# Calling GW Bush "Mr. President". Grammaticaly correct? **URL:** \ **Category:** Factual Questions\ **Created:** [October 13, 2004, 7:31am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/calling-gw-bush-mr-president-grammaticaly-correct/268978 "2004-10-13T07:31:14Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 5\ **Page:** 1
**Author:** ![Dog80](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/6bbea6/32.png) [@Dog80](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Dog80)\ **Post date:** [October 13, 2004, 7:31am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/calling-gw-bush-mr-president-grammaticaly-correct/268978/1 "2004-10-13T07:31:14Z")
Is the form “Mr. President” correct? We don’t say “Mr. Professor” or “Mr. Doctor”. Souldn’t the same apply to “President”? ---
**Author:** ![Reepicheep](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/ed655f/32.png) [@Reepicheep](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Reepicheep)\ **Post date:** [October 13, 2004, 8:29am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/calling-gw-bush-mr-president-grammaticaly-correct/268978/2 "2004-10-13T08:29:13Z")
> [@Dog80](#): > > Is the form “Mr. President” correct? We don’t say “Mr. Professor” or “Mr. Doctor”. Souldn’t the same apply to “President”? The convention is to address high government officials acknowledging their titles. One would address the Secretary of Transportation as Mr. Secretary. I think, but could be wrong, that this only applies to Cabinet level posts or higher. ---
**Author:** ![UDS](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/u/ecae2f/32.png) [@UDS](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/UDS)\ **Post date:** [October 13, 2004, 8:42am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/calling-gw-bush-mr-president-grammaticaly-correct/268978/3 "2004-10-13T08:42:12Z")
It’s a matter of style, not grammar. “Mr.” is a variant on “Master”, which is an honorific. We are not consistent on who we apply it to, but there is no rule which says we have to be. The head of the executive branch is “Mr President” but the head of the judicial branch is “Chief Justice”. “Mr Chief Justice” is just one word too long, I guess. At state level, the Secretary of State of (say) Delaware is “Mr Secretary”, but his boss is just plain “Governor”. Some way further down the governmental food chain we find “Mr Mayor”. In the UK, nobody in the legislative/executive branches is “Mr” anything, but High Court judges are “Mr Justice So-and-so”. And, of course, in both countries practically every adult male is, for social purposes, “Mr”. Looks pretty random to me. ---
**Author:** ![Alessan](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/alessan/32/465_2.png) [@Alessan](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Alessan)\ **Post date:** [October 13, 2004, 9:07am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/calling-gw-bush-mr-president-grammaticaly-correct/268978/4 "2004-10-13T09:07:49Z")
My understanding is that it originated from John Adams. He had a long argument with Jefferson on the correct way to adress a President, seeing as there was no historical precident in the English language for an elected head of state. Jefferson wanted the adress to be “Your Excellency” or someting similar, but to Adams this seemed too aristocratic for the “first among equals”, and he advocated instead the most modest form of adress he could think of: the basic job description with the egalitarian honorific of “Mr.” ---
**Author:** ![Liberal](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/l/848f3c/32.png) [@Liberal](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Liberal)\ **Post date:** [October 13, 2004, 9:49am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/calling-gw-bush-mr-president-grammaticaly-correct/268978/5 "2004-10-13T09:49:40Z")
Vice President John Adams, after being referred to in the press as “His Rotundity”, spearheaded a Senate committe to come up with some decent titles for the government high holies. > [@](#): > > This uncertainty ensured that almost everything done in Washington’s first administration set precedent. There had never been a modern republican government before. How should it conduct itself in day-to-day business? For example, John Adams, then Vice President, created a Senate committee for determining how George Washington should be addressed. Drawing on a decade of diplomatic service in Europe, Adams felt that titles were a crucial aspect of prestige both within a nation and without. Therefore he wanted Washington to be addressed in a manner which would inspire respect – something like “His Highness the President of the United States and Protector of the Rights of the Same.” It soon became clear that the vast majority of Senators, Congressmen, and Americans were not interested in installing titles of that magnitude and a simple “Mr. President” was decided on, but not before Adams himself was referred to in the press as “His Rotundity.” Underneath the humor was a decision with important theoretical implications. A king’s court was higher than than the people and his titles reflected this. Would the same be true of the new national, executive branch and its president? The government’s self-directed questioning reflected a general understanding that the United States was moving into uncharted territory on both a metaphorical and a literal level. [http://chomun.uchicago.edu/committees/usa1791\_back.pdf](http://chomun.uchicago.edu/committees/usa1791_back.pdf)