[Snidely Whiplash]

Many news reporting organizations refer to the president (or anyone else they report on) as Mr. XX. The practice appears to be a bit of a throwback to British reporting characteristics.

The New York Times is particularly memorable in regard to this convention - they once referred to Meat Loaf as "Mr. Loaf," and have always referred to politicans as "Mr. X."

The use of Mr/Mrs/Ms. is hardly a term of disrespect, even when referring to the President. I can't imagine anything less significant to get worked up over. Get a grip already!

Regards,
Snidely

[AGreatPer]

"I can't imagine anything less significant to get worked up over. Get a grip already!"

Ok Snidely Whiplash, your point is well taken and will consider.

Here comes the "Howevr" bit. During his tenure, I never recall anyone calling him Mr. Clinton. It was always President.

Double standard here or media bias?

[Dixielander]

Yes, calling President Bush "Mr. Bush" is not disrespectful.
That is to all of us except the leftwing media mites. They derive smug satisfaction among themselves by not addressing Bush as President Bush. Their use of word "mister" when referring to President Bush is a code word among themselves that shows their common disdain of his being President of the United States.

By contrast, when the white trash psychopath was president, the same talking heads referred to the creep as president every time they uttered his disgusting name. I listened attentively for the word "mister", but it was NEVER used in reference to klinton.