Running

🔥 | Latest

College, Crazy, and Jeb Bush: let's get it popping. Biden/Obama 2020 yeah yeah i know @WeCloutChase The 22nd amendment would allow Joe Biden to run as President and Barrack Obama as his VP. Just saying. Show this thread 600 coolmanfromthepast: libertarirynn: coolmanfromthepast: libertarirynn: coolmanfromthepast: libertarirynn: hst3000: libertarirynn: The constitutionality of this would likely be questioned by the electoral college but it miiiight get through depending on how strictly they interpret the 22nd amendment, since Obama would not technically be being “elected” to the office of president, which is the explicit provisional language in the amendment (Not that somebody couldn’t theoretically hold the office more than twice, but that they could not be elected to it twice). All that said it would be a shitshow but mighty entertaining. 12th amendment, guys: No person constitutionally ineligible to the office of President shall be eligible to that of Vice-President of the United States. Obama is an unconstitutional selection. Not exactly: https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/the-fix/wp/2015/08/06/could-joe-biden-pick-barack-obama-as-his-running-mate-yes-but/?utm_term=.dc9a5700ef57 All the WaPo article means is that “It’s okay when Democrats violate the Constitution!” It literally does not say that at all and I question if you even read it. I read it.  An alleged Constitutional scholar completely dismisses an entire amendment.   Except he doesn’t. He explicitly explained the argument that one would use against that amendment. And again he uses a Republican example too (Jeb Bush/George Bush) so he absolutely did not say “it would be OK if liberals did it“. He didn’t say would be “OK” with him at all, he was just laying out the argument. Y’all need to learn that theoretical arguments are not endorsements. The law is full of crazy loopholes that people literally spend years arguing back-and-forth as a career. You don’t get to just throw up your hands and say “that sounds stupid so it’s not real”. It’s insanely stupid, and it disturbs me that anyone would even consider this idea.  Crazy Uncle Joe would be an absolutely horrible President, even more of a puppet than Obama.   Friend, buddy, pal, chum. I am not even sort of saying that this would be a good idea and I don’t even think it’s on the table. Biden has shown no interest in running, much less appointing Obama as VP. He would be an idiot to do that because it almost certainly wouldn’t make it through the electoral college. This is just a thought exercise, nothing more.
College, Crazy, and Jeb Bush: let's get it popping. Biden/Obama
 2020
 yeah yeah i know @WeCloutChase
 The 22nd amendment would allow Joe Biden
 to run as President and Barrack Obama as
 his VP.
 Just saying.
 Show this thread
 600
coolmanfromthepast:

libertarirynn:
coolmanfromthepast:


libertarirynn:

coolmanfromthepast:

libertarirynn:

hst3000:

libertarirynn:

The constitutionality of this would likely be questioned by the electoral college but it miiiight get through depending on how strictly they interpret the 22nd amendment, since Obama would not technically be being “elected” to the office of president, which is the explicit provisional language in the amendment (Not that somebody couldn’t theoretically hold the office more than twice, but that they could not be elected to it twice).

All that said it would be a shitshow but mighty entertaining.

12th amendment, guys:

No person constitutionally ineligible to the office of President shall 
be eligible to that of Vice-President of the United States. 
Obama is an unconstitutional selection. 

Not exactly: https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/the-fix/wp/2015/08/06/could-joe-biden-pick-barack-obama-as-his-running-mate-yes-but/?utm_term=.dc9a5700ef57

All the WaPo article means is that “It’s okay when Democrats violate the Constitution!”

It literally does not say that at all and I question if you even read it.

I read it.  An alleged Constitutional scholar completely dismisses an entire amendment.  


Except he doesn’t. He explicitly explained the argument that one would use against that amendment. And again he uses a Republican example too (Jeb Bush/George Bush) so he absolutely did not say “it would be OK if liberals did it“. He didn’t say would be “OK” with him at all, he was just laying out the argument. 
Y’all need to learn that theoretical arguments are not endorsements. The law is full of crazy loopholes that people literally spend years arguing back-and-forth as a career. You don’t get to just throw up your hands and say “that sounds stupid so it’s not real”.

It’s insanely stupid, and it disturbs me that anyone would even consider this idea.  Crazy Uncle Joe would be an absolutely horrible President, even more of a puppet than Obama.  

Friend, buddy, pal, chum. I am not even sort of saying that this would be a good idea and I don’t even think it’s on the table. Biden has shown no interest in running, much less appointing Obama as VP. He would be an idiot to do that because it almost certainly wouldn’t make it through the electoral college. This is just a thought exercise, nothing more.

coolmanfromthepast: libertarirynn: coolmanfromthepast: libertarirynn: coolmanfromthepast: libertarirynn: hst3000: libertarirynn: The...

