Jasper Journal

 ”Now, what we’re doing, I want to be clear, we’re not trying to push financial reform because we begrudge success that’s fairly earned. I mean, I do think at a certain point you’ve made enough money.”

OK, which anti capitalist said this? If you guessed the President of the United States you would be correct!  After earning a cool 5.5 mil himself last year, he feels he can set limits on how much people can make. I didn’t make 5.5 mil last year, and for the job he’s doing, I think he is way overpaid.  In all honesty, I think the above remark  speaks to who the president really is. He is someone in favor of income redistribution. He is against wall street, the rich, successful entrepreneurs, bankers, the business community, and non union workers.  He has shown a penchant from the start to either demonize the above listed groups  or take actions to transfer money from them for his pet programs.

  People shy away from calling him a socialist. but folks , comments like the above are pretty telling. I want to make as much money as I can. Profit is good not bad. It is the engine of the capitalist system. Businesses are there to make money not provide jobs.  The better they do, the more jobs will exist. What a novel concept!  I defy him or anyone else to come up with a better system for  economic growth, productivity and development, and prosperity.  If this was such a bad system why does everyone want to come here?

Further, if he continues to tinker with and cripple our financial infrastructure, then I ask which country on earth will take the lead in helping everywhere there is a disaster or crisis?  I am afraid to think that our president is really not a fan of American capitalism. I believe more and more that he was taught nothing but the evils of the system and that he actually believes it.  I pray he does not completely destroy our economy in his remaining three years.

In another disgraceful move, it was recently announced by the Secretary of the Navy that a new amphibious landing dock ship will be named for none other than the  late corrupt and venal John Murtha.

Of course Nancy Pelosi and the democrats sing his praises to high heaven as he was one of her inner circle. He was caught on tape demurring on taking a bribe as the time wasn’t right yet, and he demeaned young marines in Iraq without knowing the story and never apologized when he was proven wrong. So I guess that’s good enough to have a ship named after you . What a mockery. Just because he served in the military doesn’t make him a hero!  I am attaching a rather long list of comments posted  to the navy.com website on this subject.  They are brutally honest and frank. One more example of this administration’s disregard for heroism and tradition. Everything is politics.

4/28/2010 10:09:00 PM
		Do you think anyone in the SECNAV’s office will note that there is 100% disdain for this decision? Probably not…
		rukiddingme, USA
		4/28/2010 7:25:00 PM
		Pure politics. The Dems feel slighted cuz our major carriers are named mostly for Rep. or deserving Dems. No one will want to serve on that ship and morale will always be a problem…It is a shame the CNO can’t say a word against this idea for fear of being sacked. Murtha was not deserving in any way.
		Retired CPO, Arizona, USA
		4/28/2010 7:23:00 PM
		As many have correctly stated, this decision is an insult to all American military veterans and must be vacated. Mr. Secretary show true leadership by correcting this dreadful mistake. Do it now. You have no idea how negatively the field force will view your wrongheaded decision and how they will respond. This decision is absolutely disgraceful and an affront to every American veteran.
		Army Green Beret , Asia
		4/28/2010 7:09:00 PM
		Naming a ship bestows the highest honor possible on the namesake. John Murtha is not deserving of this honor. I respectfully ask the SECNAV to reconsider his decision. The sailors and Marines who will serve on this ship certainly will have made enough sacrifices without having to endure the stigma of serving on a ship named after a person who wrongly pronounced our Marines guilty. Many honorable Americans, obviously, find this ship’s name abhorent.
