Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

Why is it that RepublicanPres. get Aircraft carriers named after them, but

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (Through 2005) Donate to DU
 
sleipnir Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Feb-19-05 01:38 PM
Original message
Why is it that RepublicanPres. get Aircraft carriers named after them, but
Edited on Sat Feb-19-05 01:39 PM by sleipnir
Dems get smaller ships?

Case in point, the upcoming George Herbert Walker Bush Carrier (in 2008) compared with the brand new Jimmy Carter Sub? Not to mention the Raygun ship..

The new Jimmy Carter


The Raygun Ship (will also be the same class as the new GHW Bush)



Adding insult to injury, the Carter specialty mission is to wiretap fiber-optic lines, essentially a spyship not a warship. Odd indeed if you ask me. I wonder if Clinton will ever get a ship named after him and what will it be?

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
Darkhawk32 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Feb-19-05 01:45 PM
Response to Original message
1. Simple. Penis envy. n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
BrklynLiberal Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Feb-19-05 01:46 PM
Response to Reply #1
3. Great minds travel on the same track hahahahahahaha
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Darkhawk32 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Feb-19-05 01:59 PM
Response to Reply #3
7. Well, I was born in Brooklyn... that might explain some of it. ;) n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
BrklynLiberal Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Feb-19-05 01:45 PM
Response to Original message
2. Because Repukes need phallic compensation and Dems don't
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Columbia Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Feb-19-05 02:05 PM
Response to Reply #2
9. Subs are more phallic than carriers tho...
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Darkhawk32 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Feb-19-05 09:22 PM
Response to Reply #9
18. Apparently, Repugs like to RECEIVE the phallic symbol. n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Mayberry Machiavelli Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Feb-19-05 01:47 PM
Response to Original message
4. Because Carter was a nuclear engineer on subs during his Navy time.
JFK had an aircraft carrier named after him.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Catch22Dem Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Feb-19-05 01:49 PM
Response to Reply #4
5. That's what I was gonna say
Not that Reagan had anything to do with Carriers, but it makes sense for Carter to get a sub. Now, why the FUCK GHWB get's a carrier is a mystery to me. Didn't he bail out on his own crew. Nice job there NAVY.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
WLKjr Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Feb-19-05 09:26 PM
Response to Reply #5
19. He flew a plane in WWII, I think it was a carrier based plane
He flew for the navy I think. Am I wrong here?


But I still say it's penis envy with republicans. :D
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Catch22Dem Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Feb-20-05 09:42 AM
Response to Reply #19
20. No, you're correct, but...
Apparently when he got shot down and bailed out, he left his crew behind.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
WLKjr Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Feb-20-05 09:59 AM
Response to Reply #20
21. I am not going to argue that one
All I know was that he was shot down. That is the end of my knowledge on the subject.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
boneygrey Donating Member (651 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Feb-19-05 01:51 PM
Response to Original message
6. USS Truman
is a carrier
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
charlie Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Feb-19-05 02:04 PM
Response to Original message
8. This business of naming ships after living people is bullshit
And WTF were they doing plastering Bob Hope's name on a ship? How can anyone get into the fighting spirit when they've got to sail on the USS Bob Hope?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
NorthSideCubsFan Donating Member (47 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Feb-19-05 02:33 PM
Response to Reply #8
14. No more naming ships after politicians period n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Stop_the_War Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Feb-19-05 02:08 PM
Response to Original message
10. USS JFK is a carrier, isn't it?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
sleipnir Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Feb-19-05 02:24 PM
Response to Reply #10
13. It's scheduled to be decommissioned, to make room for the GHW Bush
JFK's ship will be no more in 3 years....
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
zbdent Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Feb-19-05 02:45 PM
Response to Reply #13
15. The "reasoning" behind that is this:
"It's one of only three oil-burning carriers"

PLUS

"It's the second oldest oil-burners"

Hmm, I wonder what the other two oil-burners are named - and which of them is the oldest? The oldest is probably another "Repuglycan" saint . . .

Again, removing any memories of Dems . . .
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
RiDuvessa Donating Member (285 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Feb-19-05 03:02 PM
Response to Reply #15
17. USS Kitty Hawk is the oldest carrier
It's the only other diesel aircraft carrier in the fleet. It's forward-deployed in Japan. It has had better upkeep then the JFK, because of its mission.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Ezlivin Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Feb-19-05 02:13 PM
Response to Original message
11. Because aircraft carriers are TARGETS
At least that's what us submariners called them.

And ten submarines, properly equipped, could take out the entire world.

I'd rather have my name on a sub anytime!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Stirk Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Feb-19-05 02:21 PM
Response to Original message
12. Because carriers stay in a safe spot and send other little units off
to fight. Har. Har.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Strelnikov_ Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Feb-19-05 02:49 PM
Response to Reply #12
16. The Winner!!!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
indepat Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Feb-20-05 10:31 AM
Response to Original message
22. It's the right thing to do
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Charon Donating Member (321 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Feb-20-05 12:33 PM
Response to Original message
23. Carrier Names
What about Frankin D. Roosevelt, or Harry S. Truman Think those gents are normally classed as Democrats, also the name of US.Carriers.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
B Calm Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Feb-20-05 12:37 PM
Response to Original message
24. I liked it better when they named ships after cities and states.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Blue Wally Donating Member (974 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Feb-20-05 01:32 PM
Response to Reply #24
25. Ship naming customs
Traditionally:

Battleships were named after states. The one exception was the Kearsarge which was named after a famous and favorite ship which was lost just as the Kearsarge and kentucky were being approved by Congress. Congress legislated the name change.

Cruisers were named after cities.

Destroyers were named after naval heroes or former Secretaries of the Navy.

Carriers were named after famous ships (Ranger, Enterprise, Hornet, Wasp) or famous battles (Saratoga, Yorktown, Lexington, Bunker Hill). The first experimental carrier, CV-1 Langley was named after an aviation pioneer. Naming after famous battles came about when the unfinished battlecruisers Lexington and Saratoga were converted to CV-2 and CV-3 retaining their names. After the loss of the CV-1 langley, CV-27 recieved the name Langley. CVL-49 was named the Wright after the Wright brothers. CVB-42 was renamed during construction to the Franklin D. Roosevelt.

Ships constructed since WWII include the CVA-59 Forrestal (a SecNav who committed suicide just before her naming) and the CVA-67 John F. Kennedy shortly after his assasination.

That opened the door for Congress naming ships after people:

CVAN-68 Nimitz
CVN-69 Dwight D. Eisenhower
CVN-70 Carl Vinson (a politician big on naval appropriations)
CVN-71 Theodore Roosevelt
CVN-72 Abraham Lincoln
CNN-73 George Washington
CVN-74 John C. Stennis (a politician big on naval appropriations)
CVN-75 Harry S.Truman
CVN-76 Ronald Reagan
CVN-77 George H. W. Bush

I think the Navy pushed for a sub to be named the Jimmy Carter, since Carter was a part of the submarine force during his naval career.



Carriers changed near the end of WWII, when FDR dies and one of the Midway-class carriers was named after him.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
CatholicEdHead Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Feb-20-05 01:37 PM
Response to Original message
26. What will Clinton and GWB get named after them?
I am guessing GWB will get a carrier due to his flying hours (the AWOL stuff will get ignored).

Will Clinton even get a ship? He technically did not serve and the current GOP Congress hates to even mention his name without frothing at the mouth.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Fri May 03rd 2024, 02:44 PM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (Through 2005) Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC