I was having a discussion with a coworker who expressed disappointment in how many people lack respect for the president. While he agrees that people should feel free to complain about the president’s policies, he feels that the president is entitled to a modicum of honor and respect, if simply because the majority of the electorate voted for him. He thinks we should have more “respect for the office”.
Personally, I feel like if met Mr. President right now, I would give him a certain degree of respect. I would not scream invectives in his face or humilate him, like Stephen Colbert did. That’s just not my style…I’m not sure I would disrespect anyone–even my worse enemy–in those ways. If he paid me a compliment, I would thank him for it. I might even be polite enough to shake his hand. But that’s about the extent of my respect for him. If he personally told me to do something right now (like, make him a sandwich), I don’t think I could summon enough respect for him to do it. I admit that this is not a good thing, but I don’t blame myself. I blame the president and the things he has done that I morally object to. Human weaknesses I can handle, but I believe Bush’s wrongness goes beyond weakness.
I think many folks would agree with my coworker, but I’m kind of confused by his position. What does one mean by “respect for the office”? Does it mean calling the president “Mr. President” if you happen to encounter him in the street? Does it mean refraining from name-calling when you’re talking about him? If every elected official is entitled to respect, does this also include tyrants or total incompetents? Should your local congressman get the same degree of respect as the president? Should all authority figures be respected, or should people feel free to respect those figures they feel are worthy of respect?
It seems to me that public officials should be suspected as much as respected. Our system of government is based on the suspicion that power tends to corrupt. If that were not the case we wouldn’t need checks and balances.
I think the president starts out at least in the neutral zone if not in the positive. That can change either way depending upon the president’s subsequent actions.
That’s true of any public official. John McCain started out with tremendous respect. That respect was for something in the past. His subsequent actions, such as the interview on The Daily Show with Jon Stewart last night (24 July), can cause that respect to diminish considerably.
I have a lot of respect for the office of the president. I wish those who voted for GW had a little more.
I owe the president only as much respect as I owe any other person. No more, no less. I would not call him “Mr. President.” I would refer to him as Mr. Bush and would demand to be called by my last name as well. Personal space boundaries are the same as they are for any stranger I meet in a professional capacity. I wouldn’t call him names to his face, since I wouldn’t do that for any person I don’t know very well, but I wouldn’t be shy about telling him what I think about his politics. To do otherwise would be dishonest. Basically, I think the president is just a guy (or gal). We have drifted far too much away from egalitarianism and treat the president too much like royalty, to the point where he can grope women in plain sight and not even get called out for it. This has to stop.
Note that these rules apply for presidents I “like” as well. If Clinton pulled a Merkel, he would also get slapped.
I believe respect should be earned; just because you hold an administrative position doesn’t mean you deserve any more than some random stranger. Given how many jerks, fools, criminals, monsters and tyrants have held high office throughout history, I think “respect for the office” is a poor idea. Bob the Janitor deserves more respect than Caligula the Emperor.
My take is pretty similar to David’s and the OP’s. In our celebrity obsessed culture, it’s way to easy to elevate government officials to the point where they’re treated more like royalty than the “public servants” that they’re supposed to be. To me, respect pretty much means don’t spit on him/her or hurl personal insults. It’s actually the sitting presient who needs to respect that office more than any of us, since he or she is the only one who can abuse. it.
I see the only difference between Bush and say a national park ranger is that Bush’s job has a lot higher profile. Other than that, both are public servants and should be praised or condemned for how well they do their jobs. We owe him the basic human courtesy that we expect for ourselves and nothing more. It’s my opinion that Bush has disrespected the office more than any other person in history, so demanding special respect for him because of his job seems more than he deserves.
I for one do feel that there should be some respect for the office, regardless of how you feel about the occupant. While I don’t like the current president, I try to refer to him as the President or George Bush when I speak of him. And I would address the man as “Mr President” if I were speaking to him.
It depends on the context in which you meet the President.
