Years ago, when I first noticed the Mr Bush usage, I wrote to several reporters and editorial page editors and got replies, telling me of their ‘style’ for name usage. That is for print. TV reporters picked up on it when W became president.
The same reporters do not say Mr Kerry, Mr Obama, Mrs Clinton or Mr McCain. They always say Senator for the above names. So I KNOW that the Mr Bush is a deliberate diss.
Did I just stumble on something ere that we weren’t supposed to see yet?
http://www.soitbemaybe.com/2008-maine-democratic-primary-results/
This is the results for the February 10th 2008 DEMOCRATIC primary in Maine.
WTF???
What they really want to say is "what's his name" or "that bastard".
I too believe it is an intentional diss as well. Liberal media has moved beyond bias into propaganda, as I think we all know. They hate President Bush, just like they hated President Reagan and any other republican President. They make up stuff and present it as “news” and they NEVER discuss the polls on what the american people think of them.
The panel agrees that McCain is it; they say Romney hasn’t gotten his message out enough and his latest effort is too little to late. I have to agree with them. Brit brings up the fact that Romney has the right message, meets the requirements, etc., but that the conservative base didn’t get behind Romney until it was too late.
What hurt Romney is his flip-flops from his public positions while he was running for Gov, and Wallace points to all the you tube videos showing what Romney said then, versus what Romney says now. Kristol agrees that folks didn’t rally around Romney until it was too late.
Like an interviewer might have said to Tony Blair Prime Minister but never Prime Minister Blair. Usually though most of them being left wing were on first name terms and it was often just plain Tony.