Arguing, College, and Joe Biden: let's get it popping. Biden/Obama 2020 yeah yeah i know @WeCloutChase The 22nd amendment would allow Joe Biden to run as President and Barrack Obama as his VP. Just saying. Show this thread 600 urben911: libertarirynn: hst3000: libertarirynn: coolmanfromthepast: libertarirynn: hst3000: libertarirynn: The constitutionality of this would likely be questioned by the electoral college but it miiiight get through depending on how strictly they interpret the 22nd amendment, since Obama would not technically be being “elected” to the office of president, which is the explicit provisional language in the amendment (Not that somebody couldn’t theoretically hold the office more than twice, but that they could not be elected to it twice). All that said it would be a shitshow but mighty entertaining. 12th amendment, guys: No person constitutionally ineligible to the office of President shall be eligible to that of Vice-President of the United States. Obama is an unconstitutional selection. Not exactly: https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/the-fix/wp/2015/08/06/could-joe-biden-pick-barack-obama-as-his-running-mate-yes-but/?utm_term=.dc9a5700ef57 All the WaPo article means is that “It’s okay when Democrats violate the Constitution!” It literally does not say that at all and I question if you even read it. I have… opinions… on Dorf. Obama is ineligible for the office. Saying ‘well he’s only ineligible to be ELECTED’ is stupid shenanigans. Like saying you’re allowed to be in a house because while they said ‘don’t come in this door’ you came in through the WINDOW. You can’t back door a non citizen into the presidency this way, I see no reason why this would be different for term limitations. You can call it “stupid shenanigans” all you want but this is how the law works. Every phrase, comma, and word choice matters. If there is even a window there is a lawyer who will argue that point. I’m certainly not in support of this idea, I’m just saying you can’t hand wave a legal argument because you’re pretty sure it meant something that’s not explicitly stated. The fact is the amendment could have explicitly said “no former president can ever hold the office more than twice under any circumstances”, but it doesn’t say that, it says they cannot be elected. There is a difference. I’m pretty sure from the wording of the amendment it would be perfectly legal. If they ran as biden/Obama that would be legal because Obama isn’t being elected as president. If something happened to Biden where the vp would have to take over then you could have Obama in the white house legally. At least that’s what I get from the wording of the constitution. THANK YOU.It really isn’t that complicated.
Arguing, College, and Joe Biden: let's get it popping. Biden/Obama
 2020
 yeah yeah i know @WeCloutChase
 The 22nd amendment would allow Joe Biden
 to run as President and Barrack Obama as
 his VP.
 Just saying.
 Show this thread
 600
urben911:

libertarirynn:

hst3000:

libertarirynn:
coolmanfromthepast:

libertarirynn:

hst3000:

libertarirynn:

The constitutionality of this would likely be questioned by the electoral college but it miiiight get through depending on how strictly they interpret the 22nd amendment, since Obama would not technically be being “elected” to the office of president, which is the explicit provisional language in the amendment (Not that somebody couldn’t theoretically hold the office more than twice, but that they could not be elected to it twice).

All that said it would be a shitshow but mighty entertaining.

12th amendment, guys:

No person constitutionally ineligible to the office of President shall 
be eligible to that of Vice-President of the United States. 
Obama is an unconstitutional selection. 

Not exactly: https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/the-fix/wp/2015/08/06/could-joe-biden-pick-barack-obama-as-his-running-mate-yes-but/?utm_term=.dc9a5700ef57

All the WaPo article means is that “It’s okay when Democrats violate the Constitution!”

It literally does not say that at all and I question if you even read it.

I have… opinions… on Dorf. Obama is ineligible for the office. Saying ‘well he’s only ineligible to be ELECTED’ is stupid shenanigans. Like saying you’re allowed to be in a house because while they said ‘don’t come in this door’ you came in through the WINDOW. You can’t back door a non citizen into the presidency this way, I see no reason why this would be different for term limitations.

You can call it “stupid shenanigans” all you want but this is how the law works. Every phrase, comma, and word choice matters. If there is even a window there is a lawyer who will argue that point. I’m certainly not in support of this idea, I’m just saying you can’t hand wave a legal argument because you’re pretty sure it meant something that’s not explicitly stated. The fact is the amendment could have explicitly said “no former president can ever hold the office more than twice under any circumstances”, but it doesn’t say that, it says they cannot be elected. There is a difference.

I’m pretty sure from the wording of the amendment it would be perfectly legal. If they ran as biden/Obama that would be legal because Obama isn’t being elected as president. If something happened to Biden where the vp would have to take over then you could have Obama in the white house legally. At least that’s what I get from the wording of the constitution.

