This is why I love Marbury. He is absolutely brilliant and well spoken and deviously skilled at keeping others off balance. I so love the moments when things get real and he drops the eccentricities for a moment of impassioned, yet always respectful, debate.

He's always the smartest person in the room.

That's why President Bartlett trusts Marbury. Abby has a sweet spot for him, too.

I wouldn't be surprised if there were MI6 training in his past...at least to make for a more disarming and eccentric statesman...on who could spy without raising suspicions and if caught could play it off as drunkenness or eccentricity or stupidity.

I don’t understand why Lord Marbury didn’t counter the US position by asking “What if they were right?” What if it had been a US plane full of civilians that they shot down? What would the US reaction have been and what arguments would there then be for the UK not taking the same action?

I was hopeful that Sorkin would use him if they were going to cast Mac's father in The Newsroom.

Completely agree!

Roger Rees as The Doctor would cross the line into documentary territory.

Good shout

I think he would also be a good master

Oh he knew what it was, hence the glib joke at the end. It's not like he needed it explained to him - just a simple case of intelligent people with contrary views about a big issue, debating each point of view until a final decision is made. Not everyone can win - and especially not all the time - when it comes to political problems. It reminds me of Marbury's other appearance where he sat and chatted with Toby. Marbury's job involved repeatedly reaffirming UK's distaste for Sinn Féin getting talks at the White House. He subtly informs Toby that they have no choice BUT to talk to them, yet still reminds him of his own duty to keep saying they shouldn't - even labelling them constantly as terrorists in the process, as that would be expected of who he represents.

He's the ambassador to the US. He only has to be diplomatic with them. Iran is somebody else's job.

Actually its a pretty good explantyon of why and how the US and Britain despite appearances to the contrary, dont always agree. The problem is that since Teheran 1943,the USA has far more power and infuence.

A disservice to Maude, if I may be so bold.

two words.....Aaron Sorkin

I don't get the reference

@@stephencronin1080 kzfaq.info/get/bejne/nZ9-jJuDkrLReas.html

@@stephencronin1080 The lyrics to the them to Bea Arthur’s “All in the Family” spinoff “Maude.” I could quote some lyrics but it would be much more fun for you to search Sammy Davis Jr’s version of the tune. The reference here might be Sorkin’s tip of the hat to Norman Lear.

He died?? 😯😯😥

@@moimeself1088 in 2015, yeah

@@BrianLanders 😥😭

"Not good!" that was a great reaction. I love Kate.

Who, "Lord flibbertigibbet"...???

he was splennnnndid

Oof.

There’s a pretty solid argument for Delores Landingham as well, I believe.

@@TheKyleMark I'll give Delores street smarts. Marbury, worldly knowledge.

Marbury is ultimately a more world-wise character, with more actual time overseas, with a greater feel for the nuances of realpolitik. Bartlett is a wonderfully moral President, preferring to believe in being good. I suspect Marbury would be more likely to have a well-worn copy of "The Prince" by Machiavelli on his bookshelves. Masterfully written and acted!

Dated, though, I wonder who in the below 40 crowd will get it.

Maude........?? You mean "Lord flibbertigibbet"....??? HA HA HA HA HA HA HA

@@yahulwagoni4571 I did not understand it when I saw it on TV. Thankfully in the Internet era I could at least Google it!

Maybe, but if he were the Marquess of Needham he would be "Lord Needham", not "Lord John".

@@brettevill9055 And when addressed as 'Lord Needham', his response was 'call me John'. When you have all the salad, you don't need to make a big deal out of it. It's a British thing...

He died?

The actor Roger Rees died a couple years ago.

And continues to be, ten years after your original comment! 🙂

Politics are circular.

The power of the office.

Marbury was obviously very smart -- too smart not to realize he behaved insufferably. He obviously relished getting under everyone's skin. The West Wing crew also being smart must have realized it was a deliberate act, which made him even more aggravating to them.

He's a two-side-coin. When there's no matters of any direct import he'll coast along looking for his entertainment, be it the ladies, drink, or a running joke of pestering dear old Gerald. When the chips are down, all that is gone - it is business time, albeit the odd break to maintain his affinity for the ladies. It is nice to see that despite his ways, the President neither placates to it nor seems bothered by it, he knows it's just John being John. Even after the off-kilter joke of calling someone a "Gentle Courtesan" they jokingly talk about how charming he is, with only a hint of derision. The first lady has had numerous scenes with Marbury and, while he's made some rather... quirky and borderline offensive flirts about her breasts, she's not bothered by him. In short, he's the type of guy who you know has 'his thing', but you also know that despite how conflicting (or, for some, barely tolerable) the personality can be, he's sharp as a razor and has your back when it ACTUALLY matters. His character was very refreshing. Yes, he was aloof and played up the 'stiff upper lip' noble charm of typical TV, but he wasn't treated badly. Some don't take to him, some don't mind him, but they ALL come to respect him for his connections, intelligence and sharpness on actual business matters, even if they don't particularly want him around too long outside of that professional bubble. In contrast, check his scene with Toby. Toby seems rather taken aback by the extremely blunt and dismissing manner in which Marlbury (in his usual somewhat drunken tone) talks about the Sinn Fein / IRA issue, until he silently / knowingly infers that he's 'not as stupid as he seems', so the two head off for a nice quiet drink and a manly chat about matters and gives Toby some food for thought. Funny, isn't it, that of all the cast Marlbury interacts with, it's the stoic little Toby who in some way 'gets' the eccentric, half-drunken lady-loving posh brit due to clear realization of eachothers dedication to the craft they ply.

