Well, now this is interesting...

Well, according to the Guardian newspaper, Vladimir Putin Supports Bush for President, which is quite interesting considering that he was against the war in Iraq:

The endorsement was a significant boost for Mr Bush who has been
under fire from John Kerry for failing to maintain international support for the
US "war on terror".

"International terrorists have set as their goal inflicting the
maximum damage to Bush, to prevent his election to a second term," the Russian
president said at a central Asian summit in Tajikistan.

"If they succeed in doing that, they will celebrate a victory
over America and over the entire anti-terror coalition. In that case, this would
give an additional impulse to international terrorists and to their activities,
and could lead to the spread of terrorism to other parts of the world." He added
he would respect "any choice by the American people".

It was by far his strongest endorsement of Mr Bush to date, and the most
direct intervention in the race so far by a foreign leader.
[Emphasis Mine - D]

Strangely, halfway through the article, it goes on to talk about a completely unrelated, seemingly editorial rant about a Bush appearance saying:

The endorsement came as Mr Bush regained a small but significant
lead in the polls after his mediocre performance in the three debates with Mr
Kerry, and on a day when he accused his rival of retreat in the war on terror,
playing on memories of the September 11 2001 terror attacks in the hopes of
plucking off the reliably Democratic state of New Jersey.

New Jersey lost
nearly 700 citizens when hijacked planes struck the World Trade Centre, and the
president's visit to the southern parts of the state was aimed at exploiting
strong fears of another attack.

I may be seeing too much into this, but isn't it curious how they seem to talk about Bush's reminding New Jersey citizens about 9/11 as "exploitation strong fears" but then Kerry and Edwards' supporters saying that the US's War on Iraq is being mismanaged by an incompetent Bush Administration isn't "exploiting strong fears" enough to be mentioned in the article?