Obama admin to Britain: We’d really prefer that you not exit the EU

posted at 12:41 pm on January 10, 2013 by Erika Johnsen

There has been much ado lately about the eventual possibility of the United Kingdom bowing out of the European Union, and last summer, British Prime Minister David Cameron hinted that his government may be considering holding a national referendum on the subject in the not too distant future. Apparently, Cameron’s real end game with the idea is to win back to British sovereignty certain powers now administered through EU cooperation rules, but he may have gotten the “Brexit” ball rolling a little faster than he intended. For months, the government has been delaying the “big Europe speech” he’s meant to give to thoroughly explain the whole thing, and it’s finally slated to happen in mid-January:

But I understand that Cameron now does know what he wants to say. He will commit to keeping Britain in the single market, rejecting the calls by many in his party for a Swiss-style free trade agreement. He’ll even make the case for expanding the single market into other areas and — possibly — giving Brussels more authority to enforce its rules. This, however, will mean that most of the irritations of EU membership (including those pesky directives) will remain. There’ll be no relief for ministers who feel emasculated by EU procurement rules, no escape from regulations aimed at the heart of the City of London. Britain will only be able to open up its markets to the new economies of the east at a pace set by Brussels. This is, under Cameron’s plan, the price of being part of the world’s largest single market. …

But most things outside the single market and foreign-policy co-operation are up for consideration. Regional spending and the working time directive are two early candidates for repatriation.

Next, the timing. The pledge to renegotiate would be included in a 2015 Tory manifesto, and if they won the election outright that year, the process would start soon afterwards. Cameron will say that when the renegotiation is complete, probably around 2018, he’ll put the results to the British people. We’ll be able to vote to stay in on the new terms — or leave. Cameron plans to campaign for staying in, and is confident of victory. The idea of an exit, he thinks, would panic business.

And he’s probably right — businesses evidently would panic, as UK business leaders have just indicated in an open letter:

Prime Minister David Cameron will damage Britain’s fragile economy if he demands major changes that could threaten the country’s relationship with the European Union, business leaders said on Wednesday.

In an open letter, the heads of some of Britain’s biggest companies said Britain can’t afford to quit a market of 500 million people that buys half of its exports.

Other countries in the 27-nation bloc would probably reject Cameron’s attempts to claw back powers from Brussels, isolating the country from its biggest trading partner, they said.

“We must be very careful not to call for a wholesale renegotiation of our EU membership, which would almost certainly be rejected,” they wrote in a letter to the Financial Times.

The problem for Cameron’s agenda, however, is that he has already pretty much given away the fact that he’s not really willing to go through with a British adieu (as we have been saying on this side of the pond lately, it’s no good taking a hostage you’re not willing to shoot). The lack of teeth to the threat will mean that at least a few other EU members will almost certainly vote against Britain being awarded what they see as special privileges. Cameron reportedly believes that he will have heavy-hitter Germany’s support, but all it takes is one:

Ireland takes over the role of the EU’s six month rotating presidency this week at a time when the eurozone crisis has subsided but the question over a “Brexit”, or British exit from membership, is now openly debated in European capitals.

In a setback for the British government, Eamon Gilmore, the Irish deputy prime minister, made it clear that Ireland, traditionally a close European ally for Britain, would not support David Cameron’s call for powers to be repatriated from the EU to Westminster.

“The principal terms of membership, I think have to be the same for all member states. There are of course arrangements that member states make from time to time in relation to specific issues… but in terms of the core conditions of membership I think it is important that they are the same for all,” he said.

Meanwhile, the idea of Britain legitimately getting the hell out of EU-dodge is gaining in steam and popularity, and maybe even enough to put in a showing by the time the referendum would roll around if the EU keeps on flailing. The Obama administration is not at all pleased with the situation, and senior administration official is making it clear that Washington does not want Britain to call it quits:

The intervention by US assistant secretary for Europe Philip Gordon came as it was reported David Cameron is planning an “in or out” referendum for 2018.

