Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

Got this right wing email about the USS Reagan

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 (1/22-2007 thru 12/14/2010) Donate to DU
 
Lasher Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Dec-14-07 10:38 AM
Original message
Got this right wing email about the USS Reagan
Edited on Fri Dec-14-07 11:18 AM by Lasher
It includes a picture of our latest monster aircraft carrier, with some gee whiz statistics. Then it goes on to gloat with a photo of an ugly old barge that's supposed to be named after Clinton.

I've been enjoying an email war that ensued and while it is fresh in my mind I put together a response you might consider using if you ever receive this same message.

Did you know that during WWII most major aircraft carriers were named after battles? Battleships were named for states and submarines were named after fish.

But that was long ago, so Im trying to figure out what the new naming convention is.

I see Clinton has a humble barge named for him 'for his foresight in military budget cuts and his conduct while president. And Reagan increased military spending so thats why he got a monster carrier named after him. But that cant be right.

Measured in what economists call "constant dollars," adjusted for inflation, defense spending declined by nearly 15 percent between Reagan's last budget (for fiscal year 1989) and George H. W. Bush's last budget four years later. The decline was just under 13 percent between Bush's last budget and Clinton's final fiscal year (2001). In other words, the buying power of the dollars spent for defense declined more during Bush 41's four years than during Clinton's eight.

Bush 41s secretary of defense explained that overall, since I've been secretary, we will have taken the five-year defense program down by well over $300 billion. That's the peace dividend. And now we're adding to that another $50 billion of so-called peace dividend. That defense secretary, of course, was Dick Cheney.

http://www.factcheck.org/more_mitt_missteps.html

And yet the next new carrier to come online is already named the USS George H. W. Bush (CVN-77). Whats with that? I noticed Jimmy Carter got a new nuclear submarine, the USS Jimmy Carter (SSN-23), named after him. I guess thats because he was a submariner in the Navy. And Bush 41 saw combat during WWII, serving as a pilot aboard an aircraft carrier. So did Gerald Ford, and the next carrier after the USS Bush is already named the USS Gerald R. Ford (CVN-78) even though they havent started building it yet. So we name our ships based on what presidents did while they were in the military. But that cant be right either.

Reagan spent WWII making training films and never left the United States. If that were the convention shouldnt he have had a military movie theater or something like that named after him instead of an aircraft carrier?

So I guess its back to the spending thing. In that case I can understand how people might make a mistake in naming a carrier after Bush 41 because of a myth that Clinton cut military spending and Republicans didnt. But it still seems kind of funny to use the USS Reagan to criticize Clinton because he didnt spend anything on our military. After all she was ordered on December 8, 1994 and launched on March 4, 2001.

Clinton built the USS Reagan.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
ProfessorGAC Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Dec-14-07 10:42 AM
Response to Original message
1. I Want The Ship's Name Changed
And i want it now. The hagiographers make me ill.
The Professor
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Lasher Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Dec-14-07 10:57 AM
Response to Reply #1
2. This is a source of irritation for me, especially when I am confronted with this gloating.
Proud Navy tradition has been corrupted. It is clear that the actual convention today is we name our monster carriers after loser Republican presidents.

Anyway, if I may be so bold as to say, I was a clear victor in the email war that lasted for several days. It was easy. Most Republicans are pretty stupid.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
alfredo Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Dec-14-07 11:05 AM
Response to Original message
3. What cuts Clinton made were cuts called for by Poppy Bush.
Poppy wanted to streamline the army to meet the needs of post cold war America. The person tasked to redefine, downsize, and modernize the military was Dick Cheney. So when Cheney criticizes Clinton for degrading the military he is actually criticizing his own recommendations.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Lasher Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Dec-14-07 11:29 AM
Response to Reply #3
6. If you look at the cuts as a percentage of GDP, they began during the Reagan administration
Hit the Factcheck link I furnished in the OP if you want details of that. I tried to include one of the graphs in the OP as I did with a copy & paste in my email to them but DU didn't like the picture's URL.

These guys were real hardcore neocons. One started harping about bigots who hate Israelis, while in the same message trying to drum up a war against all Muslims. I replied, "If I'm a bigot who hates Jews if I won't buy the snake oil being peddled by Dick Cheney and the rest of the neocons, then I guess I'll need to go shopping for some Klan robes."
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
alfredo Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Dec-14-07 12:32 PM
Response to Reply #6
7. the neocons are in league with the end of timers. The end of timers
have as part of their agenda the conversion or death to all Jews.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Lasher Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Dec-14-07 02:06 PM
Response to Reply #7
8. I guess.
Anyway, it's good to be back at DU where most people are not quite as nutty as those neocons.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
alfredo Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Dec-14-07 02:47 PM
Response to Reply #8
9. We're better at hiding our craziness.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
unpossibles Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Dec-14-07 11:06 AM
Response to Original message
4. let's see.... over-large, bloated, slow, overbearing and warlike
yeah, that describes Reagan pretty well.

:D
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
hunter Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Dec-14-07 11:10 AM
Response to Original message
5. I predict this ship will come to an inglorious end much like its namesake.
Confined to home, and tended by nurses.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Ezlivin Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Dec-14-07 03:03 PM
Response to Original message
10. If it's like Reagan, it won't see action and will forget where it's going
But it'll look nice and grandfatherly.


Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Lasher Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Dec-14-07 04:01 PM
Response to Reply #10
11. They'll sell all their bombs and rockets to our enemies.
Then they'll use the proceeds to hire a bunch of thugs to terrorize some latin american country that's never done anything to us. Then they'll say they can't remember anything about it.
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 Aug 22nd 2014, 04:43 PM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (1/22-2007 thru 12/14/2010) 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