@@Mixcoatl As a proud Brit, I'll accept that as a compliment.

He made democrats playing democrats look like democrats

I think that the staff of the west wing were often childish and whiny, and really really condescending.

He's colorful

Sums up the British tbh

He would handle it better than the last one.

Look up "Marion Coatsworth Hay".

"C.J., you are a freakishly tall woman"

@@samconner2011 Each and every one of his lines was priceless. Paxton Whitehead had to have a lot of fun delivering them.

@@samconner2011 This is one of the thousand reasons I love Aaron Sorkin: "It was on loan from the Musee d'Orsay to the National Gallery. The President, on a visit to the National Gallery, and possessing even less taste in fine art than you have in accessories, announced that he liked the painting. The French government offered it as a gift to the White House, I suppose in retribution for EuroDisney. So here it hangs, like a gym sock on a shower rod."

@@miguelencanarias That was a fantastic line...!

Except-I believe-when Marbury was made Ambassador and the discussion turned to missile shields...

Gerald

"The french are at the gate" is an old English expression from various comedies. "And then there's Maude..." is a slapstick comedy from the seventies

hilarious!! Love this show!

Susan Wood .

Maude was a spin off show from "All In The Family" in the 1970's. Here's the theme song with the line, "and then there's maude" kzfaq.info/get/bejne/nZ9-jJuDkrLReas.html

Not sure but I think it was close to the Series Finale. Bartlet apparently makes a wise move in not getting involved in conflict with Iran as he's forced to get the USA involved in a conflict between China and Russia in Kazakhstan over deposits (and thus prevent China and Russia from fighting each other over oil).

No the Russians shooting down the Korean air flight, was what this was a take off on.

Sorkin left after season 4

I remember that.... Private Eye had the Vincennes on the front cover with the caption : "Is it a bird....? Is it a plane...? What the hell, shoot it down anyway."

Yes, but "Lord John" has always spouted gibberish about his background. The nonsense he comes out with about his titles is absolutely cringeworthy. Some of it is German. Did nobody in the writer's room take half an hour to look up what British styles and titles are like?

They made those kinds of mistakes a lot. Didn't count on DVD box sets and internet replays... and wildly committed fans who remember details to a scary extent. My pet peeve is how Zoe was introduced as 19 going to Georgetown, then for the MS drama she was 17 and needed parental signatures for her college forms. But, hey ho. 🤷🏾‍♀️

@@moimeself1088 One usually puts in initial applications for college before one's final year, as it is a lengthy process. Dependent upon when in the year her birthday is, it is possible both could be true.

Forgotten Thatcher already? Positing a PM like her would make this quite believable. Marbury would reflect the desire of his government.

@@johnargus9081 I'm no fan of Mrs Thatcher, but reading her autobiography, it was clear she was a lot of more thoughtful and subtle in matters of war and statecraft (e.g. over the Falklands War) than her "iron lady" public persona might lead one to believe. But more to the point, Marbury is supposed to be smart and sophisticated. Him disregarding the news that the Iranians had not intended to down a jet liner is just dumb. He might ultimately have to reflect the desire of his government, but his first duty would be to inform it of the news and, given his supposed character, give appropriate counsel. Fundamentally, I'm not persuaded bombing Iran to delay its nuclear programme is smart, but it only seems a realistic option for the US and Israel - I don't think the UK has the capability.

@@theodisius1 Ohh you are dead wrong, we do indeed have the capability to strike Iran, and we did back then too...

@@dougle03 After Suez, after the failed US attempt to bomb Gadhafi from UK bases and after the hunt for non-existent Iraqi WMDs, I am sceptical the UK could delay Iran's nuclear weapons programme through precision bombing. Regardless, my suspicion is that the genie is out of the bottle and nuclear weapons are ultimately available to governments willing to pay the not inconsiderable cost for them. A delay would achieve little in the end, except likely spur retaliation. Maybe you are right about the capability but I doubt it would on the agenda for a UK response to a terror attack. I would be very surprised if there is a contingency plan for such an act. We did not even bomb the Argentine mainland during the Falklands war.

Only within limits. The sandpit, and it's backwards tyrants are only just tolerated because of oil. Once the western world weens itself off of it, we'll see just how irrelevant the shithole in the middle east really is...

Some people might think "what does hat have to do with anything ?" Here it is: propaganda. Any country in the Middle East having a nuclear weapon (other than the Zionist state) is unacceptable, and so any country wanting this technology is portrayed as a rogue nation.

The thing is, a lot of people are worried that if a country in the Middle East develops Nuclear Weapons, one of those weapons will end up in the hands of a extremist group like Al-Nusra or ISIS and then all the bets are off the table. So far as we know there's only two Nuclear powers in the Middle East: Israel and Saudi-Arabia.

@Ulysses432 Israel has it's own nukes, they can protect themselves against Iran just fine.

Except without sales to America and the rest of the west, that oil is useless...

The responsibility of a leader is to protect the people they lead, not to hew to the principle of fairness and balance. In the context of protecting those they're responsible for, past misdeeds by their own nation are irrelevant.

Both nothing compared to the regimes of nazi Germany, China under Mao and Russia under stalin

It's a work of fiction... There is a difference between fiction and real life.. The Koran for example, is pure fiction written by powerful men, but soooo many people believe it's real life...