THANK YOU.It really isn’t that complicated.

urben911: libertarirynn: hst3000: libertarirynn: coolmanfromthepast: libertarirynn: hst3000: libertarirynn: The constitutionality of ...

Arguing, College, and Joe Biden: let's get it popping. Biden/Obama 2020 yeah yeah i know @WeCloutChase The 22nd amendment would allow Joe Biden to run as President and Barrack Obama as his VP. Just saying. Show this thread 600 hst3000: libertarirynn: hst3000: libertarirynn: coolmanfromthepast: libertarirynn: hst3000: libertarirynn: The constitutionality of this would likely be questioned by the electoral college but it miiiight get through depending on how strictly they interpret the 22nd amendment, since Obama would not technically be being “elected” to the office of president, which is the explicit provisional language in the amendment (Not that somebody couldn’t theoretically hold the office more than twice, but that they could not be elected to it twice). All that said it would be a shitshow but mighty entertaining. 12th amendment, guys: No person constitutionally ineligible to the office of President shall be eligible to that of Vice-President of the United States. Obama is an unconstitutional selection. Not exactly: https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/the-fix/wp/2015/08/06/could-joe-biden-pick-barack-obama-as-his-running-mate-yes-but/?utm_term=.dc9a5700ef57 All the WaPo article means is that “It’s okay when Democrats violate the Constitution!” It literally does not say that at all and I question if you even read it. I have… opinions… on Dorf. Obama is ineligible for the office. Saying ‘well he’s only ineligible to be ELECTED’ is stupid shenanigans. Like saying you’re allowed to be in a house because while they said ‘don’t come in this door’ you came in through the WINDOW. You can’t back door a non citizen into the presidency this way, I see no reason why this would be different for term limitations. You can call it “stupid shenanigans” all you want but this is how the law works. Every phrase, comma, and word choice matters. If there is even a window there is a lawyer who will argue that point. I’m certainly not in support of this idea, I’m just saying you can’t hand wave a legal argument because you’re pretty sure it meant something that’s not explicitly stated. The fact is the amendment could have explicitly said “no former president can ever hold the office more than twice under any circumstances”, but it doesn’t say that, it says they cannot be elected. There is a difference. Being elected is the default way to become president. I don’t doubt someone would argue it, but it’s a STUPID ARGUMENT. The rest of the argument in that article is ‘well there’s no law saying the parties can’t run a dog for election’ type of crap. “Being elected is the default way to become president” Yes but it’s not the only way. Teddy Roosevelt not initially get elected to the office, he became president when McKinley died. Whether or not it’s a stupid argument is beside the point. We’re talking about theoretical legality.
Arguing, College, and Joe Biden: let's get it popping. Biden/Obama
 2020
 yeah yeah i know @WeCloutChase
 The 22nd amendment would allow Joe Biden
 to run as President and Barrack Obama as
 his VP.
 Just saying.
 Show this thread
 600
hst3000:

libertarirynn:

hst3000:


libertarirynn:

coolmanfromthepast:

libertarirynn:

hst3000:

libertarirynn:

The constitutionality of this would likely be questioned by the electoral college but it miiiight get through depending on how strictly they interpret the 22nd amendment, since Obama would not technically be being “elected” to the office of president, which is the explicit provisional language in the amendment (Not that somebody couldn’t theoretically hold the office more than twice, but that they could not be elected to it twice).

All that said it would be a shitshow but mighty entertaining.

12th amendment, guys:

No person constitutionally ineligible to the office of President shall 
be eligible to that of Vice-President of the United States. 
Obama is an unconstitutional selection. 

Not exactly: https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/the-fix/wp/2015/08/06/could-joe-biden-pick-barack-obama-as-his-running-mate-yes-but/?utm_term=.dc9a5700ef57

All the WaPo article means is that “It’s okay when Democrats violate the Constitution!”

It literally does not say that at all and I question if you even read it.

I have… opinions… on Dorf. Obama is ineligible for the office. Saying ‘well he’s only ineligible to be ELECTED’ is stupid shenanigans. Like saying you’re allowed to be in a house because while they said ‘don’t come in this door’ you came in through the WINDOW. You can’t back door a non citizen into the presidency this way, I see no reason why this would be different for term limitations.


You can call it “stupid shenanigans” all you want but this is how the law works. Every phrase, comma, and word choice matters. If there is even a window there is a lawyer who will argue that point. I’m certainly not in support of this idea, I’m just saying you can’t hand wave a legal argument because you’re pretty sure it meant something that’s not explicitly stated. The fact is the amendment could have explicitly said “no former president can ever hold the office more than twice under any circumstances”, but it doesn’t say that, it says they cannot be elected. There is a difference.

