RC> Hello Bob!

 RC> 11 Mar 07 08:56, you wrote to me:

 RC>>> Of the 10:

 RC>>> 6 were named using some variation of an opinion you voiced,
 RC>>> the namesake had been dead for an excess of 25 years.

 BK>>  Good, they get to keep their names.

 RC> Oh, you going to order the USN to immediately change names?

 I'm sure they'll hop right to it.

 RC>>> You would not have had an opinion on this, had I not raised
 RC>>> the observation, after all take away the Reagan and the
 RC>>> Bush, the Nimitz's commisioned before were a DEM, A DEM and
 RC>>> the father of the country.

 BK>>  You have no idea what you are talking about.

 RC> This topic has not come up before.

 You must think Fido is the entire world.

 RC>>> Quite frankly you had no opinion until I introduced the
 RC>>> topic, you bristled immediately and quickly devised one and
 RC>>> decorated it by trying justify it with the "its politics"
 RC>>> ploy, more to the point "gop only politics".

 BK>>  That was one of the dumber things you have said. If you think I
 BK>>  didn't "bristle" when they first announced the construction of
 BK>>  the "Reagan" you badly underestimate my objection to the
 BK>>  deification of Ronald Reagan. If you think I didn't
"Bristle" at
 BK>>  the announcement of the "GHW Bush" you badly underestimate my
 BK>>  disgust at the republican exploitation of the military, and my
 BK>>  disgust at the corruption of the Bush dynasty.

 RC> Am I allowed to be disgusted at the Kennedy dynasty or that

 Yes.

 RC> of all Democrats, whom strive to punish the successful to

 The Libertarian lament, if you have to pay according to how you
 benefit you are exploited. How sad.

 RC> coddle the weak to keep a voting block beholden to them?

 The whole point of govt is to do for us what we cannot do for
 ourselves. It's not necessary for the democrats to keep any
 voting block beholden, all that's necessary is wait for the
 republicans to abandon a particular group, and they have no
 where else to turn. See, if govt doesn't protect the weak, what
 purpose does it serve?

 Which is why children wind up in poverty to a greater extent
 under republicans, and why the elderly are abandoned by
 republicans. They cater to the elite and feed off the strong for
 their own benefit, not for anyone else. That's why, for a
 republican, pro-life ends at the womb.

 RC>>> Admit it Bob, you dont care what the Carriers are called as
 RC>>> long as they perform the duties they are designed to do.

 BK>>  I most certainly do care about any military facility being
 BK>>  exploited for partisan purposes, esp for the worship of
 BK>>  republican presidents whose legacy is debt, poverty, and
 BK>>  decline.

 RC> Its a fucking name designation, some huge white letters
 RC> painted on the side of the boat.

 Then change them if it's so unimportant. Otherwise it's a
 floating political ad.

 RC> If you have a guard dog protecting your property, is it any
 RC> less effective as a guard dog if you call it "Flower"
 RC> versus calling it "Rocky"?

 If I pay for it I can call it anything I want. If the govt pays
 for it the govt most certainly should not name it something
 insulting to some group, or honoring a political group or
 person.

 RC> Bottom line, its a name, which does not diminish the
 RC> carriers usages or missions, if the names fucking bother
 RC> you that much as to make you think your GOD might die, then
 RC> write your congressman and 2 state senators!

 My God recognizes the falseness of your intentions. And rather
 than writing them, I work to replace the republicans. One down,
 one to go.

 RC>>> This is why you get the shit from me and others in debating
 RC>>> it is that fucking facade you put up.

 BK>>  No, you spew shit because you can't deal with anyone who will
 BK>>  stand against you no matter how much bull shit you spread.

 RC> Roll over boy, you had nothing to stand up against me for
 RC> in this topic, I simply presented an observation.

 They why are you making such a big deal out of it? I just
 presented a point of view, you are the one going off the deep
 end on it.

 RC>>> I believe the Navy names its Capital Ships after people, do
 RC>>> you have issues with them naming their lighter ships after
 RC>>> US cities?

 BK>>  I haven't yet seen that exploited for partisan purposes. If it
 BK>>  is, I will object.

 RC> Would you object if they started using only city name in
 RC> Democrat stronghold states?

 Yeah, I would because next time it will be republican. Don't
 start that and you won't have to deal with it from the other
 side.

 RC>>> BTW, The Ford Class Carrier I mentioned, I never specified
 RC>>> when the first one is to be built, why did you perceive
 RC>>> otherwise?

 BK>>  If it isn't in process, then good, maybe it will never be built.
 BK>>  Maybe a class named after someone who fits the standards will be
 BK>>  built.

 RC> I am sure its on the blueprint phase now.

 Just write a different name at the bottom of the blueprint.

BOB KLAHN bob.klahn{at}sev.org   http://home.toltbbs.com/bobklahn

... Mary had a little lamb...the doctor was shocked.
 * Silver Xpress V4.5/P [Reg]
--- Platinum Xpress/Win/WINServer v3.0pr5a