		Navy Mom/Wife, Virginia
		4/28/2010 6:32:00 PM
		In 998 days we will get our country back. Until then we have to live with an oppressive government. SecNav and other DOD cabinet members are just doing what they are told and acting like they like it. Its career survival mode for them. It should take quite some time for this ship to even start the build process and tha…n a couple of years before its finished. Maybe by that time a conservative can take the helm of this sinking country and rename the ship. Whether it be after a city (which is wh…   >>More In 998 days we will get our country back. Until then we have to live with an oppressive government. SecNav and other DOD cabinet members are just doing what they are told and acting like they like it. Its career survival mode for them. It should take quite some time for this ship to even start the build process and tha…n a couple of years before its finished. Maybe by that time a conservative can take the helm of this sinking country and rename the ship. Whether it be after a city (which is what the San Antonio class ships were to be named after) or a REAL patriot and defender of this nation. So many people i can think of on this one. We need to call our elected officials in the mean time and pressure them to reconsider. If your elected official is a Democrat, you can just about forget getting them to reconsider. They dont listen to the people anyway. And they view Murtha as a good fellow democrat. I pray for this country. God Bless the USA.   <<Less
		Marc, USA
		4/28/2010 6:28:00 PM
		What an absolute disgrace. Is John Murtha’s contribution to the military history of the United States anywhere near equal to Iwo Jima, or the 295 Marines awarded the Medal of Honor, etc. etc. etc.? NO!
		Anton, Colorado
		4/28/2010 6:16:00 PM
		Nothing surprises me with this group. After 2012 I hope they can change the name. I know it is bad luck, but what about that Virgin urinating on the bow name change ritual? My Dad (Bikini Island Nuclear Test Vet) is scratching his head in heaven.
		T. C. Clarke
		4/28/2010 6:01:00 PM
		There seems to be a universal revulsion here. Glad to know others are thinking what I’m thinking. What an embarrassment. I live just south of what was Murtha’s district. We’ve always felt he had become a liability to the nation, but the pork that he brought home kept him in office for all those years. But to name a ship after him? Bad form, Navy.
		DT AF Veteran, Pennsylvania
		4/28/2010 5:15:00 PM
		Nothing surprises me anymore under this administration. There are true heroes to name ships after — The USS Murtha is pitiful.
		Mark N, USA
		4/28/2010 5:07:00 PM
		Definitely not the name to name a boat without a negative effect on morale. Name after a City or a Marine who depicted selfless service and sacrific to the Nation. Not a “Self-Serving” politician who in the end maligned serviceman fighting for our country.
		Disapproval of Murtha naming, Maryland
		4/28/2010 5:04:00 PM
		this is my third try to express my dismay at this horrible mistake. i have received and responded to your “confirmation” each time, but no posting. what’s the deal? are you awash in protest?!
		Retired tailhooker, Maryland
		4/28/2010 4:55:00 PM
		What a joke!
		timinaz, Arizona
		4/28/2010 4:29:00 PM
		This decision is absolutely disgusting. All LPD’s have been named for cities, and we must have run out of cities deserving of an honor. Instead of a politician, how about naming the ship after CMH recipients, or Navy Cross recipients. I would even support the USS John Doe ahead of the choice you made.
		LeRoy Zacher, Arizona
		4/28/2010 3:55:00 PM
		Total disgrace. If you are going to name the ship after a Marine, make it a Marine who showed true heroism in battle e.g. Sgt Rafael Peralta.
		Mike, GySgt USMC, USA
		4/28/2010 3:51:00 PM
		This is an absolute disgrace to our men and women in uniform, and to all those who have served and died for their country. Shame on you.
		Nahum, Georgia
		4/28/2010 3:26:00 PM
		absolutely off the chart unreal; appalling, and he has that rip-off little airport named after him; stop this and close the airport
		Denis, California, USA
		4/28/2010 3:00:00 PM
		It is highly inappropriate to name this ship for a man who performed no great deed of valor whilst serving the smallest possible committment in the Corps, but then did greatly dishonor, slander and disgrace the uniform of the United States Marine Corps. On the other hand, to name the ship after Marine Cpl. Jason Dunham, who through his selfless actions saved two fellow Marines and is now a Medal of Honor (posthumous) recipient, would be perfectly fine.
