Circus, the respect is completely mutual even if we stand on different sides of the political spectrum.
And I realize I kinda of opened it up when I disparaged your guy, but you have to admit it is kinda hard not to talk about our new president and his potential effect for US travelers without referencing it to the prior administration. While you may not think it matters what they think of of overseas, that is essentially the subject of this thread. And, while you may think they've always hated us, that is not completely true as reputable non-partisan international polling has shown. After 9/11 (as a result of the terrorist's acts, not our policies) we were at the apex of world sympathy and support. Whether YOU think the Iraq war was the right thing to do or not, in terms of world opinion it has had a devestating effect on the US image abroad to the point that all that post-9/11 support has all but vanished. Numerous studies back this up including:
http://pewglobal.org/reports/display.php?ReportID=247
http://www.worldpublicopinion.org/pipa/articles/views_on_countriesregions_bt/463.php?lb=btvoc&pnt=463&nid=&id=.
Of COURSE, the arab countries have always had a big problem with us. But look at our favorability ratings among our key allies. Britain went from 83% having a favorable view of us in 2000 to just 59% in 2006. France went from 62% to 39%, Germany from 78% to 39%, Spain 50% to 23% and Japan from 77% "only" dropped to 63% (those figures all came from the US State Dept.) Favorable ratings of America are lower in 26 of 33 countries for which trends are available. Other surveys have shown a high correlation between how a country feels for us and how they feel about Bush. Throughout Europe, those who say the problem is "mostly" Bush out-number those who say it is "a more general problem with America" by margins of about two-to-one. This ratio is especially lopsided in Spain, where 76% of those with a negative view of the U.S. blame Bush while just 14% blame America in general.
The electrifying response overseas to Obama's election is arguably as much a response to the unpopularity of the Bush administration and its policies and relief that it is over as it is a reflection of Obamas personal message. I think if they read all the research even Bush/McCain supporters would recognize that.
Anyway, it is hard with a thread subject like this not to step over the line into partisan remarks. I'd like to apologize for doing so but before I do I'll add this one closing remark.
The use of Bush's middle name or initial is NOT the same thing as the way it has been used with Obama. Bush's own admirers affectionately often refer to him as Dubya. And I'd bet half the people here couldn't tell you for certain what the W was for (or what Bill Clinton's middle name was) without looking it up. In contrast, the ONLY people I ever hear referring to Barack as Barack HUSSEIN Obama are conservatives trying to make some sort of political mielage out of it. You're absolutely right that a guy's middle name is a meaningless issue, but then why do you and other conservatives keep bringing it up. To claim that you don't really mean anything by it is really being disingenuous.