Being elected is the default way to become president. I don’t doubt someone would argue it, but it’s a STUPID ARGUMENT. The rest of the argument in that article is ‘well there’s no law saying the parties can’t run a dog for election’ type of crap. 

“Being elected is the default way to become president” Yes but it’s not the only way. Teddy Roosevelt not initially get elected to the office, he became president when McKinley died. Whether or not it’s a stupid argument is beside the point. We’re talking about theoretical legality.

hst3000: libertarirynn: hst3000: libertarirynn: coolmanfromthepast: libertarirynn: hst3000: libertarirynn: The constitutionality of...

College, Crazy, and Jeb Bush: let's get it popping. Biden/Obama 2020 yeah yeah i know @WeCloutChase The 22nd amendment would allow Joe Biden to run as President and Barrack Obama as his VP. Just saying. Show this thread 600 coolmanfromthepast: libertarirynn: coolmanfromthepast: libertarirynn: hst3000: libertarirynn: The constitutionality of this would likely be questioned by the electoral college but it miiiight get through depending on how strictly they interpret the 22nd amendment, since Obama would not technically be being “elected” to the office of president, which is the explicit provisional language in the amendment (Not that somebody couldn’t theoretically hold the office more than twice, but that they could not be elected to it twice). All that said it would be a shitshow but mighty entertaining. 12th amendment, guys: No person constitutionally ineligible to the office of President shall be eligible to that of Vice-President of the United States. Obama is an unconstitutional selection. Not exactly: https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/the-fix/wp/2015/08/06/could-joe-biden-pick-barack-obama-as-his-running-mate-yes-but/?utm_term=.dc9a5700ef57 All the WaPo article means is that “It’s okay when Democrats violate the Constitution!” It literally does not say that at all and I question if you even read it. I read it.  An alleged Constitutional scholar completely dismisses an entire amendment.   Except he doesn’t. He explicitly explained the argument that one would use against that amendment. And again he uses a Republican example too (Jeb Bush/George Bush) so he absolutely did not say “it would be OK if liberals did it“. He didn’t say would be “OK” with him at all, he was just laying out the argument. Y’all need to learn that theoretical arguments are not endorsements. The law is full of crazy loopholes that people literally spend years arguing back-and-forth as a career. You don’t get to just throw up your hands and say “that sounds stupid so it’s not real”.
College, Crazy, and Jeb Bush: let's get it popping. Biden/Obama
 2020
 yeah yeah i know @WeCloutChase
 The 22nd amendment would allow Joe Biden
 to run as President and Barrack Obama as
 his VP.
 Just saying.
 Show this thread
 600
coolmanfromthepast:

libertarirynn:
coolmanfromthepast:

libertarirynn:

hst3000:

libertarirynn:

The constitutionality of this would likely be questioned by the electoral college but it miiiight get through depending on how strictly they interpret the 22nd amendment, since Obama would not technically be being “elected” to the office of president, which is the explicit provisional language in the amendment (Not that somebody couldn’t theoretically hold the office more than twice, but that they could not be elected to it twice).

All that said it would be a shitshow but mighty entertaining.

12th amendment, guys:

No person constitutionally ineligible to the office of President shall 
be eligible to that of Vice-President of the United States. 
Obama is an unconstitutional selection. 

Not exactly: https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/the-fix/wp/2015/08/06/could-joe-biden-pick-barack-obama-as-his-running-mate-yes-but/?utm_term=.dc9a5700ef57

All the WaPo article means is that “It’s okay when Democrats violate the Constitution!”

It literally does not say that at all and I question if you even read it.

I read it.  An alleged Constitutional scholar completely dismisses an entire amendment.  

Except he doesn’t. He explicitly explained the argument that one would use against that amendment. And again he uses a Republican example too (Jeb Bush/George Bush) so he absolutely did not say “it would be OK if liberals did it“. He didn’t say would be “OK” with him at all, he was just laying out the argument. Y’all need to learn that theoretical arguments are not endorsements. The law is full of crazy loopholes that people literally spend years arguing back-and-forth as a career. You don’t get to just throw up your hands and say “that sounds stupid so it’s not real”.

coolmanfromthepast: libertarirynn: coolmanfromthepast: libertarirynn: hst3000: libertarirynn: The constitutionality of this would likel...

