Also curious if they have always referred to current presidents as Mister...Did they call Clinto President or Mister???
2007-08-27 01:34:53 · 11 answers · asked by That Guy 3 in Politics & Government ➔ Politics
I do seem to remember that Clinton was called Mister as well. I don't ever remember Bush Sr. as being called Mister. I know Regan would have not stood for being called Mister.
So it must have been something that was started during the Clinton years and has carried over. It's not a bad or good thing, it just is.
2007-08-27 01:41:56 · answer #1 · answered by mustagme 7 · 1⤊ 0⤋
i think this is a question for the ettiquitte area. I believe it would be proper to address him as President and not Mr. But maybe if they have already met him , they are entitled to call him Mr. I think using a title is considered formal / respectful. I donot know how long it is expected or if he would ask to be called Mr. or George after he's been introduced. I know that he, the President knows some of the press by first names and calls them by first names in the q and a portion of the status/state of union speeches.
2007-08-27 01:47:31 · answer #2 · answered by Mildred S 6 · 0⤊ 1⤋
Only reason to do it most of the time is to strip away the psychological value obtained from addressing him as President Bush.
This is also how they convey the dignity of the title to the impeached one they call President C, along with the psychological value. It adds more weight to our opinion of him and his ideas if we associate them with the endearing term Mr. President.
Mr president is Mr President, ex-presidents are properly called Mr--for example, Mr. Clinton and President Bush.
2007-08-27 01:51:04 · answer #3 · answered by ciamalo 3 · 1⤊ 0⤋
many times, there is extra advantageous than one suited thank you to communicate with a man or woman. contained related to President Bush, one might appropriate communicate with him as President Bush, The President, or Mr. Bush. yet, as a rely of style, the grander titles are used extra sparingly. So one ought to communicate with the president as President Bush or The President the 1st time one mentions him, yet as Mr. Bush thereafter. Analogously, while speaking with the Queen of england, one ought to ward off too many Your Majesty's, yet handle her as Ma'am lots of the time.
2016-10-17 02:33:09 · answer #4 · answered by saucier 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Must have started back in 2000 when mr. bush,s brother Jeb the Gov. of Florida ordered the poeples votes to stop being counted when mr. bush was ahead by 500 some votes ,disregaurding the over 15000 voters who stood in the rain all day and whos votes ( had they been counted) would have put President Gore in the white house. The "press" had they of done ther jobs for the past 6 years would be refering to him as INMATE bush! I say trie him with war crimes & high treason, then publicly exicute him and you or anyone else will have to worry about what to call him.
2007-08-27 02:16:29 · answer #5 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 3⤋
Proabably for the same reason that the press constantly referred to Bill Clinton as Bubba.
2007-08-27 01:48:11 · answer #6 · answered by vinny_says_relax 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋
The title president is reserved for the man who is leading this nation forward .
While Mr. George Bush sits in the WHITE HOUSE nothing but a rein of criminal activity has been going on .
It hard to respect a president that violates the oath of office on a daily basis and has wanted torture and refuses to abide by the Geneva Convention of war .
You can not have it both ways . Terrorists are soldiers or criminals but not both and to consider them anything less then soldiers in a war against the spread of western Christianity is to deny that Islam wants christians dead .
These Islamic soldiers are the front line of defense for Islam and to call them criminals is incorrect .
Holy warriors and soldiers of God who answer to the ultimate authority have nothing to fear from George Bush .
2007-08-27 01:49:19 · answer #7 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 4⤋
Yes they did. It is an old tradition dating to the time of "prime minister" in england from the 18th century, and carried over to our president.
2007-08-27 01:53:13 · answer #8 · answered by lundstroms2004 6 · 2⤊ 1⤋
maybe the liberal media is having a hard time saying president bush
like they still won't admit defeat in the 2004 election
2007-08-27 01:45:44 · answer #9 · answered by crazy_devil_dan 4 · 1⤊ 0⤋
Cause many people like President Clinton, including myself.
Nobody likes Bush. The man has proved himself to be one of the worst leaders in history.
2007-08-27 01:51:28 · answer #10 · answered by Zabanya 6 · 1⤊ 4⤋