I was always told that when you address the President of the United states its it disrespectful to reffer to them as Mr. IE. Mr. Bush. I have seen on many occasion on New casts that they reffer to him as Mr. Bush instead of President. Is this ok or am I correct that this is a insult?
2007-01-01 19:17:49 · 12 answers · asked by athena9980 2 in Politics & Government ➔ Government
Caling him President is showing more respect, and if you meet him in public it would be proper to do so. In writeing about him, it depends, if you are being critical of his actions, Mr or just his last name is better because it does not give mixed signals.
2007-01-01 23:51:32 · answer #1 · answered by Paul K 6 · 0⤊ 1⤋
Why should it be disrespectful, it's his name isn't it? I don't think we should have to use his title all the time, we know he's President even if we don't use the word every single time we address him. It may depend a bit on the context though; if a person who's politically opposed to him *always* calls him "Mr Bush" and *never* uses the word President, it's probably meant as an insult or at least the expression of the wish that he wouldn't have the title at all :P But in general, it's just a different form of address, not necessarily an insulting one.
2007-01-01 19:30:10 · answer #2 · answered by Sheriam 7 · 1⤊ 0⤋
"Mr." Bush is also his title. It was determined by our first President that the sitting President of the United States will be called Mr President or simply Mr. Some of our Founders wished for the President to have a title such as "His Excellency" , President Washington quashed that notion, by pointing out (as answered above) that the office and the man are 2 different things, and a title would hearken back to the ways of the British whose influence we were trying to rid our country of.
2007-01-01 22:15:24 · answer #3 · answered by Sartoris 5 · 0⤊ 0⤋
The person who is Elected and active as Presidnet is the only one representing that office, it is the office that holds title not the man!
Bush is just an ordinary citizen, no more power than you or I, an elcted Representative or a man sitting in the Supreme court.
When refering to the Office, such as when he is givng a speech it is proper to refer to the Office but when on a newscast or topical discussion you can and should say MR Bush President of the United States says such and such.
Remember what it says in constitution about titles.
Take Commander in chief, it is not a Title it is a job in addition to acting as presidnet and only is used in a Declared War!
No power resides in the man, it resides in the office. the power of the civilian over the military had to be maintained and the Executive branch only has it in time of war.
Otherwise the constitution puts it into cngressioanl hands as tor aisng , supplying or paying the military it calls forth.
Once out of office an ex presisndet hodls no power of office none at all. He is just a civilian pensioner.
No amerian is supposed to have to fawn to any elected official , President Senator or Judge but the trend of media to kiss up to the political powes and infer rank and privelee just to curry favor is what got the ball rolling on this ex president and mr ex presidnet Bull Crap.
You or any american is the equal of " Mr.Bush,Bush or bush under your constitution.
2007-01-01 20:10:31 · answer #4 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
According to the American Constitution all men are created equal and anyone can become president, but that was in the old days, when people still had respect for other people like the president,
but in this day and age when you have to be rich or famous to get into office, it seems these rules of equality etc have been swept under the mat, so now they call them by their sir name just to remind them that after all they are still only men and not gods like some of them think they are, all powerful, and back in the old days they earned respect not demanded it.
2007-01-04 17:49:09 · answer #5 · answered by bazbikes49 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Although the proper form of address is indeed "President ...," each President has his own specific preference that the news media follows. Some want the press to shout out "Mister President," others may prefer "President...," while others prefer "Mister ..." . It's a fair bet that none of the news networks are intentionally insulting the President -- doing so would make it difficult for their reporters to get access to press conferences.
2007-01-01 19:25:19 · answer #6 · answered by oldironclub 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
I always thought the same thing. Should be President Bush or when referring to an earlier president former President Bush.
2007-01-01 20:13:46 · answer #7 · answered by ctsnowmiss 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
It isn't disrespectful...but I always understood that it was standard to refer to a current or former president as "Mr. President", or "President Bush", President Clinton", etc.
2007-01-01 19:23:00 · answer #8 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
No the Governor already has, she isn't waiting for Obama to finally floor after 2 tornadoes and 2 days later via the way, the nationwide look after isn't controlled via Obama its a Governor who sends interior the nationwide look after
2016-10-19 08:36:06 · answer #9 · answered by ? 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Yes, you are wrong. It is common for the British or Europeans to add the "Mr" in front of leaders. Simple cultural differences.
2007-01-01 19:22:40 · answer #10 · answered by Kevin 1 · 0⤊ 1⤋