Arguing, College, and Joe Biden: let's get it popping. Biden/Obama 2020 yeah yeah i know @WeCloutChase The 22nd amendment would allow Joe Biden to run as President and Barrack Obama as his VP. Just saying. Show this thread 600 hst3000: libertarirynn: coolmanfromthepast: libertarirynn: hst3000: libertarirynn: The constitutionality of this would likely be questioned by the electoral college but it miiiight get through depending on how strictly they interpret the 22nd amendment, since Obama would not technically be being “elected” to the office of president, which is the explicit provisional language in the amendment (Not that somebody couldn’t theoretically hold the office more than twice, but that they could not be elected to it twice). All that said it would be a shitshow but mighty entertaining. 12th amendment, guys: No person constitutionally ineligible to the office of President shall be eligible to that of Vice-President of the United States. Obama is an unconstitutional selection. Not exactly: https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/the-fix/wp/2015/08/06/could-joe-biden-pick-barack-obama-as-his-running-mate-yes-but/?utm_term=.dc9a5700ef57 All the WaPo article means is that “It’s okay when Democrats violate the Constitution!” It literally does not say that at all and I question if you even read it. I have… opinions… on Dorf. Obama is ineligible for the office. Saying ‘well he’s only ineligible to be ELECTED’ is stupid shenanigans. Like saying you’re allowed to be in a house because while they said don’t come in this door’ you came in through the WINDOW. You can’t back door a non citizen into the presidency this way, I see no reason why this would be different for term limitations. You can call it “stupid shenanigans” all you want but this is how the law works. Every phrase, comma, and word choice matters. If there is even a window there is a lawyer who will argue that point. I’m certainly not in support of this idea, I’m just saying you can’t hand wave a legal argument because you’re pretty sure it meant something that’s not explicitly stated. The fact is the amendment could have explicitly said “no former president can ever hold the office more than twice under any circumstances”, but it doesn’t say that, it says they cannot be elected. There is a difference.
Arguing, College, and Joe Biden: let's get it popping. Biden/Obama
 2020
 yeah yeah i know @WeCloutChase
 The 22nd amendment would allow Joe Biden
 to run as President and Barrack Obama as
 his VP.
 Just saying.
 Show this thread
 600
hst3000:

libertarirynn:
coolmanfromthepast:

libertarirynn:

hst3000:

libertarirynn:

The constitutionality of this would likely be questioned by the electoral college but it miiiight get through depending on how strictly they interpret the 22nd amendment, since Obama would not technically be being “elected” to the office of president, which is the explicit provisional language in the amendment (Not that somebody couldn’t theoretically hold the office more than twice, but that they could not be elected to it twice).

All that said it would be a shitshow but mighty entertaining.

12th amendment, guys:

No person constitutionally ineligible to the office of President shall 
be eligible to that of Vice-President of the United States. 
Obama is an unconstitutional selection. 

Not exactly: https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/the-fix/wp/2015/08/06/could-joe-biden-pick-barack-obama-as-his-running-mate-yes-but/?utm_term=.dc9a5700ef57

All the WaPo article means is that “It’s okay when Democrats violate the Constitution!”

It literally does not say that at all and I question if you even read it.

I have… opinions… on Dorf. Obama is ineligible for the office. Saying ‘well he’s only ineligible to be ELECTED’ is stupid shenanigans. Like saying you’re allowed to be in a house because while they said don’t come in this door’ you came in through the WINDOW. You can’t back door a non citizen into the presidency this way, I see no reason why this would be different for term limitations.

You can call it “stupid shenanigans” all you want but this is how the law works. Every phrase, comma, and word choice matters. If there is even a window there is a lawyer who will argue that point. I’m certainly not in support of this idea, I’m just saying you can’t hand wave a legal argument because you’re pretty sure it meant something that’s not explicitly stated. The fact is the amendment could have explicitly said “no former president can ever hold the office more than twice under any circumstances”, but it doesn’t say that, it says they cannot be elected. There is a difference.

hst3000: libertarirynn: coolmanfromthepast: libertarirynn: hst3000: libertarirynn: The constitutionality of this would likely be questi...

