[OldDeckHand]

"No decision has been made yet, but they are floating around a few politician names and the USS Arizona."

I could live with "Enterprise", only because of its uniquely historical context.

My personal preference, however, is that no US Navy ship of war be named after ANY politician, current or former, including Presidents. Our warships should be named after cities, counties, states or fallen US service members. Only people who have either paid the ultimate sacrifice, or have accomplished a remarkable feet of heroism (like a Medal of Honor winner), should be commemorated in such a way.

I'm tired of naming ships (and federal buildings, and airports, and national parks) after people who live high off the hog, on the government dole with dozens of staffers and then go on to enjoy a guaranteed pension. Where's the "sacrifice" in that so-called public service?

[Jeff Head]

Amen. Enterprise has a rich and amazing historical tradition. They are naming the new LHAR (Amphibious Assault Ship) the USS America. I wish a new full deck carrier had gotten that name.

[AndyJackson]

Attack submarines used to be named after marine animals, until we stared naming them after corrupt congressmen. Then we started naming them after cities. We should go back to fish, or better naming them after valorous WWII submarines, which were named after fish. FBMs were named after famous patriots, then we started naming them after states. That is ok, I guess.

[editor-surveyor]

>> “I’m tired of naming ships (and federal buildings, and airports, and national parks) after people who live high off the hog, on the government dole with dozens of staffers and then go on to enjoy a guaranteed pension. Where’s the “sacrifice” in that so-called public service?” <<

.
Agree!