User Panel
User Panel
User Panel
|
Posted: 9/28/2002 8:39:16 AM EDT
[#1]
Like it or not this is the accepted protocol for addressing former Presidents.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 9/28/2002 8:41:07 AM EDT
[#2]
Sorry, I am a diehard conservative, but you are WRONG!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
It is proper to address him by his former office so long as he was not removed from office. Governors are always addressed as Governor, Senators as Senator, House Members as Congressman or Congresswoman, Ambassadors as Ambassador. |
|
|
|
Posted: 9/28/2002 8:47:25 AM EDT
[#3]
If I met Colin Powell, I would probably address him as General Powell, not Secretary Powell. Would I be wrong or impolite?
|
|
|
|
Posted: 9/28/2002 8:53:14 AM EDT
[#4]
Anyone noticed that the media has a habit of referring to GWB as "Mr. Bush"?
-Gloftoe |
|
|
|
Posted: 9/28/2002 8:55:04 AM EDT
[#5]
Quoted: Anyone noticed that the media has a habit of referring to GWB as "Mr. Bush"? -Gloftoe YES! |
|
|
|
Posted: 9/28/2002 8:57:06 AM EDT
[#6]
Quoted: If I met Colin Powell, I would probably address him as General Powell, not Secretary Powell. Would I be wrong or impolite? I think either would be appropriate, but clinton should assuredly be addresses as President whore chasing, draft dodging, gun grabbing, perjury committing, not inhaling, nuclear secret selling, illegal campaign contribution receiving, federal land grabbing, pardon selling shitbag. Did I leave anything out? |
|
|
|
Posted: 9/28/2002 9:13:32 AM EDT
[#7]
Prior to Bill Clinton, I've have heard that the news media refering to out-of-office past presidents "former." When the reporter is talking directly to the person on a one-on-one, they refer to him as Mr. President.... But when they are talking about him in the 3rd person, the media used to refer to them as former-president... BUT I think that these folks are still smarting from the fact that they can't believe that their hero Bill Clinton is out of office, and that Al Gore lost; they are still refering to Bill as Pres. Clinton, when it should be former as a Freudian-slip. One thing for sure, the media has given more screen time to Bill C. than most other former presidents.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 9/28/2002 9:13:39 AM EDT
[#8]
Here is the absolute proper way to address clinton and powell.
Clinton: worthless shitbag traitor. Powell: Pussy. this is the ONLY way they should be addressed. Mike |
|
|
|
Posted: 9/28/2002 9:19:56 AM EDT
[#9]
While I understand the etiquette, I have never liked the custom of referring to people by their former title, position, what have you. Smacks of "titles of nobility", which were banned in the original Constitution, IIRC.
Don't much care for "Esquire" and the like, either. |
|
|
|
Posted: 9/28/2002 9:24:01 AM EDT
[#10]
"so tell us scumbag, anti-American, lying, cheating puke, what are your FEELINGS on the coming war with Iraq? [50]
|
|
|
|
Posted: 9/28/2002 9:27:07 AM EDT
[#11]
Actually it should be "Mr. Impeached, disbarred and held in contempt for perjury President" |
|
|
|
Posted: 9/28/2002 9:28:16 AM EDT
[#12]
Quoted: If I met Colin Powell, I would probably address him as General Powell, not Secretary Powell. Would I be wrong or impolite? Yes! very impolite. You should address him as General Powell,[b]SIR![/b] |
|
|
|
Posted: 9/28/2002 9:48:18 AM EDT
[#13]
Really, and your souce for this is?
The common protocol I was taught was that their is only one President. If you are refer to a former President with the title "President" it is only acceptable when speaking of them during their time in office. A quick search through all the news archives I found showed that when speaking about an individual that is no longer president, they ALL used the term "former President". The exception to this was when referring to Clinton. If you have a valid reference to back you claim, I would be happy to agree that it is proper to refer to former Presidents as if they are the current President. Also, by your claim, is Bill Clinton still the Commander in Chief? After all, the President is the C.I.C, is he not?[:P] |
|
|
|
Posted: 9/28/2002 10:09:31 AM EDT
[#14]
Joe, you are just being an ass. If you want references as to how to address former Heads of State you could contact the State Department.
Calling the President, former or current, Mr. President does not smack of nobility. Like it or not President Clinton was elected twice. It is a title he earned, it was not bestowed upon him by birth or virtue of marriage. Whether he disgraced the office or not is not the issue, he held the office and it is proper to address him as such. I despise the man, but I still addressed him as Mr. President when meeting him after he left office. As for Colin Powell, either would be proper and he would likely prefer Mr. Secretary from what I know of him and since he is a civilian holding a cabinet position in a civilian government he would likely prefer not to be called General for appearance sake. |
|
|
|
Posted: 9/28/2002 10:25:50 AM EDT
[#15]
Americans seem to need their nobility fix. The "office" of POTUS deserves respect and so I would properly have respect for the person presently serving. After leaving office he is just another citizen, albeit, one with many advantages and benefits. I can't see the benefit of the pretense unless you absolutely must put yourself on a lower level to demonstrate the class structure that exists to our detriment.
Guys like Hiram Ranger have politically related jobs and may have a more practical viewpoint. |
|
|
|
Posted: 9/28/2002 10:26:33 AM EDT
[#16]
Bulls**t, I just did an internet search for former presidents and guess what Clinton was the second one listed.
As far as when I learned it was proper protocol to address former presidents in this manner I do not remember but most likely was when my mother taught me manners, something your mother obviously neglected to teach you. Educate yourself at the link below; please refer to the parts that address good manners. [url]http://englishplus.com/news/news1200.htm[/url] What happens when they no longer hold the office? Usually out of respect, we would still refer to them the same way. While we might refer to a retired Senator Smith as former Senator Smith or ex-Senator Smith, that would not be appropriate as an address - whether a direct personal address or address on a letter. It is perfectly acceptable and appropriate to continue to address him as "Senator Smith" or write him in care of "Senator John Smith." The term Honorable is usually reserved for those still in office. For the salutation in a letter, it would still be fine to write "Dear Senator Smith." "Dear Mr. Senator" tends to suggest that he is still in office. There is usually nothing wrong with addressing him as "Dear Mr. Smith," but it is probably better to avoid it unless you know for sure that he does not mind. This is especially true after an election loss. Calling him "Mr. Smith" rather than "Senator Smith" might be calling more attention to his loss - and gloating is never good manners. |
|
|
Win a FREE Membership!
Sign up for the ARFCOM weekly newsletter and be entered to win a free ARFCOM membership. One new winner* is announced every week!
You will receive an email every Friday morning featuring the latest chatter from the hottest topics, breaking news surrounding legislation, as well as exclusive deals only available to ARFCOM email subscribers.
AR15.COM is the world's largest firearm community and is a gathering place for firearm enthusiasts of all types.
From hunters and military members, to competition shooters and general firearm enthusiasts, we welcome anyone who values and respects the way of the firearm.
Subscribe to our monthly Newsletter to receive firearm news, product discounts from your favorite Industry Partners, and more.
Copyright © 1996-2024 AR15.COM LLC. All Rights Reserved.
Any use of this content without express written consent is prohibited.
AR15.Com reserves the right to overwrite or replace any affiliate, commercial, or monetizable links, posted by users, with our own.