If you are also a public servant, e.g a white house staffer or a serving member of the armed forces, your relationship is different to that of an “average joe”.
By joining the White House staff, for example, you accept that you stand up when the President enters the room - because that’s the rules.
If the President walked into your living room, you would not be under a similar obligation to stand (other than basic politeness if that’s your thing).
There are correct channels for staff to lodge complaints, yet any voter should be able to tell the president to his face what they think. Likewise a soldier should salute his commander-in-chief even if he has zero respect for the man.
Respect for the office means that you respect the institutions and traditions within your government regardless of who occupies it at the moment. The US government is made up of three branches and George Bush represents one all by himself. By respecting the office itself, you are recognizing what the country was and will be.
The royal family of Great Britain is a similar thing. Now, a lot of us not from there think that is the silliest thing ever. However, Prince Charles isn’t just some dufus with big ears. He represents an integral part of what the country is. It really isn’t about him at all nor is it about George Bush when you talk about respect your the office. It is acknowledging the collective soul that built the country.
I think W is a world class douchebag, as far as *his performance * in the office, but said office is one of the symbols of our nation, and therefore I think deserves a certain amount of respect.
The responses here lead me to wonder if anyone who thinks of him as another average Joe (if not less) had anything to say about his behavior at the conference, as pitted in this thread
To me, it depends on whether I am dealing with “the President” or “the person.” If I was invited to the White House, and met the President in some official capacity, then I would follow the usual protocol. If I met him on the street, or in some other unofficial capacity, I would treat him as I would treat anyone, based on what I think of him or her as a person.
Don’t confuse the officeholder with the office. The last two Presidents that we have had really point up the need for that.
Clinton dishonored the office beyond belief. As a sitting President, he committed a felony and was impeached for it. We won’t even go into the baldfaced lies that he told us about durn near everything under the sun.
Bush, however, has not. There is no evidence that he has lied to us and he has not committed a crime while in office.
I think the respect for the office has to start with the amount of respect the officeholder brings to it. Clinton thought of the Oval Office as his personal playpen. Bush sees it as the focal point of American society, as should we all.
Oh yeah, it’s my focal point all right. I probably spend between two and three hours daily thinking about the office of the president. Fixation? Obsession? I call it being a good-old-fashioned American, as should you all.
I believe what you are referring to is the useful system of having a head of state (in Britain’s case, the queen) who is a different person from the head of government (the PM). The head of state is a symbol of the country, and should be uninvolved in politics so that both the position and the holder of it can retain everyone’s respect. The head of government is only that, and can be regarded (and addressed) quite impolitely as one’s politics and personal views dictate.
Other countries have heads of states that are not hereditary (but I can’t think of one right now). Often in these countries there is both a Prime Minister and President, and the President is the head of state.
In our country, one office embodies both the head of government and the head of state, and this makes for the difficulties in distinguishing the two that are being discussed in this thread.
In a nation of laws, we should indeed respect the office per se. If Nixon were alive and I met him, I’d respect him qua former President, and probably refer to him as Mister President.
IMHO, W has gone beyond the pale, and my disgust for the may has overpowered my respect for the office.
Part of the problem with the question, however, is that respect is too ambiguous of a term, really. Suppose I get pulled over by a police officer who I know to be a Grade-A P.O.S. I still respect the office by doing as he instructs, referring to him as “officer,” and deferring to his knowledge of the law. I may be minimally cooperative, but I respect the office.
In the case of W, respecting his office also means acknowledging that he is indeed President and has the authority and duties that implies. Which puts me at odds with myself because respect can mean two things, one is willingness to accept another’s authority (for lack of a better term), and the other is a personal sense of esteem for a person or thing.
As much as I oppose most of his actions as President, I would afford him the cordiality the office is due if I met him in person. However, I can and will say whatever I want about him behind his back. This is as the forefathers intended, I believe.
And yet Bush’s ratings are the lowest any president has ever seen- it would seem that more people respected Clinton the President than they respect Bush the President. Strange.