posted on Jan, 6 2007 @ 06:03 AM
But Gerald Ford's sole claim to fame is hushing up the Watergate investigation before it put a President (rightly, IMO) in jail. That is not much to
be proud of, even in a mere 2 years of office.
'America' can handle and NEEDED TO HANDLE the truth. As proof that we were grown ups, not coddled ex-flower children. Whether the seated President
chose to pardon the criminal after the fact or not, it was not his place as a compromised close associate to fail to allow for due process.
I think that Enterprise has a foul connotative smell to it because this recent war veritably REEKS of money-trail politicking and while self
advancement through 'entreprenurial means' is a good thing in the real world, it has no place as a mark of honor in the military, no matter what
'America' may not be the best choice either since anyone in this hemisphere can lay claim to being one.
My vote, did it come to it and 'was I asked', would be _U.S.S. United States_. There was a time when that was NOT something people went out of
their way to avoid admitting, especially when abroad.
It is also the name that was intended for the first of the super carriers, waaaaaaay back when the B-36 was a giant shoot-me bullseye in the sky.
Of course there are practical matters to consider. I wouldn't be at all surprised to see a nuke carrier get SUNK in the next 50 years, as stupidly
as we continue to play them close in in the litorals.
And it would suck raw buttermilk if that carrier bore EITHER of the names by which this nation names itself.
But Mr. Ford, while I understand 'was a real nice fellah' is not deserving of having his name on a 5 billion dollar boat. Even less than Reagan
There are other good names out there: Langley. Hornet. Lexington. Shiloh. Antietam. Yorktown. Gettysburg. Halsey. Spruance (yes but they are
retiring). John Paul Jones. Decatur. Bainbridge.
Historical figures, places or shipnames whose associations are with critical events in our past which /did things/ for this nation beyond the normal
parameters of politics as usual. Events which had a profound impact on the military history of this nation and it's navy in particular.
NONE of which Ford did.
P.S. While I disagree as to the notion that a strong navy is no longer required in a world where nearly ALL our manufactured goods and a fair
majority of our strategic resources come from unstable slave states far across the globe; I do believe that we would be better off with many smaller
decks vice a few large ones. Not least because the 'Roosevelt Load' of a 70 plane OPP capable airwing is down to a 'Reagan' equivalent of less
than 40 and we can do more with smartship technologies to reduce the crew and airwing to a level where it is EASIER (on retention after _short_
cruises) using more hulls with more automation and thus less stressed manpower. It doesn't hurt that intermediate-hull technology can be built in
several yards. Major Capital Classes only in one.