Bush's ability to get along with Europe is vastly different than our biased press would acknowledge. The evidence of Brown, Merkel, and Sarkozy is plain for all to see.
Posted by: Menlo Bob | July 30, 2007 8:40 AM
Mr. Silva neglects to report that Prime Minister Brown praised President Bush personally for his leadership in the war on terror. The London Sun reports today, "Gordon Brown last night praised George Bush for leading the global war on terror — saying the world owed America a huge debt. Mr Brown stunned critics by THANKING President Bush for the fight against Islamic extremism, and insisted the UK-US relationship will be his No1 foreign policy priority." Too bad we have to read a London newspaper to learn this.
Posted by: Sedona | July 30, 2007 8:42 AM
Mark, I'm wondering why when Fox News microphones picked up Hillary and John Edwards discussing how to get the lower-polled candidates out of the debates, there was no Swamp coverage of that?
I'm also curious how often past presidents went to Camp David. And isn't Camp David set up for the president to be there? And what is the difference between the president being at Camp David or the White House?
Posted by: John D | July 30, 2007 8:43 AM
He came here to tell Bush that the Brits are going to be pulling out of Iraq.Now we must count on the Polish contingent to help our troops.
By the way INSERT,thanks for adding a meaningful insight to the debate.Your hilarious.NOT.
Posted by: Raving Loon | July 30, 2007 9:24 AM
The Prime Minister has the right idea. Declare victory and go home.
Posted by: Sac Ramento | July 30, 2007 9:26 AM
John D.,
Can you still type when RNC Bruce is drinking a glass of water?
Ventriliquists everywhere want to know?
Posted by: Doug Zook | July 30, 2007 9:55 AM
Brown is not pulling out British Troops anytime soon. He is strategizing for future withdrawals. "And we should acknowledge the debt the world owes to the United States for its leadership in this fight against international terrorism," If the fight was really international, why are we just fighting in Iraq, when the real threats to the US are in another country? Guess G-dub just can't swallow his pride on this one!!
Posted by: Mugsy | July 30, 2007 9:57 AM
The "Sissyhawks" are always complaining about the MSM not reporting all the great things that Bushies war has accomplished.Well,the Iraq victory in a soccer game has been widely reported all over the world.Happy now?
At least now we know why we invaded Iraq and spent 600 billion of our tax dollars,to have a better soccer team!!!
Now,back to reality.
LONDON - About 8 million Iraqis — nearly a third of the population — need immediate emergency aid because of the humanitarian crisis caused by the war, relief agencies said Monday.
Those Iraqis are in urgent need of water, sanitation, food and shelter, said the report by Oxfam and the NGO Coordination Committee network in Iraq.
The report said 15 percent of Iraqis cannot regularly afford to eat, and 70 percent are without adequate water supplies, up from 50 percent in 2003. It also said 28 percent of children are malnourished, compared with 19 percent before the 2003 invasion.
Happy now?
Posted by: Raving Loon | July 30, 2007 10:05 AM
John D,
I'm curious - when are you going to provide ANY links to substantiate your claim that John Edwards spends as much on his suits as Bush does? Or are you ready to admit that you threw out that smear without any proof at all?
Posted by: BC | July 30, 2007 10:25 AM
John D wrote --I'm also curious how often past presidents went to Camp David. And isn't Camp David set up for the president to be there? And what is the difference between the president being at Camp David or the White House?
Lately you and Bruce have been doing double time identifying what can only be called "implied criticsm"of Bush in Swamp reports. Is there something to what you say (basically the whole world is unfarily against us!), or are your trying a bit too hard, smarting some, and on the defensive just automatically now?
Posted by: Anonymous | July 30, 2007 11:41 AM
John D wrote --I'm also curious how often past presidents went to Camp David. And isn't Camp David set up for the president to be there? And what is the difference between the president being at Camp David or the White House?
Lately you and Bruce have been doing double time identifying what can only be called "implied criticsm" of Bush in Swamp reports. Is there something to what you say (basically the whole world is unfarily against us!), or are your trying a bit too hard, smarting some, and on the defensive just automatically now? Thanks for entertaining though.
Posted by: kb | July 30, 2007 11:42 AM
BC, please for once answer these questions:
1. If John Edwards pays $1,200 to get his hair cut and owns a 30-square-foot house valued at $10 million, how much do you think Edwards pays for his suits?
2. Where do you think Edwards buys his suits?
3. What do you think suits cost?
4. Do you think Edwards buys his suits at Sears, Wal-mart, Filene's Basement?
BC, you do prove just how moronic and distressed most of the Loony Left that you keep coming back to the costs of Edwards' suits. You keep saying George Bush pays $3,000 a suit. Sorry to break the news to you BC, but folks with money wear expensive and often tailor-made suits.
If Brooks Brothers, which is actually a middle-of-the-road suit supplier charges $600 for a basic suit, what do you think the really rich pay for them and buy them from?
What do you think Matt Lauer pays for his suits? Charles Gibson?
Sorry, BC, but most folks aren't like Howard Dean and wear the same suit they wore 20 years ago!! Get a clue, for once, will ya?
Posted by: John D | July 30, 2007 12:36 PM
I don't know how much President Bush pays for his suits but I do know that his shoes were made by the same man than made Saddam Husseins shoes. Repeat: President Bush did business with the same cobbler who took money from Saddam Hussein, the Butcher of Bagdhad. As a matter of principle you would think President Bush would have found another high priced cobbler to get his one of a kind custom made shoes and boots from.