Mr Gordon said: “We have a growing relationship with the EU, which has an increasing voice in the world, and we want to see a strong British voice in it. That is in America’s interests. We welcome an outward-looking EU with Britain in it.

“Britain has been such a special partner of the US. It shares our values, our interests and has significant resources to bring to the table. More than most, its voice in the EU is essential and critical to the US.” But he added: “Referendums have often turned countries inward.”

I’m sure the White House certainly would be against a British withdrawal, because of the at least temporary panic/recession/uncertainty that doing so would almost certainly cause. Obama views the European debt crisis as a big hindrance to the United States’ economy and likely has no desire to risk the status quo, thank you very much — not to mention that he evidently has zero qualms with big-government collectivism — but I have to say, I’m feeling some major sympathy for these “Brexiters.” The fact that these EU countries are actually discussing a eurozone super-state with tax-and-spend powers is nothing short of terrifying. As Margaret Thatcher once said, the problem with socialism is that you eventually run out of other people’s money, and I think that’s what this whole drive to “go global” is all about: Certain countries have run out of their own money through their own spending-happy folly, and now they’re going for a bigger pool from which to draw.

Addendum: Shots. Fired.

“The Obama administration now thinks the U.K. should be subservient to Brussels rule in many areas, just so the U.S. has a more acceptable lobbyist at the EU court,” former Cabinet minister John Redwood wrote on his blog. “The U.S. stance will probably recruit more U.K. citizens to the cause of a new and different relationship with the EU for the U.K. We have no wish to be told that we should lose our democracy in the cause of advancing America’s.” …

Bernard Jenkin, the Tory chairman of the House of Commons Public Administration Committee, said Gordon’s intervention showed that U.S. governments do not understand the ways of the 27-nation EU.

“They have a default position that the United States of Europe is going to be the same as the United States of America. They haven’t got a clue,” he told BBC Radio 5. “The State Department in particular has long had this predilection that somehow European unity is a good thing and Britain ought to be in there, but I don’t think David Cameron is going to be dictated to based on such a misunderstanding.”


Related Posts:

Breaking on Hot Air

Blowback

Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.

Trackbacks/Pings

Trackback URL

Comments

I’m sure the White House certainly would be against a British withdrawal, because of the at least temporary panic/recession/uncertainty that doing so would almost certainly cause.

No, you misunderstand. They don’t want Britain to escape the panic/recession/uncertainty that will be caused within the next 6 months. They want all of the EU to go down together. It’s a global plan.

LoganSix on January 10, 2013 at 12:46 PM

Great Britain to Obama: “About that bust of Winston Churchill that you sent back…”

Khun Joe on January 10, 2013 at 12:46 PM

Why doesn’t obozo just issue an executive order barring the U.K. from exiting the E.U.??

Flange on January 10, 2013 at 12:49 PM

Hope UK tells the Obama to stuff it.

petefrt on January 10, 2013 at 12:50 PM

Why doesn’t obozo just issue an executive order barring the U.K. from exiting the E.U.??

Flange on January 10, 2013 at 12:49 PM

Beat me to it.

BobMbx on January 10, 2013 at 12:51 PM

Don’t they have platinum coins in the UK?

halfastro on January 10, 2013 at 12:52 PM

Why doesn’t obozo just issue an executive order barring the U.K. from exiting the E.U.??

Flange on January 10, 2013 at 12:49 PM

/winner!

That has as much legal basis as any EO that infringes on the Second Amendment.

And would be about as effective too.

Taking a job that required you to run around in circles on foot on the Interstate during rush hour would be a safer occupation than Official Obama Regime Gun Grabber Jackboot…

Longer life expectancy, lower insurance rates…

wildcat72 on January 10, 2013 at 12:53 PM

Obama admin to Britain: We’d really prefer that you not exit the EU

UK to O: FU

Resist We Much on January 10, 2013 at 12:54 PM

Michelle also thinks your fish and chips are too fatty and you need to tone down on the crumpets.

JellyToast on January 10, 2013 at 12:57 PM

We have no wish to be told that we should lose our democracy in the cause of advancing America’s.