		Andrew, Georgia
		4/28/2010 2:59:00 PM
		What? The USS Taliban was taken? Shame on you SECNAV. We know you will do nothing to fix this atrocity. Is there no honor anymore? God bless all the true heroes in our Navy and Marines!
		Micah, Washington
		4/28/2010 2:38:00 PM
		a total disgrace….are you going to name the next one The Rod Blagojevich?
		you gotta be kidding
		4/28/2010 2:32:00 PM
		What a disgrace!
		Erika, USA
		4/28/2010 2:13:00 PM
		There are many honorable people who have served this country who should be recognized rather than this politician who accused Navy department personnel of crimes and who never apologized when proven wrong. This would seem to be a pandering political act toward the party in charge of the country which will negatively influence the morale of anyone in uniform or retired from it.
		Ann, North Carolina
		4/28/2010 1:58:00 PM
		This is a disgrace!
		Valerie in Oregon, Oregon
		4/28/2010 1:55:00 PM
		This is ludicrous; and he has an airport named after him; stop this, and close the airport
		Denis, California, USA
		4/28/2010 1:34:00 PM
		As a 23 yr Navy vet, I’m embarrassed for the Navy and the Navy Secretary at this decision. This man murtha termed the Marines murderers! Now I see why the Marine Corp want to stand separate from the Department of the Navy…and I don’t blame them. Bill/San Diego
		Bill Fitzgerald, USA
		4/28/2010 1:27:00 PM
		Add yet another vet’s voice to the rising cacophony against this outrage. There are far more valiant veterans that are far more deserving of this honor. Mr. Murtha broke with military when he came out against the liberation of Iraq and when he slandered my brother Marines who were doing their honorable duty. Find an old leaky rowboat and name THAT for Mr. Murtha.
		Dann, Michigan
		4/28/2010 1:22:00 PM
		If all of these negative comments are impressive, consider that they don’t post all of them here. I submitted a quite mild rebuke this morning, stating my disgust that a US Navy ship would be seen ’round the world with this embarrassing endorsement. It was not posted to the site. Hmm,sounds like the outcry has someone in a defensive crouch.
		Retired tailhooker, Maryland
		4/28/2010 12:45:00 PM
		All I can say is thank God I am no longer in the Navy. I served my time, enjoy my Honorable Discharge, and dearly miss some good ole friends. Todays military is getting more and more political, and to have a warship named after a man who liked to posture politically when it was convenient is a disgrace, and to select this name shows the incompetence of the SECNAV. He is either weak or stupid.
		Alec GSM2(SW)
		4/28/2010 12:27:00 PM
		My brother served on PBR’s in the delta and ended up as a P.O.W. for 3 years,he died at the age of 36 from war related problems from his captivity My Brother Stan was a hero and because of his example I served 6 years,My uncle was on the antietam in WW2 for the duration and is also deceased. Both Stan and Uncle gary must be spinning in there graves at the prospect of the name murtha attached to a ship-it makes me sick-name a ship after my brother first-he is a hero ,murtha was a bum
		Dutch Beasley, Ohio
		4/28/2010 12:26:00 PM
		As a 36 year Marine Corps Veteran with Combat in Vietnam and service on many Amphibious Ships – naming an Amphibious Ship after John Murtha is a disgrace for both the Navy and Marine Corps. Name it after a City or at least a Marine that has died in the service of his Country.
		Retired Marine, California
		4/28/2010 12:24:00 PM
		Are you stopping posting comments?! I know more have been sent, including mine. What the hell in the matter with the Navy? This secretary, whom I doubt has ever been near the ocean until he got the job, has made a terrible, disgusting, political decision that desecrates a Navy warship. And the uproar is just beginning, friends. You tell Secretary Mabus he dishonors the Mississippi McCains who served. He should have stayed in Saudi Arabia.