Posted by: Janet | July 30, 2007 1:20 PM
[quote]
BC, please for once answer these questions:
1. If John Edwards pays $1,200 to get his hair cut and owns a 30-square-foot house valued at $10 million, how much do you think Edwards pays for his suits?
2. Where do you think Edwards buys his suits?
3. What do you think suits cost?
4. Do you think Edwards buys his suits at Sears, Wal-mart, Filene's Basement?
BC, you do prove just how moronic and distressed most of the Loony Left that you keep coming back to the costs of Edwards' suits. You keep saying George Bush pays $3,000 a suit. Sorry to break the news to you BC, but folks with money wear expensive and often tailor-made suits.
If Brooks Brothers, which is actually a middle-of-the-road suit supplier charges $600 for a basic suit, what do you think the really rich pay for them and buy them from?
What do you think Matt Lauer pays for his suits? Charles Gibson?
Sorry, BC, but most folks aren't like Howard Dean and wear the same suit they wore 20 years ago!! Get a clue, for once, will ya?
Posted by: John D | July 30, 2007 12:36 PM
[/quote]
WAY TO COMPLETELY AVOID ANSWERING THE QUESTION JOHN D!
YOU'RE the one who claims that Edwards pays as much for his suits that Bush does - so where is the PROOF to back up YOUR claim? Non-existent. Why is that John D; is it because you know that you were spouting BS and CANNOT back up you FALSE ALLEGATION?
Unlike you, I do rise to the challenges posted by the likes of the clueless (John D):
"1. If John Edwards pays $1,200 to get his hair cut and owns a 30-square-foot house valued at $10 million, how much do you think Edwards pays for his suits?"
Edwards paid $1200 for a haircut no more than twice - after that the price he paid dropped back to the $400 range. That was from a table in a link provided in a Swamp post. So harping on the $1200 makes it sound like that's what he pays EVERY TIME - which is a LIE. but it makes for a good Republican sound bite.
He owns a 30-000square-foot house valued at $10 million, which is fine with me because he's EARNED his money and can spend it any way he wants to, unlike Dubya who was born into a very wealthy family.
Edwards gets his suits custom-made, like all wealthy people do. But he doesn't get them made by The Oxxford Company; if he did, they would be promoting it on their web site. The only politician they promote is Dubya.
"2. Where do you think Edwards buys his suits?"
From whoever is his custom tailor ... but why do you think that that is important?
"3. What do you think suits cost?"
A lot more than I pay for mine at Men's Wearhouse. if I want to pay a lot of money for really nice suits, I could go to Gaede's in downtown Wheaton.
"4. Do you think Edwards buys his suits at Sears, Wal-mart, Filene's Basement?"
No, but you probably do.
"you do prove just how moronic and distressed most of the Loony Left that you keep coming back to the costs of Edwards' suits."
And you and your ilk keep coming back to Edwards' haircuts, so how is that different?
"If Brooks Brothers, which is actually a middle-of-the-road suit supplier charges $600 for a basic suit, what do you think the really rich pay for them and buy them from?"
I used to report to a Executive Vice President who received a $200,000 annual salary and bought his suits from the downtown Brooks Brothers store. He liked the way he looked in them just fine.
"What do you think Matt Lauer pays for his suits? Charles Gibson?"
And these people are RELEVANT to the conversation HOW???
Tell us, John D - why are Republicans like you so obsessed with the costs of Edwards' suits and haircuts? And why is it when you're challenged to back up your claims that he pays as much as Dubya does for his suits, you can't back it up WITH EVIDENCE?
Once again, you remain a lazy reporter.
Either provide PROOF that Edwards spends as much on his suits as Dubya does, OR ADMIT THAT YOU MADE IT UP!
Posted by: BC | July 30, 2007 6:01 PM
Sedona...I mean, bruce. Come on, who you trying to kid?
It's cool that the RNC allowed you time off to honeymoon in the beautiful west. If you stay there long enough, that harmonic convergence of karmic energy might help you see the error of your ways.
Posted by: dt | July 30, 2007 6:55 PM
Bruce,
Bush's own intelligence says the Iraq war has increased the threat of Islamic Terrorism. So tell me again why we would want to read a London rag that gives us the heads-up on Bush's new lap-dog. And if the Brits are so keen on the war, why are they pulling out?
Posted by: dt | July 30, 2007 11:10 PM
Heavens, BC,
First of all, like most Loons, reading and comprehension are beyond your reach. Nowhere do I diss Brooks Brothers. Their suits are just fine and I own three of them.
Second, you are the one making a big deal out of suits. I could care less how much Edwards pays for them. But you admit he probably buys them custom, so that means they cost well over $1,000 each. You are the one making a big deal of Bush's suits.
The reason a big deal has been made of Edwards' haircuts is because most folks, even rich folks, do not fly hairdressers cross country. Anyway, BC, Edwards, hairstylist lives in LA area. Edwards does not. So if he flies him elsewhere it costs over $1,000. If he flied to LA to get his hair cut, it costs him more than $400. And, if the environment is such a concern, why are we flying hairdressers cross country?
Posted by: John D | July 31, 2007 12:27 AM