Smart power! Dick “Franz Liebklind” Shawn for State!

cbenoistd on January 10, 2013 at 12:58 PM

British Prime Minister David Cameron

He’s not even a pale comparison to Margaret Thatcher.

This from a country that now debates “knife control” in the Parliament?

http://www.publications.parliament.uk/pa/cm201011/cmselect/cmhaff/447/447i.pdf

PappyD61 on January 10, 2013 at 12:59 PM

Obama admin to Britain: We’d really prefer that you not exit the EU

.
Britain would have really prefered that we had not exited from their empire.

listens2glenn on January 10, 2013 at 1:02 PM

They have kissed O’s butt for over 4 years. They snubbed Romney. Screw the brits!

Blake on January 10, 2013 at 1:03 PM

Dear Britian: Leave the EU, and be sure to burn all the bridges on the way out.

nobar on January 10, 2013 at 1:04 PM

“Referendums have often turned countries inward.”

IOW, democracy is a good thing for Egyptians, but not Britons.

Resist We Much on January 10, 2013 at 1:04 PM

Monumental Deceit: How Our Politicians Have Lied And Lied About The True Purpose Of The European Behemoth

(European) Union Power!

Resist We Much on January 10, 2013 at 12:57 PM

nice, thanks for sharing.

PappyD61 on January 10, 2013 at 1:04 PM

Monumental Deceit: How Our Politicians Have Lied And Lied About The True Purpose Of The European Behemoth

Resist We Much on January 10, 2013 at 12:57 PM

I was wracking my mind trying to remember where that was. I should have known. :) Anyway,

Bump.

^^^ That’s sort of a must read:

The real story, surprisingly, goes back to the 1920s, when a senior League of Nations official, Frenchman Jean Monnet, first began to dream of building a ‘United States of Europe’, very much on the lines that decades later would shape the European Union as it is today.

After World War II, Monnet, by then the second most powerful man in France, finally set the project on its way. He knew there was no chance of bringing such an astonishingly ambitious vision into being all at once. So his plan was that it should gradually be constructed, piece by stealthy piece, without ever declaring too openly what was intended to be its ultimate goal.

At first it should be presented as just a trading arrangement, the ‘Common Market’ set up in 1957 by the Treaty of Rome. But the essence of that treaty was to create the core institutions of what Monnet always intended should one day be the ‘Government of Europe’ . . .

Axe on January 10, 2013 at 1:04 PM

Why? We can take their place. We’d fit in perfectly.

NoDonkey on January 10, 2013 at 1:06 PM

Ireland takes over the role of the EU’s six month rotating presidency this week at a time when the eurozone crisis has subsided but the question over a “Brexit”, or British exit from membership, is now openly debated in European capitals.

In a setback for the British government, Eamon Gilmore, the Irish deputy prime minister, made it clear that Ireland, traditionally a close European ally for Britain, would not support David Cameron’s call for powers to be repatriated from the EU to Westminster.

Ireland is of course one of the PIIGS countries (Portugal/Ireland/Italy/Greece/Spain, for those who came in late), who are bankrupt by any metric and are seeking to use the Brussels regime’ to loot the treasuries of less profligate EuroUnion members to keep their bloated bureaucracies and “cradle-to-grave” social (i.e., vote-buying) programs running. So, to Gilmore & Co., letting the UK run off is rather like a mugger letting a little old lady get away rather than getting her purse.

What they don’t realize, and I suspect won’t until it’s too late, is that since the UK started their version of the Perfect Socialist State back in the 1950s, they’re in no better shape financially than the PIIGS are. The successive British governments going back to Eden and Attlee have just done a better job of cooking the books to “hide the decline”.

My best estimate is that the UK will be “persuaded” to stay in the EU. But when the inevitable measures come down from Brussels demanding an “equitable redistribution of assets”, they’ll find the British treasury empty, except for an IOU signed “Harold MacMillan”.

And a used cigar butt. Havana, of course.

clear ether

eon

eon on January 10, 2013 at 1:07 PM

I’m sure the White House certainly would be against a British withdrawal, because of the at least temporary panic/recession/uncertainty that doing so would almost certainly cause.