		Joe McCain, North America (non-US)
		4/28/2010 12:18:00 PM
		Unacceptable. Hopefully Secretary Mabus will pull back on this insult to the Marine Corps and Navy.
		acl
		4/28/2010 12:02:00 PM
		Please tell me this is a bad joke. You might as well name it “SEMPER INFIDELIS”. What idiot came up with this idea?
		23 years of USMC active duty, Missouri
		4/28/2010 11:28:00 AM
		Please re-consider this decision. Rep. Murtha already has an airport to nowhere that should be sufficient.
		Tom Weaver, USA
		4/28/2010 11:24:00 AM
		My comment: I am completely abhorred over the naming of a navy ship after rep. Murtha. It would appear that someone who is willing to demonise our troops (Who have sice been exonerated )without even allowing them to be tried, is not representative of American thinking. It makes me wonder who really is on the ball in this military , or have we completely degraded there as well?Tim Fraser
		american patriot, USA
		4/28/2010 10:45:00 AM
		This is a profound disgrace. Mr Murtha was the poster child for all that is wrong with Congress today. Mr. Mabus’ remarks on the late representative were as ridiculous as they were inaccurate. We can only hope that if this obscene act is carried through some future administration will re-name this ship.
		Lucius Quinctius, Wisconsin
		4/28/2010 10:34:00 AM
		As a retired Marine and father of an active duty Marine officer, I am flabbergasted by this clearly political move. What an incredible disgrace and slap in the face to our active duty warfighters!
		Retired Marine Colonel, Colorado
		4/28/2010 10:33:00 AM
		I guess if you accuse marines of murdering women and children in cold blood, you get a warship in your name. Way to go navy. What a sick thing to do.
		Preston, Texas
		4/28/2010 10:20:00 AM
		As a proud Marine veteran and the proud father of an active duty Marine, no to naming anything after Ex-Marine Murtha.
		Ken M, USA
		4/28/2010 9:56:00 AM
		I respectfully vote no to naming LPD 26 USS MURTHA.There are a lot of more deserving persons to name this after than that politician.
		NO TO USS MURTHA, Texas
		4/28/2010 9:39:00 AM
		The SECNAV shows very poor judgment in this proposal. Murtha did show two years of valor in Vietnam, but this cannot compensate for his ugly career as a politician, which was marked by ugly opportunism and an ongoing smell of corruption. Moreover, his slander of Marine behavior in Iraq was disgraceful. The notion that Murtha is worthy of this honor is preposterous. The whole idea should die a quiet death.
		Iowa voice
		4/28/2010 9:22:00 AM
		You are a disgrace.
		Disgraceful, Georgia
		4/28/2010 8:51:00 AM
		Another example of this administration’s contempt for the military. The debt for this insult will be repaid at the polls.
		Retired MCPO, Indiana
		4/28/2010 8:48:00 AM
		I think it is disgraceful to name a LPD 26 after Mr. Murtha. I respect his military service – but he disgraced himself with his more recent comments and accusations toward our troops. This Political Correctness has gone too far. Put an end to it. Name LPD 26 after someone that actually gave their life for this country.
		Joseph Tortorella
		4/28/2010 8:23:00 AM
		An LPD after a politician? No. Tradition is important. A tin can or a pigboat, maybe, but not an LPD.
		CDR Michael P. Muetzel, Retired, Florida
		4/28/2010 8:06:00 AM
		What a GREAT recruiting tool for the Army and Air Force.
		Paul Urban, Pennsylvania
		4/28/2010 7:48:00 AM
		I would like to register my disapproval at naming a ship after a politician who referred to US Marines as “murderers”.
		0311 Sgt, USA
		4/28/2010 7:06:00 AM
		A political disgrace. You are naming a combatant ship after an EX Marine, not a FORMER Marine.
		KEN, New York
		4/28/2010 6:53:00 AM
		Disgusting!!!
		gamps, Pennsylvania
		4/28/2010 6:13:00 AM
		Please don’t do this. There are plenty of people who DESERVE to be honored with a ship name.