Arguing, College, and Joe Biden: let's get it popping. Biden/Obama 2020 yeah yeah i know @WeCloutChase The 22nd amendment would allow Joe Biden to run as President and Barrack Obama as his VP. Just saying. Show this thread 600 terrapinfox: libertarirynn: hst3000: libertarirynn: The constitutionality of this would likely be questioned by the electoral college but it miiiight get through depending on how strictly they interpret the 22nd amendment, since Obama would not technically be being “elected” to the office of president, which is the explicit provisional language in the amendment (Not that somebody couldn’t theoretically hold the office more than twice, but that they could not be elected to it twice). All that said it would be a shitshow but mighty entertaining. 12th amendment, guys: No person constitutionally ineligible to the office of President shall be eligible to that of Vice-President of the United States. Obama is an unconstitutional selection. Not exactly: https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/the-fix/wp/2015/08/06/could-joe-biden-pick-barack-obama-as-his-running-mate-yes-but/?utm_term=.dc9a5700ef57 i read that article and it still doesn’t seem possible given “No person constitutionally ineligible to the office of President shall be eligible to that of Vice-President of the United States.”and at first i thought this’d be a good way to secure trump his second term, but… judging by the sheer amount of lunatics in usa atm, a kinda technicality shadow president could have a chance, which would be terrifying and dangerous tbh. The article lose things out pretty clearly, and I summarize it in the OP: the exact wording of the 22nd amendment says that a person cannot be ELECTED more than twice to the office of president. It does not prohibit someone becoming president through a line of succession, Having not been directly elected to the office. A former president would not be constitutionally ineligible based on those parameters.It’s a loophole in the wording but the law is literally build on loopholes. A constitutional lawyer could and would argue this if they tried to make it happen. Now this article also points out they almost certainly wouldn’t try to make it happen because of the backlash and lack of likelihood that the electoral college would approve such a ticket. But it is theoretically possible.
Arguing, College, and Joe Biden: let's get it popping. Biden/Obama
 2020
 yeah yeah i know @WeCloutChase
 The 22nd amendment would allow Joe Biden
 to run as President and Barrack Obama as
 his VP.
 Just saying.
 Show this thread
 600
terrapinfox:

libertarirynn:
hst3000:

libertarirynn:

The constitutionality of this would likely be questioned by the electoral college but it miiiight get through depending on how strictly they interpret the 22nd amendment, since Obama would not technically be being “elected” to the office of president, which is the explicit provisional language in the amendment (Not that somebody couldn’t theoretically hold the office more than twice, but that they could not be elected to it twice).

All that said it would be a shitshow but mighty entertaining.

12th amendment, guys:

No person constitutionally ineligible to the office of President shall 
be eligible to that of Vice-President of the United States. 
Obama is an unconstitutional selection. 

Not exactly: https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/the-fix/wp/2015/08/06/could-joe-biden-pick-barack-obama-as-his-running-mate-yes-but/?utm_term=.dc9a5700ef57

i read that article and it still doesn’t seem possible given “No person constitutionally ineligible to the office of President shall be eligible to that of Vice-President of the United States.”and at first i thought this’d be a good way to secure trump his second term, but… judging by the sheer amount of lunatics in usa atm, a kinda technicality shadow president could have a chance, which would be terrifying and dangerous tbh.

The article lose things out pretty clearly, and I summarize it in the OP: the exact wording of the 22nd amendment says that a person cannot be ELECTED more than twice to the office of president. It does not prohibit someone becoming president through a line of succession, Having not been directly elected to the office. A former president would not be constitutionally ineligible based on those parameters.It’s a loophole in the wording but the law is literally build on loopholes. A constitutional lawyer could and would argue this if they tried to make it happen. Now this article also points out they almost certainly wouldn’t try to make it happen because of the backlash and lack of likelihood that the electoral college would approve such a ticket. But it is theoretically possible.

terrapinfox: libertarirynn: hst3000: libertarirynn: The constitutionality of this would likely be questioned by the electoral college but...

