I always thought when referring to the President, past or current you address them as President ‘Last Name’. I was reading a news story and all mention of Obama was ‘Mr. Obama’, but yet they later mentioned ‘President Bush’. Do the newspapers not respect President Obama enough or is it just me?
When was the article from? President Obama may not have been the official President at the time of the article.
whats up with the signature?
It was a quote I saw on the top of some ice-tea bottle. It fit at the time because I had a bunch of people coming over my house and there is always a relief when they go. I just take a deep breathe and am happy again. 
As for the news article I think it was the NYT yesterday or the day before.
Damn media and their damn conservative bias!
Dude, you’ve got to be joking. The media worshipped Obama during the campaign and continues to worship him. There were many articles over the last 8 years that referred to Mr. Bush, and Mr. Clinton before that.
Referring to Obama’s handling of Biden’s 30% chance of failure comment Drudgereport - “Obama throws Joe Biden under the bus?” CNN - “Obama pokes fun at Biden”
I heard on NPR a few weeks ago that it is their policy to refer to the President first as President last name’ and then afterwards to address him as Mr. ‘Last Name’. It came up as a question with President Obama coverage, and the reporter reiterated this has been editorial policy for many presidents. Other media outlets may have similiar editorial policy.
I always find it amusing when they write an entertainment column in the formal style, and refer to certain people in ways you would see in other places. Article about the WWE once referred to the Hulkster as “Mr. Hogan”.
I’ve seen The Economist do something like this too. President for the first reference, then Mr. or Ms. (e.g. “Ms. Merkel,” who’s technically a Prime Minister, but it illustrates the policy), but sometimes they will sprinkle another President in there just to vary things around a bit.