From: adam flinton 

Jeff Shultz wrote:

>>>
>>>Served in the Texas Air National Guard. Which incidently, did have a
>>>purpose in life.  And unlike the casualty statistics for Rhodes Scholars
>>>in Moscow, Air Force pilot training is definitely not a safe profession.
>>>
>>
>>Safer than being enlisted & shipped to SE Asian jungles I reckon.
>
>
> Probably - but if you are smart enough to be a pilot, you should be one -
> and not "wasted" as an enlisted man.
>

Hummm.


>>
>>>However, unless HW Bush does something significant for the Navy or comes
>>>off as one of the great leaders of our time (I happen to like him, but
>>>"great leaders of our time" is doubtful), he won't
get a carrier named
>>>after him either. I suspect that after he's out of office, if he hasn't
>>>disgraced himself with any interns or such, he'll probably get something
>>>in the Texas Air National Guard structure re-named after him. As much as
>>>a base, as little as a significant building.
>>
>>Seems a little falacious to me. Is that Senator from Arizona who was
>>shot down & captured over N. Vietnam going to get a ship?
>>
>
> McCain? Possibly he will eventually. But it wouldn't be a carrier. Probably
> along the lines of a destroyer. And it would probably happen after he
> died.
>

Not good enough at raising funds for the navy or just never made it as president?


>
>>The other way "doing things for the navy" strikes me as
even worse as it
>>is in effect buying a shipnaming with taxpayer's money
>
>
> Only if that is the goal.... which, as far as I can see, hasn't been for
> the three living presidents who are currently having ships named for them.
> OTOH, I don't happen to like the trend, started in the 50's with the
> Forrestal, of naming carriers after politicians.
>

I just find it bizarre. Very Soviet.

Adam

--- BBBS/NT v4.01 Flag-4