		NotoMurtha, New York
		4/28/2010 5:45:00 AM
		Wow…..what are we going to call the next Ship…..the USS Jane Fonda?????
		Al, Maine
		4/28/2010 5:17:00 AM
		Utterly disgraceful. What better example of how disconnected this administration is with reality and how much they despise our armed forces. It looks to me to be a deliberate slap in the face to every member of the military. What a mess.
		number_one, USA
		4/28/2010 12:58:00 AM
		Naming this ship after Murtha gives Marines a good reason to jump ship. Disappointed in the Navy of having short and selective memory to honor this politician. A few years ago, he was smearing the Marines of killing women and children in cold blood. Guess it does matter which political party is in power. Urge the Navy to reconsider selecting his name and choose another person or city.
		Retired Military, Virginia
		4/28/2010 12:35:00 AM
		Mr. Murtha insulted US combat troops on the ground in combat. That does not qualify him for anything, period.
		Robert D. Bryn, USA
		4/27/2010 11:41:00 PM
		LPD now means Last Possible Denegration. I hope every marine refuses orders on it as well as every Sailor. It will forever be the laughing stock and the street names for it will be endless. Thanks for raising the passion of those who really care for America and who will bring down this dishonor to real heros.
		Phillip from Ohio, Ohio
		4/27/2010 11:37:00 PM
		You cannot be serious!!!
		T.R. White, Nevada
		4/27/2010 11:05:00 PM
		The Secretary dishonors the service of every sailor – present and future – who will sail aboard the so-called USS Murtha. Why not call it the Queeg instead? No sir – in spite of many good things he did in his years of service, Rep. Murtha questioned the honor and integrity of those who served in the Global War on Terror. In my mind, that is a disqualifier and I am astonished that the Secretary has entertained a misguided notion. No sir. Name it anything but that.
		DAV, North Carolina
		4/27/2010 11:01:00 PM
		Any Captain assigned to command this vessel will feel as though he is being punished. Any Marine would be ashamed to have to be associated with the name Murtha. Poor judgement on the part the SECNAV. Sergeant of Marines 1974-1980
		PatrickBNA, Tennessee
		4/27/2010 10:54:00 PM
		The idea of naming a United States military ship after Murtha is absolutely disgraceful. Has this current government no shame at all?
		A Marine Fan, Idaho
		4/27/2010 10:44:00 PM
		This ship is being named after Murtha because he was a diehard liberal hack. It has nothing to do with commendable military service. It’s a posthumonous award for dedication to an ever expanding federal government.
		Gunner, Kansas
		4/27/2010 10:41:00 PM
		You have got to be kidding! After what he said about our marines. Disgraceful!!!!
		Jim P, Missouri
		4/27/2010 10:32:00 PM
		What a slap in the face to active duty personnel, and especially to the Marines, and Navy personnel that will have to board that ship. I am glad I did my time before this ‘Political Correctness’ bullshit existed!
		NPJ, Texas
		4/27/2010 10:28:00 PM
		Great idea, SECNAV! Maybe next you can name a ship after Eleanor Roosevelt? Or Jane Fonda? Quite an honor to serve on a vessel named after someone who believed you were a mindless killer.
		B. Harris, California
		4/27/2010 10:26:00 PM
		What’s next, the USS Jane Fonda? She’s also a Vietnam vet. Grow a pair!
		Don, Ohio
		4/27/2010 10:19:00 PM
		It is a disgrace that the Navy would choose to name a ship after someone who accused United States Marines of killing Iraqis “In cold blood”. The Secretary of the Navy should be ashamed of himself. Rico
		Rico from Texas, USA
		4/27/2010 10:09:00 PM
		What are you people in Washington thinking? John Murtha did admirable deeds while he was in the Marine Corps but his conduct when he became a vocal voice in DC politics was UNSAT!!!
