I do believe that a person can change their views when presented with new info…..especially over the course of 16years.
However, he is a Bush appointee and so far, the appointee I have been least bothered by was Powell. From there his appointees go down hill fast.
Peace!

The last article on him(before this new format) mentioned his standing by a minister who didn’t want a gay man in his church and also Holsinger helping a lesbian minister get dismissed from a church ( I think that is correct). He claims he has changed his views, after the paper he wrote for a Methodist study on homosexuality. If he gets the post, I guess time will tell as to his change in views on homosexuality. But he also would have a short career as we are looking forward to the day (January 20, 2008) when “W” is no longer messing up this country and the world. He’d be out along with “W”.

OOPS! that should be January 20, 2009. Am trying to get”W” out sooner!

Jan 2008 sounded good to me. Bush has already been in office 6.5 years too long as it is.
I never thought I would miss Nixon….but, Bush makes Nixon look good.
Peace!

My mother always said that we are known by the company we keep. Simply because Bush nominated him I am suspicious. On top of that there is his reputation to consider. Sure he may have changed, even mellowed some. But if it came down to hard choices, it is obvious where his allegiances and heart are. I wonder where he is on the stem cell issue. I expect he toes the “W” line, which makes him an even lousier choice. January 200 cannot come quickly enough.
Reagarding missing Nixon, remember that Fred Thompson – the Golden Bass of the Elephant Party – was on Nixon’s legal team. That alone should toss him out of the ring and back onto TV where he is much better suited and less dangerous.

jestrfyl:
I agree “W” wouldn’t have nominated Holsinger if he didn’t agree with “W’ on all things. If he gets the post, we can only hope that nothing comes up regarding homosexuals. I don’t really think that he has changed either. Expect we can guess where he stands on stem cell research…

He seemed to say some of the right things, but Bush’s nominees have dissembled before. We need to impeach Cheney and Bush, and get a president we can trust again and whose appointees we can have some confidence in.

nnmns:
As much as I like the idea of impeaching “W” And Dick, it probably wouldn’t happen. However I find it interesting that Clinton was impeached because of infidelity in his marriage, but “W” not only invades a country for no reason, but has no idea what to do after he does it. Oh I forget, we won 2 weeks after the invasion! How could I forget? Never mind the wonderful relationships the U.S. now has with the world at large.

Not to mention the fact Bush effectively pardoned a guy who almost surely lied to protect Rove and/or Cheney’s office in a national security enquiry.
And to do so he claimed the sentence was too harsh when in fact it was in line with sentencing guidelines and Bush as governor virtually never pardoned anyone or commuted their sentence.
If Bush and Cheney are not impeached future generations will view now as the time presidents started becoming dictators, able to do what they want with no recourse to law for those they don’t like.

nnmns:
Your certainly brought up the latest “W” trick! There are too many to list. Giving “Scooter” a break and probably pardoning him in the future is the act of a man who continues to be totally living like a king of a couple of hundred years ago…King George of England. I thought this was a democracy….Maybe I should check that. “W” and Dick have been making up their own rules since day #1 of the first mistaken term.

Yes, and it’s way past time to get rid of them.

My only fear would be that some of the political credit that will be needed to put a Democrat in the White House would be exhausted by election day. As we learned even with Clinton, impeachment does not lead to resignation. So if they won’t resign – and can’t get fired – then the only hope is to stymie their every move. First, let’s cancel all of the Haliburton contracts. Then we’ll see how long the war lasts!

I think the thing to do is make the case for impeachment. There’s plenty of evidence. Probably some Republicans would vote no, no matter what the evidence, and it may well be some Democrats would be too wimphy to vote sensibly, but nonetheless the case needs to be made.

I hope Dr. Holsinger is confirmed. He would be a valuable and able administrator. As for impeaching President Bush, I think that will not happen because the president has done nothing worthy of impeachment. Many forget that we went to war in Iraq because of September 11 and the fact that information at the time suggested the enemy was in Iraq. Many also forget that it was President Bush who rid the world of an evil and malicious dictator who killed many people for his own political gain. The world is a better place without Suddam Hussein. Many also forget that once a country gets into a war, it is difficult to get victory and get out. That happened in Viet Nam. It has happened in Iraq. War should never be popular. But war is sometimes necessary. I respect a man who does not govern on the basis of opinion polls, but rather on the basis of conviction. My own feeling is that one year from now we will not have many, if any, soldiers in Iraq.

But Bush jiggered the evidence, picking what he wanted and ignoring all the evidence against WMD’s. And he rushed us into war rather than waiting for more evidence.
And (though fighting a war stupidly is not impeachable, as far as I know) he fought the war stupidly and what we are doing now is generating more enemies rather than making fewer, while making us poorer in servicemen and women and wealth. We have real enemies but we have not brought them down, at least in part because of the illegal and stupid invasion of Iraq. Bush has been the worst thing that has happened to America in decades; likely since Pearl Harbor. Fortunately he’s done a number of things that make him impeachable.

