I would ask this in the mundane and pointless thread, but since this is a question of fact, I guess it goes here.
I believe that someone who was once President (of the United States) is always called Mr. President (at least until we have a woman president).
If so, would the current President call the former President “Mr. President” if the two were having a conversation? (This assumes that the two aren’t on a first name basis.)
Officially, all Presidents and former Presidents are supposed to be addressed as “Mr. President.” or “President Whathisname.” So if the two were not chummy, they would call each other Mr. President.
Not as ridiculous as it might sound, since Presidents from many other countries that have Presidents are also called Mr. President, and the President has to talk to those other Presidents on occasion.
Actually, former Presidents are not to be addressed as “Mr. President,” but rather as “Mr. Ford,” or “Mr. Carter.”
And if you are addressing him by letter, it’s “The Honorable Gerald R. Ford,” or “The Honorable James E. Carter.”
Somebody should tell the radio stations here in DC. It seems as though most news stories involving President Bush have him being addressed as Mr. Bush after the first mention. Seems disrespectful, IMO.
Unfortunately I don’t have a copy of Emily Post handy, but CNN says
One test of how an incumbent president addresses a predecessor is how a newly inaugurated president opens his inaugural address:
President Carter began his address without a salutation, and did not mention former President Ford.
You’ve done your homework, brianmelendez.
Wow, a lot more responces that I thought I’d get. Thanks for the info everybody.
I thought people used “Mr. President” because they were forgetting the guy’s name.
If they refer to him as “Mr. Bush” it is probably because that is how the White House press office instructed them to. It is not in the least bit disrespectful to refer to the President of the USA as “Mr. Bush” (if that is his name).
You should look at the daft titles that were proposed for George Washington.
It used to be traditional that a former President or Vice President was addressed by whatever title that individual had held immediately before becoming President (or, if he had previously been Vice President, before becoming Vice President). Thus, the proper terms of address would be Governor Clinton, Ambassador Bush, Governor Reagan, Governor Carter, and Senator Ford. This tradition dates back to General Washington and therefore has a strong pedigree. However, President Clinton has explicitly requested to be known as Former President Clinton (or Mr. Clinton), and the media have acceeded to this request.
It sounds like the radio station is following a common journalistic practice by first giving the person’s title and full name, then in subsequent references calling the person by either his last name, or Mr. Lastnamehere. I believe the only common exceptions to this rule, following such a style, are military ranks and titles of nobility or royalty.
IIRC, The New York Times, which every day refers to “Mr. Bush” or “Mr. Rumsfeld” or “Mr. Blair,” had a bit of an editorial debate in 2001 about whether to refer to Secretary of State Colin Powell as “Mr. Powell” or “General Powell.” They appear to have settled on “Mr. Powell.”
KellyM writes: “It used to be traditional that a former President or Vice President was addressed by whatever title title that individual had held immeadiately before becoming President (or, if he had previously been Vice President, before becoming Vive President).”
It seems as though formers judges are often referred to this way. During the impeachment, many pundits referred to the Independent Counsel as Judge Starr, even though he no longer sat on the bench.
Slight nitpick: Gerald Ford was a member of the House, not the Senate.
I have read somewhere that in the early days of the Republic, the founding fathers debated over whether the president should be referred to as “Your Majesty”.
The other leading candidate after the title “President of the United States,” addressed as “Mr. President,” was “His Highness the President of the United States of America and Protector of their Liberties,” addressed as “Your Highness”:
From U.S. Senate, “The Senate Prepares for a President.” There were other proposals that seem equally ridiculous in hindsight:
Suzanne Fields, “Campaigning Like Our Founding Fathers.”
These proposals, as odd as they seem today, were not being invented out of whole cloth for the new Presidency. For example, in the late 18th century, “their High Mightinesses” was the usual form of address for the lords of the States General of the United Netherlands, who are so styled in the Treaty of Paris (1783). James Madison made the successful argument against adopting such a lofty title for the President:
Now I do. Here is what Emily Post says:
Peggy Post, Emily Post’s Etiquette 324 (16th ed. 1997).
Christine Todd Whitman, former governer of NJ and current Administrator of the Environmental Protention Agency prefers to be called Governer even though that is no longer her title.
I think part of the issue is that a person is, as a matter of courtesy, referred to by the highest title they’ve ever been entitled to. A corollary to this rule is: Once Honorable, Always Honorable (i.e. if someone holds a civil office entitled to the appellation Honorable, they should thereafter be addressed as Hon. even after they’re out of office).
The President is the top of the heap as far as the U.S. is concerned, so I’ve often heard former Presidents referred to as President Carter, etc. However, I think that the title Mr. President should be usually reserved for the serving President.
As to other officials, a cabinet secretary position would be considered higher than a military one, so Secretary of State Powell would be Mr. Secretary. On the other hand, Administrator of the EPA probably doesn’t outrank Governor of a State, so Christie Whitman would be referred to as Governor (and Madam Administrator is just a horrible title).
Wouldn’t he just call him “Dad”?
Re: referring to Dubya as “Mr. Bush” – there’s a difference between talking to him, when you’d address him as “Mr. President,” and talking about him, as in a news report, when you’d call him “President Bush,” “the President,” or “Mr. Bush.”