Bless Up, Boo, and Cheetos: Walter running for his daily swim One of my followers commented: “why do dog paws smell like Fritos? I still love them 😊.” See this raise a very important issue about women and that is, if she love u, she gon find nasty things endearing, whereas if she don’t fvck with u no more, she gon find nasty things HELLA NASTY. Case in point... 1) Fritos that smell like Fritos = yummy 😂. Don’t let nobody tell u different. When u was a kid and u seen them little bags with the yellow and maroon package boy it was on like all type of donkey kong. Deerishis. (2) Dog paws that smell like Fritos = bueno! C’mon now if a dog stink a lil bit that’s expected. He a animal. He ain always gon smell like rosebuds. (3) Humans that smell like Fritos = IT DEPEND 😂. Bruv u give a girl that soul-snatching, Nani wall chakra realigning, organ rearranging deep Pipington? Where the stomach end up where a lung should be and her liver trade places with her kidney bruv? Then it don’t matter no more. U could smell like Fritos. Cheetos. Bruv u could smell like a 17 lb slab of aged Camembert cheese on it, it don’t matter. She gon be texting her friend the next day (with a pack of iced peas on her Nani because she can’t move 😊) talmbout “GURRRRRL. WHY THIS MAN TAKE HIS DRAWLS OFF LAST NIGHT AND THE WHOLE ROOM SMELL LIKE FRITOS 😂 lmaooo 😂 Nah but he coming over again tonight doe 😆 we in the middle of a Seinfeld marathon. We bout to get to the episode where Costanza rock the big a$$ down coat u remember that one? Anyway girl lemme holla at u AYE like my last pic if u don’t mind bye boo!” 😂 But let that lil situationship end bruv? Oh now he ain’t cute at all. “GIRL I AM DONE WITH THAT MAN. CAN’T RETURN A TEXT. DON’T CLIP HIS FINGERNAILS. STANKY SMELLIN A$$, I AM DONE.” But her friend ain’t getting them texts. Nope. Because her ‘friend’ is at Mr. Frito’s crib, putting toilet paper around the toilet bowl so she can pee bc his place filthy 😂. But see that’s when she knew the pipe game was beyond exquisite bc nobody would find frito smell cute unless dude was going Ham and Bananington on the Nani so she went to see for herself and now she supporting dude and paying his cell phone bill 😊. Y’all be safe now! Bless up 😂😂😂
Bless Up, Boo, and Cheetos: Walter running for his daily swim
One of my followers commented: “why do dog paws smell like Fritos? I still love them 😊.” See this raise a very important issue about women and that is, if she love u, she gon find nasty things endearing, whereas if she don’t fvck with u no more, she gon find nasty things HELLA NASTY. Case in point... 1) Fritos that smell like Fritos = yummy 😂. Don’t let nobody tell u different. When u was a kid and u seen them little bags with the yellow and maroon package boy it was on like all type of donkey kong. Deerishis. (2) Dog paws that smell like Fritos = bueno! C’mon now if a dog stink a lil bit that’s expected. He a animal. He ain always gon smell like rosebuds. (3) Humans that smell like Fritos = IT DEPEND 😂. Bruv u give a girl that soul-snatching, Nani wall chakra realigning, organ rearranging deep Pipington? Where the stomach end up where a lung should be and her liver trade places with her kidney bruv? Then it don’t matter no more. U could smell like Fritos. Cheetos. Bruv u could smell like a 17 lb slab of aged Camembert cheese on it, it don’t matter. She gon be texting her friend the next day (with a pack of iced peas on her Nani because she can’t move 😊) talmbout “GURRRRRL. WHY THIS MAN TAKE HIS DRAWLS OFF LAST NIGHT AND THE WHOLE ROOM SMELL LIKE FRITOS 😂 lmaooo 😂 Nah but he coming over again tonight doe 😆 we in the middle of a Seinfeld marathon. We bout to get to the episode where Costanza rock the big a$$ down coat u remember that one? Anyway girl lemme holla at u AYE like my last pic if u don’t mind bye boo!” 😂 But let that lil situationship end bruv? Oh now he ain’t cute at all. “GIRL I AM DONE WITH THAT MAN. CAN’T RETURN A TEXT. DON’T CLIP HIS FINGERNAILS. STANKY SMELLIN A$$, I AM DONE.” But her friend ain’t getting them texts. Nope. Because her ‘friend’ is at Mr. Frito’s crib, putting toilet paper around the toilet bowl so she can pee bc his place filthy 😂. But see that’s when she knew the pipe game was beyond exquisite bc nobody would find frito smell cute unless dude was going Ham and Bananington on the Nani so she went to see for herself and now she supporting dude and paying his cell phone bill 😊. Y’all be safe now! Bless up 😂😂😂

One of my followers commented: “why do dog paws smell like Fritos? I still love them 😊.” See this raise a very important issue about women a...