		Disgusted with Washington, Massachusetts
		4/27/2010 10:08:00 PM
		Why in the world would a Navy ship be named after Jack Murtha? This guy might have had a distinguished military career, but he brought shame on himself with his slanderous comments about our soldiers, especially in connection with the Iraq War. His only other accomplishment was bringing pork back to his district. There have got to be other military members more deserving of this honor than Congressman Murtha.
		Jan, Wisconsin
		4/27/2010 9:57:00 PM
		What a disgrace to all Marines who have ever served this country. SgtMaj USMC (Ret)
		Paul Chevalier, New Hampshire
		4/27/2010 9:40:00 PM
		From a 23 yr veteran…the man doesn’t deserve to have a tug named after him! As a previous writer stated…if I received orders to that ship under that name, I would refuse them! Outrageous decision by people who know nothing about the US Navy and it’s history.
		Bill, California
		4/27/2010 9:24:00 PM
		I cannot believe the Navy is intending to name a ship after this gentleman. He has disgraced himself by his comments of our active duty men and women. I can easly think of a dozen people who are more deserving of this honor. I can only think that there is something political about this naming. Please honor those men and women who have given the ultimate sacrifice by nameing LPD 26 after someone deserving of the honor and not someone who called our Marines cold blooded killers.
		Sam Pipkin GMCS(SW) RET, Tennessee
		4/27/2010 8:01:00 PM
		This is an April fools joke….and April fools is past
		OLDJTD, USA
		4/27/2010 7:31:00 PM
		Sad that so many others deserve this more. Typical politics.
		C.E. Neher, North America (non-US)
		4/27/2010 6:54:00 PM
		Wow, a Gator freighter that Marines won’t want to serve on now there is a recruiting tool. How about if your a politician, no boat named after you -period. How about “USS Haditha”
		Tired of USS Politics, California
		4/27/2010 5:41:00 PM
		This another example of politics taking over the ship naming process
		Tom, CVA66, New York
		4/27/2010 4:09:00 PM
		Really? Are the powers that be smoking crack when naming ships today? This name joins a growing list of absolutely TERRIBLE names that have been given to ships in recent years. Ships should not be named for political reasons or people at all. Please, return to traditional names. At this rate, the classic and inspirational names of the past are doomed to the dust bin of History to satisfy a few crooked politicians… And yes, Murtha was a tool and does not deserve anything but a YG named for him…
		Chris V, Texas
		4/27/2010 12:29:00 PM
		So LPD 27 will be the USS Duke Cunningham, why not, same distinguished military service same congressional ethics
		Mr. Phil, California
		4/27/2010 10:08:00 AM
		It is getting to be sooo depressing that ships are being name with no regard to history or tradition! John P Murtha is not the name for a ship of this class, it is not the name for the next Ford class ship either. It should or could go on a LCS class ship or one of the new JHSV ships. Hopefully the SecNav will reconsider the gross decision to name this ship after him. He should also reconsider the Naming of the John Warner, should have been Montana. God Bless America and the US Armed Forces.
		Depressed in USA, Colorado
		4/27/2010 10:04:00 AM
		Utterly outrageous
		Phil in San Diego, California
		4/26/2010 9:35:00 PM
		I agree wholeheartedly with the majority of the respondents. How did the politicians come up with the Murtha selection? Did they not have the foreknowledge that their choice would incite absolute displeasure in 95 percent of all who served on the seven seas? Another way to have selected a name for this ship was to have researched every deserving marine/sailor, officer/enlisted, who have served with and for this class of ship with outstanding loyalty to their brothers and sisters in arms.
		NAVAIR01, Alabama
		4/26/2010 5:22:00 PM
		This is a proper way to honor a man who always did his duty to his country as God gave him the light to see that path. Those who protest don’t know Jack and didn’t know Jack!