Oh, and bad as Saddam was I think the majority of Iraqis would rather have his regime than the chaos the miserably bungled invasion has brought them.
And people who start wars should think about the difficulty of getting out of them before they start them. Especially optional wars, most especially wars against enemies of our real enemies.
Surely, Tom, you aren’t among the really uninformed people who still don’t realize Saddam was not involved with 9/11. Let’s say that again: Saddam was not involved with 9/11.

For those who honestly feel that President Bush has messed things up, be patient. Before long the Democrats will have their turn to mess things up as well.

Tom Parsons
Saddam was not a good man, in fact he was awful. If we invaded all the countries that had dictators (that we didn’t like) we’d have to invade a lot of countries…some in Africa, how about North Korea (been in Korea already) etc. However, it isn’t up to us to decide who runs a country. Many think we should have spent the time in Afganistan, going after the group that was responsible for 9/11 instead of hitting a country that at that time had no part in it. All we have done is make more enemies in the world. Also as nnmns remided us, Saddam had nothing to do with 9/11, or any WMD’s either! The current president of Iraq just said we can leave anytime. Our men and women are dying and getting wounded for NOTHING!
As to “W”, he is one of the worst presidents this country has ever had!! I respect the office of president, but not the sorry person that is in there now, or his buddy, Dick.
Holsinger is another “puppet- to- be”, if he is put in the post of Surgeon General. His history of dealing with homosexuals is obvious and I really don’t think he has changed. Of course he will say so in his hearings…he wants the job.

windsorschild
I, for one, (of many) feel that “W” has messed up, BIG TIME. And yes, it is possible the Democrates can mess up too. However, it would be hard for any Democrate to be as LOUSY as “W”.

The connection between Iraq and 9/11 was not even tenuous – it was fictional. Essentially Cheney and Bush Sr. used W Bush as a front man to clean up some family business. Clearly, theri head and heart has not been in the conflict sine Hussein was executed. If it were truly 9/11 oriented then binLaden would not be producing more video footage than is see on myspace. If we were truly in the business of cleaning up malacious and criminal dictators – then Zimbabwe and so many other countries would not be in the horrid meeses they are. Why impeach Bush od Cheney would simply take over? Why not impeach Cheney so Bush would no long have Cheney’s hand up his – neck. Better yet, lets work on dicrediting Darth Rove, the Sith of the Bush administration. I’m not sure the hydra could grow a more reprehensible head than that (he makes Voldemort seem smiley!). What is sad is that Bush not only ignores opinion polls, he ignores the entire nation, for the rarefied benefit of Cheney, Rove and the other dark lords.

Technically, people have forgotten that actually we did NOT go to war (well, with Iraq, anyway) because of ANY connection between Iraq and 9/11.
Just because Bush, for a year before the war, made sure he never made a speech about Saddam, without mentioning 9/11, does not mean that was the actual reason for the war. The now NEVER mentioned ‘WMD’s’ we never found was the reasons.
Indeed, it was only a year or so ago that Bush and Cheney, straight faced, claimed they never made any actual connection between Saddam Huseein and OBL, or between Iraq and 9/11. (Ironically, one of the few countries in that area that did NOT have a single member among the hijackers. The country with the most, we never considered going to war with… Saudi Arabia.)

“ I respect a man who does not govern on the basis of opinion polls, but rather on the basis of conviction.”
I agree that W is not governing based on opinion polls. However, it certainly appears that he is governing based on his, his family’s, and his friends’ best interests.
I would much prefer a person govern based on the best interest of the people herm represents. Oops, I guess W is doing that…he represents his friends..and family. Certianly, he is not representing the rest of us.
Bush took out the man who threatened his daddy a few years back. What a great son.
Is this a good time to ask what happened to Osama bin Laden? Saddam had nothing to do with 9/11….bin Laden was the mastermind.
So, tell me again who W is representing and looing out for?
Peace!

Now ain’t that simply cheesy. If you (or the bishops that blessed you) can’t take the heat go soak in a tub!

“For those who honestly feel that President Bush has messed things up, be patient. Before long the Democrats will have their turn to mess things up as well.”
Hopefully there are no more Republicans or Democrats left who have the Bush administrations unique combination of incompetence and arrogance.

I am at a loss to figure out what the heck the Iraq war, 9/11 and Saddam Hussein have to do with the appointment of a bad selection for surgeon general.

Well, his Bush-iness manages to include some 9/11 reference in every possible way, so why not continue the pattern?