The only reason that we do not have super inflation even after printing trillions of dollars and planning to print trillions more is that EU is in worse shape than us… It is our best interest that EU will be even in worse shape than it is now and if Britain withdraws and cause more troubles for the EU then it is good for us…

mnjg on January 10, 2013 at 1:13 PM

Why the F*&k do “we” have a Secretary of Europe?

MoreLiberty on January 10, 2013 at 1:15 PM

nice, thanks for sharing.

PappyD61 on January 10, 2013 at 1:04 PM

You’re welcome. It explains the nefarious and contemptible story about how the British people were lied into ceding their sovereignty to unelected apparatchiks in Brussels, which has become a sort of Hotel California: “You can check out anytime you like, but you can never leave” or so the rules have been up until now. We’ll see what happens in the coming years with Greece and Spain and whether Germans, who must work until the age of 67 and retire on a pension of 46% of their final salary while Greeks can begin to retire at 45 on a pension of 97% of their highest salary, will continue to fund the ClubMed spendthrifts.

I was wracking my mind trying to remember where that was. I should have known. :) Anyway,

Axe on January 10, 2013 at 1:04 PM

:-)

Resist We Much on January 10, 2013 at 1:17 PM

I remember the halcyon days of yore when preaching to other nations was a sign of America attempting to foist its tyrannical ways on others.

Those were the…*sniff sniffle*…those were the good ol’ days.

Bishop on January 10, 2013 at 1:20 PM

I swear, this guy.

Has no problem ordering our allies around, but when it comes to Iran, he clenches his sphincter.

Red Cloud on January 10, 2013 at 1:25 PM

It is our best interest that EU will be even in worse shape than it is now and if Britain withdraws and cause more troubles for the EU then it is good for us…

mnjg on January 10, 2013 at 1:13 PM

American economic interests are not served by European failure. The global economies are chained together and failure in Europe harms the US just as it would with any other major trading partner.

lexhamfox on January 10, 2013 at 1:25 PM

Certain countries have run out of their own money through their own spending-happy folly, and now they’re going for a bigger pool from which to draw.

We will be facing the same thing in this country when California goes belly up. They will demand that they get keep all their pensions, super trains, and spending programs and that the rest of America should pay for it. The dems will demand that we do….California is the progressive’s xanadu.

William Eaton on January 10, 2013 at 1:26 PM

American economic interests are not served by European failure. The global economies are chained together and failure in Europe harms the US just as it would with any other major trading partner.

lexhamfox on January 10, 2013 at 1:25 PM

Yes American economic interests are served by European economic failure… It is all relative… As I said, we have been able to print trillion of dollars without having super inflation (so far) is because Europe economy is worse than us… no one is buying Euros or investing in Europe…

mnjg on January 10, 2013 at 1:33 PM

American economic interests are not served by European failure. The global economies are chained together and failure in Europe harms the US just as it would with any other major trading partner.

lexhamfox on January 10, 2013 at 1:25 PM

However economic interest must never get in the way of liberty and national sovereignty. I am a capitalist and am a fan of free trade up to a point, but what the EU wants for the future of Europe (and for the world) is subjugation and tyranny to a elite class of power hungry bureaucrats, with only the trappings of a democratic process.

Let the British people decide and keep our noses out of it. If we Americans suffer some economic pain big deal, nothing even close than what has been inflicted upon us by Obama and his merry band of progressives.

William Eaton on January 10, 2013 at 1:35 PM

UK to O: FU

Resist We Much on January 10, 2013 at 12:54 PM

Exactly what I wanted to respond.

Most every time the people of Europe are given a chance they vote against Brussels. Then the politicians, not only in Britain, vote as often as it takes to get enslaved by the bureaucrats of Brussels.

Europe keeps the people subjects (not related to kings and queens, which are just tourist and other attractions and pains in the azz, or embarrassments).

Where is your so-called democracy?

On Obama, Fluke yourself, you tiny eunuch.