		Proper act, Pennsylvania
		4/26/2010 5:21:00 PM
		This has to be some sick, twisted joke! The SECNAV is about as far off of the mark as can be… How about the USS Dunham or the USS Monsoor, those would be thousand times better!
		Gator Sailor, USA
		4/26/2010 3:52:00 PM
		So now Mabus has shown that he can out-Dalton Dalton in pandering to the current powers-that-be!
		Sarge
		4/26/2010 3:44:00 PM
		There isn’t a soldier, sailor, marine, or airman who isn’t enraged and insulted over naming a U.S. Navy ship for John Murtha. The guy embarasssed the Navy, Marines, and even the U.S. House, which is nearly impossible. He never apologized to the Haditha Marines who he accused of cold-blooded murder before they were tried (and later acquitted). I am completely disgusted by this decision.
		Theodore J. DelGaizo, Pennsylvania
		4/26/2010 3:09:00 PM
		My only issue with this is that the LPD have been named for cities/counties. If they want to name a ship after Congressman Mutha, it should be the second of the Ford class carriers.
		Scott, Washington
		4/26/2010 2:43:00 PM
		Naming a ship after Murtha borders on the criminal and is such a horrible and distasteful slap in the face of every Soldier, Sailor, Airman, Coast Guard, Merchant Marine, and Marine that ever served. Please, Please rescind this.
		George Singer, California
		4/26/2010 2:32:00 PM
		Jack Kemp would have been a much better choice to name a ship in memory of! What an American! AFL MVP, 9 term Congressman, Vice President candidate, Housing Secretary, Medal of Freedom recipient! Never made disparaging remarks to gain political points like John Murtha has against this country and its people!
		Navy Chief, Maryland
		4/26/2010 1:29:00 PM
		This goes beyond the usual political payback for naming our warships. This is a direct and LASTING insult to the honor of the US Marine Corps, as well as the US Navy. What can the average person do to stop this travesty? Other than replace the incumbents, of course.
		FRAM Driver, USA
		4/26/2010 11:46:00 AM
		Unbelievable–cannot fathom how this decision came about, other than political.
		Phil, Alabama
		4/25/2010 8:23:00 AM
		Absolutly disgraceful and an affront to ALL American Vets. I cant think of a more inappropriate name for this vessel and I will work to see this changed.
		Rick554, USA
		4/24/2010 11:30:00 PM
		I would refuse orders to the ship.
		pigboat, USA
		4/24/2010 8:09:00 PM
		The naming of LPD 26 after John Murtha is inappropriate. There many men and women with greater records of valor and service to the country who deserve the honor of having a warship named in their memory before John Murtha has a warship names in his honor. He made sure there was an airport named after himself, what more does there need to be?
		David Martin, USA
		4/24/2010 12:39:00 PM
		This is an absolute disgrace and insult to members of the Navy/Marine Corps team.
		Sailor in Europe, Europe
		4/23/2010 10:12:00 PM
		The fact that anyone thinks that this is a good idea is nothing more than a political hack. What’s next? USS Benedict Arnold. Idiots.
		JeffinOrlando, Florida
		4/23/2010 8:13:00 PM
		Good grief!
		Concerned, Maryland

A US District judge has just ordered that the University of Wyoming MUST allow Weather Underground leader William Ayers to speak on campus. Ayers, a 1960’s radical, linked to terrorism and, by the way, associate of our president, has had speeches cancelled at the Universities of Nebraska and Boston College.  The judge, while deploring what Ayers stands for, cited his free speech rights; the University was concerned about security issues.  Obviously free speech rights trump concerns for student safety.

Now lets move back to an analogous topic: fear of offending Islam by the media. Clearly the free speech line is drawn there because of fear of getting blown up. OK, lets review this: a 60’s radical, whose group engaged in terrorism and blew things up,  is allowed to speak  publicly because of free speech; yet radical  terrorists today who do blow things up and kill regularly, can prevent the exercise of free speech on televison and newspapers when it deals with Islam. Where does this make sense?