Does it bother anyone else that the media calls President Bush Mr?

Question

When I watch the news I get mad that they refer to the President as Mr. Bush. I beleive that even if you don't like him you owe him the respect he is do, for dealing with that job in the first place. The media still calls clinton President Clinton. The media itself shows no respect for the position of President. They are the ones leading this country into the ground with this behavior. Does anyone else agree?

Answer 1

When I hear someone disrespect the President like the Clinton people did during Bush Senior's reelection campaign, it only shows me that the source of the disrespect is a desperate dirty dog.

Answer 2

I'm glad that you ask this question. I too am bothered when I read the news paper or when I hear on TV someone referring to President George W. Bush as Mr. Bush. I find that it is a total lack of respect. Newscasters and journalist need to show the leader of this country respect, whether they agree with his policies or not. When a doctor is referred to as Mr., Ms, or Mrs. they are often immediately corrected. Maybe those in the media do not know better, they are in fact often times liberal. The president has earned his title of President whether people from the media like it or not. Whether they call him President Bush or Mr. Bush, President Bush is still the president. Those who refuse to state so are either delusional or uncabible of showing respect.

Answer 3

There really is a trend to even drop the "mister". Clinton was mostly referred to as "Clinton" while he was President, and now we're hearing him frequently called "Bill Clinton" because of Hillary's candidacy. When a member of the press is asking a question of the President directly, they refer to him as "Mr. President" or "Mr. Bush". This is the proper form which was settled on in George Washington's day.

If the absence of titles bothers you generally, I recommend you read the NY Times.

Is the media leading the country into the ground? No doubt, they are influential. Almost all the media outlets backed the US entry into Iraq, and in that sense, they led the country downward.

Answer 4

Respect! He don't respect us! If I was addressing him, I'd call him a few other names. **** face, stupid, *** whole, dummy, muderer, theif, scum, coward. He is the sh*t on the bottom of my shoe. How dare he and his buddies make a profit off of us. He is running this country in the ground. But he didn't start it or do this himself. you can thank the rest of the buttheads in office before him. We haven't had a real president since Kennedy and look at what happened to him? Don't you find it rather odd that Bush Sr was the head of CIA at the time? If you think Bush is a respectible guy then you go to Iraq and fight that silly a$$ war!

Answer 5

You're getting very upset over nothing. It is perfectly fine to call the sitting president "Mr." Abraham Lincoln was often addressed as "Mr. Lincoln." This is proper etiquette.

Answer 6

I heard people using Mr. Bush too. I don't think it's disrespect. It's just shorten way to call him. But it's somewhat rare to see people use Mr. Bush. I think. It's quite common to see 'W', or dubya in newspaper columns.

Answer 7

He's never earned any respect and therefore has no right to expect any! I would call him a thousand other titles and names but that would bother you even more!

Answer 8

You ignorant! The President of the United States is a position, an institution, not a person. Bush is a person, that occupies that position. It is perfectly correct calling him, Mr. Bush.
But why Mr? Why not Murderer, or criminal, or simply bastard?

Answer 9

I'd worry more if they called him Doctor Bush or Professor Bush.

Answer 10

He's done so many unethical things that I really don't give a rat's you-know-what what they call him. If anything, using 'Mr.' as a title for him is being quite generous.