Schadenfreude on January 10, 2013 at 1:37 PM

Super, on the

Addendum: Shots. Fired.

Schadenfreude on January 10, 2013 at 1:38 PM

Of course our Socialist/Communist Thug In Chief wants the UK to bow to the EU. The one good thing the UK did w/r to the EU was to refuse to adopt the Euro.

How about those UKIP folks? RSM can weigh in this, but it seems to me that in many respects they have been treated by the Left as the TEA Party has although UKIP is a formal political party.

Even the Guardian recently acknowledged that UKIP is gaining:

Ukip: the party that’s coming in from the cold

It was written off by David Cameron as a party of ‘fruitcakes, loonies and closet racists’. So why is Ukip suddenly becoming a political force to contend with?

C’mon, Brits. Get your $hit together. Forget about Barfy, and do what’s best for Britain.

Cody1991 on January 10, 2013 at 1:43 PM

Obama admin to Britain: We’d really prefer that you not exit the EU return the bust of Churchill

My mind’s early finishing of the sentence before I could read/comprehend it …

ShainS on January 10, 2013 at 1:44 PM

Meddling ?

FlaMurph on January 10, 2013 at 1:45 PM

I take the Obama administration pleas to stay in Europe as a ringing endorsement to leave.

EnglishRogue on January 10, 2013 at 1:49 PM

They The sycophant media have kissed O’s butt for over 4 years. They snubbed Romney. Screw the media.

Blake on January 10, 2013 at 1:03 PM

Fixed it for you .

EnglishRogue on January 10, 2013 at 1:50 PM

IOW, democracy is a good thing for Egyptians, but not Britons.

Resist We Much on January 10, 2013 at 1:04 PM

It’s only good for Obama’s tyrannical brothers.

Schadenfreude on January 10, 2013 at 1:50 PM

I swear, this guy.

Has no problem ordering our allies around, but when it comes to Iran, he clenches his sphincter.

Red Cloud on January 10, 2013 at 1:25 PM

Really, are there any foreign leaders that take 0bama seriously as a US President?

I mean, besides Castro and Oo-go Chavez?

UltimateBob on January 10, 2013 at 1:54 PM

I live in London and trust me when I tell you, Britain needs to run away from Europe as fast as we can. This entire EEC thing is nothing but trouble. They come up with the most stupidest regulations, you sometimes wonder which stupid idiot came up with it.

Europe is destroying business, all those crazy regulations and costing business a fortune. By the time you finish setting up your business to meet those crazy standards and regulations you have no more money left to actually trade.

Everywhere you go in Britain you;ll bump into a notice stating that “Due to EEC regulation XYZ we can/cannot do this or that or the other”

What all those politicians don’t tell you is that the majority of brits want out.

Oh and Obama should shove off, what the heck is he doing telling us what to do when he can’t even solve his own problems?

Sheya on January 10, 2013 at 1:59 PM

Oh and Obama should shove off, what the heck is he doing telling us what to do when he can’t even solve his own problems?

Sheya on January 10, 2013 at 1:59 PM

Well, I couldn’t agree more with that statement. I am, however, dismayed (and disgusted) with the apparent support Brits gave to BO – the most unqualified person to ever be elected to the presidency…the most far left…. and of all previous presidents – the only one who absolutely hates this country.

My own assessment is that Brits need to stop with the guilt – white guilt. Enough with the endless self-flagellation. And stop piling on the US. We have paid the price.

I’d really like to see the day (although I won’t live to see it) when Brits regain some self-respect.

Cody1991 on January 10, 2013 at 2:08 PM

Cody1991 on January 10, 2013 at 2:08 PM

“Colonial” guilt maybe. . .

Axe on January 10, 2013 at 2:15 PM

“Colonial” guilt maybe. . .

Axe on January 10, 2013 at 2:15 PM

Same thing to my mind, and certainly with my Brit relatives. There’s also the class issues involved that run deep…. a leftist’s dream situation.

My ties run deep with the UK. The self-subjugation and denial of worth and achievement I’ve seen is beyond sad. It’s sickening.

