Actually, not to get picky, but technically it is improper to refer to Governor Reagan as "President Reagan" after he is out of the oval office. I can't remember to where I need to cite for this, but I think it was a Jefferson notion that since there is only ONE President at any given time, there is only, well, ONE president at any time. The correct way to refer to a former president, then, is by the highest title he held prior to serving as commander in Chief. Governor Clinton, Governor Reagan, etc.

Of course, it's also a bit odd to say that calling him "Mr. Reagan" is disrespectful because a) we called him "Mr. President," for the very good reason that we wanted no tinge of royalty on our shiny new republic and b) the whole point of this shiny new republic is that the president may deserve a lot of respect, but he is still just a citizen of the United States, due all the privileges citizens here get - but really, no more.

He is not king. He is president. And he isn't even that anymore, George W. Bush is. So he's Governor Reagan or Mr. Reagan.

An online guide I found to forms of address for US Government officials states that former presidents are first addressed as "The Honorable ..." and after that as "Mister" (or whichever female title is appropriate).

So attending the funeral will be the Honorable Gerald R. Ford, Jimmy Carter, George Bush, and Bill Clinton.

The Associated Press stylebook -- used by most every newspaper of note -- says to use "former" in front of the title, as in former President Reagan.

Kevin, as you rightfully mention, "real names raise the level of discussion" - and I've never been one to hide behind pseudonyms or shy away from offering my personal off-duty opinion in forums that engender such. If asked and relevant, I always owe up to who I am and what I stand for.

In all fairness, I believe you have less than accurately paraphrased my comments at Ron Fineman's website. So be it.

Please know that I offered my personal comments as a Simi Valley resident and sometimes television viewer and not as a Fire Department official. Yes, I happen to work for the agency you mention (and several others), but my comments are mine and mine alone. Isn't that the way it should be?

When I'm speaking on behalf of and attributable to my professional endeavors or political appointments, I'll be sure to say so. Otherwise, they are just the ramblings of a poorly schooled more salt than pepper haired LA observer.

Regards,

Brian Humphrey
Simi Valley, CA

Kevin:

I could be wrong (attention Brian Humphrey), but the office of the President is a sworn civil service position. As I understand it, once a titled civil servant, a person is entitled to retain that title, i.e. SGT Rod Bernsen, LAPD, Ret. (like I'd ever insist on that). Now over time, especially with former presidents, I believe that making a reference of president without the former is journalistically acceptable.
As to the mailing address: all members of congress and the senate are referred to as honorable.
Finally Brian, the LAFD should be proud of your talents. Last I recall, expressing your opinion (even as identified as a member of the LAFD) doesn't violate policy? Or does it?

Kevin, thanks for the mention.

No, there is no policy issue. I'm welcome to speak as I please during my off-duty time.