tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4241416962008169508.post6362687993036062614..comments2024-03-27T21:03:58.972-04:00Comments on Just A Life Sciences Blog...: Please -- Please! -- Read The Front Page Of The New York Times, On Saturday: Not O/T, And Not Since 1920Unknownnoreply@blogger.comBlogger3125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4241416962008169508.post-60911355192804480322015-12-08T07:45:30.463-05:002015-12-08T07:45:30.463-05:00I wonder, is the King of Comb-overs really running...I wonder, is the King of Comb-overs really running for president. Or is he running a side-show gambit in order to make the remaining GOP candidates look 'normal?' IMHOAnonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4241416962008169508.post-11353234268734693992015-12-07T17:06:33.202-05:002015-12-07T17:06:33.202-05:00Precisely, my erstwhile good friend!
Nice one, An...Precisely, my erstwhile good friend!<br /><br />Nice one, Anon. -- sad that it even needs mentioning, but. . .<br /><br />I appear here mostly, now -- to note that the "<i><b>We shall... over-COMB!</b></i>" candidacy is now advocating that <a href="http://www.nytimes.com/politics/first-draft/2015/12/07/donald-trump-calls-for-banning-muslims-from-entering-u-s/" rel="nofollow"><b>all</b> Muslims be denied entry to the US</a>. Ugh.<br /><br />I guess the Trump-in-ator figures that Amendment <b>First</b> wasn't as important -- in the founders' minds, than the one they adopted. . . <i>Second</i>. He wasn't a very bright kid -- in Civics, it seems.<br /><br />His response to a call for sensible gun regulation is. . . to <b>REPEAL</b> the First Amendment(?), and the Fourteenth's "<i>equal protection</i>" clause!?!<br /><br />Sheesh.<br /><br />Namaste -- crazy times, indeed. Condorhttp://shearlingsplowed.blogspot.comnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4241416962008169508.post-56466003959430837792015-12-07T14:01:44.376-05:002015-12-07T14:01:44.376-05:00But, wait~!!! They are covered under the 2nd admen...But, wait~!!! They are covered under the 2nd admendment<br /><br />http://www.slate.com/blogs/the_slatest/2015/12/07/supreme_court_assault_weapons_case_scotus_won_t_hear_challenge_to_ban.html Anonymousnoreply@blogger.com