Cody1991 on January 10, 2013 at 2:20 PM

I am, however, dismayed (and disgusted) with the apparent support Brits gave to BO – the most unqualified person to ever be elected to the presidency…the most far left…. and of all previous presidents – the only one who absolutely hates this country.

Cody1991 on January 10, 2013 at 2:08 PM

I feel your pain and I was disgusted too and the outright support for Obama coming from Britain. However we were not the ones who voted for him.

Sheya on January 10, 2013 at 2:23 PM

American economic interests are not served by European failure. The global economies are chained together and failure in Europe harms the US just as it would with any other major trading partner.

lexhamfox on January 10, 2013 at 1:25 PM

.
Poppycock !

Our debt exposure to the socialists is minimal- infinitesimal compared to what havoc our fine politicians are wreaking on our own country.

We run an $80-$100 Billion annual trade Deficits with the Eurps, and while that will mean higher prices (inflation)for us – its worse for them, as our exports are more competitive. Our currency valuation goes up, but contrary to actions of DC- thats a good thing.

Germany hardest Hit….France is in decline.
But remember, Asia will be taking over…….with or without a Euro (crisis) Union.

FlaMurph on January 10, 2013 at 2:27 PM

Cameron plans to campaign for staying in, and is confident of victory. The idea of an exit, he thinks, would panic business.

And he’s probably right — businesses evidently would panic, as UK business leaders have just indicated in an open letter

The UK could immediately transition to EEA membership, giving it access to the same markets and allowing it to negotiate trade agreements on its own terms rather than being represented as 1-in-27.

The EU does not close its markets to EEA member Norway.

This talking point is a huge McGuffin which Cameron hopes to use to scare UK voters into staying in.

aengus on January 10, 2013 at 2:27 PM

However we were not the ones who voted for him.

Sheya on January 10, 2013 at 2:23 PM

Yes, this is true. And after this last election we can only look at this country with despair.

In the end, I can never get my head around the notion that Brits desire a weakened US. But I am older and remember what I hope are different times. BO will never lift a hand to help the UK. He does enjoy Cameron kissing his a$$, however.

Perhaps the UK will be fine. I do hope we will never revisit hard days.

Cody1991 on January 10, 2013 at 2:34 PM

So, to Gilmore & Co., letting the UK run off is rather like a mugger letting a little old lady get away rather than getting her purse.

As regards EU money, here is what an Irish economist found:

‘Over the entire period from 1973 to 2009, Ireland’s net receipts from the EU budget totalled about €41bn [£33bn], of which no more than about €20bn [£16bn] could be classified as in any sense discretionary. It is entirely possible, under the no-bondholder-left-behind policy, that this sum and more is being routed from Irish taxpayers to European private creditors of Irish private banks.’

And most of those private banks to which the Irish taxpayer is now generously donating are located in *drumroll* the UK.

So sleep tight, the City of London is not getting beguiled by mischevious Leprechauns.

aengus on January 10, 2013 at 2:40 PM

in my last post, ‘banks’ s/b ‘creditors’

aengus on January 10, 2013 at 2:42 PM

Same thing to my mind, and certainly with my Brit relatives.

Cody1991 on January 10, 2013 at 2:20 PM

Yeah. I can see how that might be. Interesting.

Axe on January 10, 2013 at 2:43 PM

McGuffin or MacGuffin

an object or event in a book or a film that serves as the impetus for the plot

[coined (c. 1935) by Sir Alfred Hitchcock ]

. . . just sharing homework. :)

Axe on January 10, 2013 at 2:48 PM

:)

aengus on January 10, 2013 at 2:48 PM

Yeah. I can see how that might be. Interesting.

Axe on January 10, 2013 at 2:43 PM

It is, Axe. What’s interesting is to see how BO and his cohorts try to do the same here in the US.

One difference is that we supposedly do not have a class system. Unfortunately, we do. We don’t have people born to privilege (in the European sense), but we do have those who have a protected, political elite….. and we voted for them!

Our Founders were astute. They understood human nature, and this is why Leftists hate the Constitution. Leftists love power and understand human nature.

We are, IMHO, rapidly becoming a country that will revert to the old norms, i.e. people content to live with an elected aristocracy…. evolving into some sort of benign, or not benign, dictatorship.

Looking at our insane levels of government, I would say we’re already there.

I share Kafka’s nightmares.

Cody1991 on January 10, 2013 at 3:03 PM

I think Redwood and Jenkin are giving our boys a hell of a beating.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PqZTP8-8wIs

cbenoistd on January 10, 2013 at 3:03 PM

The UK has only gotten this deep into the EU through *avoiding* any kind of plebiscite.

The politicians there know that they are acting against the popular will and are united in doing so. The same holds true for capital punishment funnily enough, which is banned. If you put them both to popular votes you’d find overwhelming majorities voting “Withdraw form the EU” and “YES to Capital Punishment”.

Don’t think for a second that the elites have had a change of heart on the EU. They have not. Any plebiscite will be a sham like the recent one on Egypt’s constitution.

CorporatePiggy on January 10, 2013 at 3:04 PM

Beat me to it.

BobMbx on January 10, 2013 at 12:51 PM

Me too. Pretty arrogant of our government to try to dictate something like this to another country. The Emperor really does have a serious plus size ego.

dogsoldier on January 10, 2013 at 3:22 PM

What if we encouraged the U.K. to leave the E.U. and engaged in greater trade with them. I’m assuming that they have money to spend and we’d love to get some of it (additionally we have products/services to sell and we’d love to have them as customers).

They get access to a huge market almost the size of the E.U. and we have no interests in their sovereignty at all.

Seems like a win-win.

JadeNYU on January 10, 2013 at 3:54 PM

Obama admin to Britain: We’d really prefer that you not exit the EU

And while you’re at shine my shoes, pick my suit at the valet and reserve a table for two at Chez Chicageaux.

MaiDee on January 10, 2013 at 4:02 PM

Why the F*&k do “we” have a Secretary of Europe?

MoreLiberty on January 10, 2013 at 1:15 PM

Assistant Secretary of State who deals with “matters European”.

We’ve got ASSes for Asia, Africa, South America, too.

No big deal.

Solaratov on January 10, 2013 at 6:02 PM

“We must be very careful not to call for a wholesale renegotiation of our EU membership, which would almost certainly be rejected,” they wrote in a letter to the Financial Times.

Kinda like, “Once you’re in the mob, you’re in for life. There’s only one way out.”

Solaratov on January 10, 2013 at 6:04 PM

I am, however, dismayed (and disgusted) with the apparent support Brits gave to BO – the most unqualified person to ever be elected to the presidency…the most far left….

Some Britons. Not all. There were plenty of Britons commenting on the “empty suit” / “naked emperor” nature of Mr Obama right back in 2008.

My own assessment is that Brits need to stop with the guilt – white guilt. Enough with the endless self-flagellation.

Cody1991 on January 10, 2013 at 2:08 PM

I’m not sure it is guilt. Arrogance perhaps. It is as if a large number of Britons cannot conceive that their country could fail, and so they plough forward carelessly, recklessly. I think this is a combination of having been on the winning side in a few major conflicts, an awareness that the UK has contributed “great” things to the world in the past, and a general ignorance of global geo-philosophio-politics and of economics.

In the end, I can never get my head around the notion that Brits desire a weakened US.
Cody1991 on January 10, 2013 at 2:34 PM

Some do. Some don’t. Some might prefer that some parts of the USA, like the leftist progressive parts, were greatly weakened. Britons, like Americans, do not hold one common opinion; the political divisions of the UK are very real. However, the “left” has been very successful in dominating the supposedly intelligent parts of the UK media such that dissenting opinions are not widely aired. (The non-intelligent parts of the media are devoted to gossip, scandal and sentimentality, same as everywhere else in the world).

YiZhangZhe on January 10, 2013 at 6:31 PM

Britain to Barky!….Blow Me!

KOOLAID2 on January 11, 2013 at 12:07 AM