Being Alone, Ass, and Assassination: HI... I'M I'M VERY GLAD FRANKLIN.. TO KNOW yOU I ) OPNTS <p><a href="https://atomicsalmon.tumblr.com/post/176535484178/brett-caton-atomicsalmon-brett-caton" class="tumblr_blog">atomicsalmon</a>:</p> <blockquote><p><a href="http://brett-caton.tumblr.com/post/176509323667/atomicsalmon-brett-caton-atomicsalmon" class="tumblr_blog">brett-caton</a>:</p> <blockquote><p><a href="https://atomicsalmon.tumblr.com/post/176489965878/brett-caton-atomicsalmon-brett-caton" class="tumblr_blog">atomicsalmon</a>:</p><blockquote> <p><a href="http://brett-caton.tumblr.com/post/176488525882/atomicsalmon-brett-caton-libertarirynn" class="tumblr_blog">brett-caton</a>:</p> <blockquote> <p><a href="https://atomicsalmon.tumblr.com/post/176487882003/brett-caton-libertarirynn-on-july-31-1968" class="tumblr_blog">atomicsalmon</a>:</p> <blockquote> <p><a href="http://brett-caton.tumblr.com/post/176468087807/libertarirynn-on-july-31-1968-a-young-black" class="tumblr_blog">brett-caton</a>:</p> <blockquote> <p><a href="https://libertarirynn.tumblr.com/post/176420298534/on-july-31-1968-a-young-black-man-was-reading" class="tumblr_blog">libertarirynn</a>:</p> <blockquote> <p>“On July 31, 1968, a young, black man was reading the newspaper when he saw something that he had never seen before. With tears in his eyes, he started running and screaming throughout the house, calling for his mom. He would show his mom, and, she would gasp, seeing something she thought she would never see in her lifetime. Throughout the nation, there were similar reactions.</p> <p>What they saw was Franklin Armstrong’s first appearance on the iconic comic strip “Peanuts.” Franklin would be 50 years old this year.</p> <p>Franklin was “born” after a school teacher, Harriet Glickman, had written a letter to creator Charles M. Schulz after Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. was shot to death outside his Memphis hotel room. </p> <p>Glickman, who had kids of her own and having worked with kids, was especially aware of the power of comics among the young. “And my feeling at the time was that I realized that black kids and white kids never saw themselves [depicted] together in the classroom,” she would say. </p> <p>She would write, “Since the death of Martin Luther King, ‘I’ve been asking myself what I can do to help change those conditions in our society which led to the assassination and which contribute to the vast sea of misunderstanding, hate, fear and violence.‘”</p> <p>Glickman asked Schulz if he could consider adding a black character to his popular comic strip, which she hoped would bring the country together and show people of color that they are not excluded from American society. </p> <p>She had written to others as well, but the others feared it was too soon, that it may be costly to their careers, that the syndicate would drop them if they dared do something like that.</p> <p>Charles Schulz did not have to respond to her letter, he could have just completely ignored it, and everyone would have forgotten about it. But, Schulz did take the time to respond, saying he was intrigued with the idea, but wasn’t sure whether it would be right, coming from him, he didn’t want to make matters worse, he felt that it may sound condescending to people of color.</p> <p>Glickman did not give up, and continued communicating with Schulz, with Schulz surprisingly responding each time. She would even have black friends write to Schulz and explain to him what it would mean to them and gave him some suggestions on how to introduce such a character without offending anyone. This conversation would continue until one day, Schulz would tell Glickman to check her newspaper on July 31, 1968.</p> <p>On that date, the cartoon, as created by Schulz, shows Charlie Brown meeting a new character, named Franklin. Other than his color, Franklin was just an ordinary kid who befriends and helps Charlie Brown. Franklin also mentions that his father was “over at Vietnam.” At the end of the series, which lasted three strips, Charlie invites Franklin to spend the night one day so they can continue their friendship.</p> <p>There was no big announcement, there was no big deal, it was just a natural conversation between two kids, whose obvious differences did not matter to them. And, the fact that Franklin’s father was fighting for this country was also a very strong statement by Schulz.</p> <p>Although Schulz never made a big deal over the inclusion of Franklin, there were many fans, especially in the South, who were very upset by it and that made national news. One Southern editor even said, “I don’t mind you having a black character, but please don’t show them in school together.”</p> <p>It would eventually lead to a conversation between Schulz and the president of the comic’s distribution company, who was concerned about the introduction of Franklin and how it might affect Schulz’ popularity. Many newspapers during that time had threatened to cut the strip.</p> <p>Schulz’ response: “I remember telling Larry at the time about Franklin – he wanted me to change it, and we talked about it for a long while on the phone, and I finally sighed and said, “Well, Larry, let’s put it this way: Either you print it just the way I draw it or I quit. How’s that?”</p> <p>Eventually, Franklin became a regular character in the comic strips, and, despite complaints, Franklin would be shown sitting in front of Peppermint Patty at school and playing center field on her baseball team. </p> <p>More recently, Franklin is brought up on social media around Thanksgiving time, when the animated 1973 special “A Charlie Brown Thanksgiving” appears. Some people have blamed Schulz for showing Franklin sitting alone on the Thanksgiving table, while the other characters sit across him. But, Schulz did not have the same control over the animated cartoon on a television network that he did on his own comic strip in the newspapers.</p> <p>But, he did have control over his own comic strip, and, he courageously decided to make a statement because of one brave school teacher who decided to ask a simple question.</p> <p>Glickman would explain later that her parents were “concerned about others, and the values that they instilled in us about caring for and appreciating everyone of all colors and backgrounds — this is what we knew when we were growing up, that you cared about other people … And so, during the years, we were very aware of the issues of racism and civil rights in this country [when] black people had to sit at the back of the bus, black people couldn’t sit in the same seats in the restaurants that you could sit … Every day I would see, or read, about black children trying to get into school and seeing crowds of white people standing around spitting at them or yelling at them … and the beatings and the dogs and the hosings and the courage of so many people in that time.”</p> <p>Because of Glickman, because of Schulz, people around the world were introduced to a little boy named Franklin.” (Source: The Jon S. Randal Peace Page, Facebook)</p> </blockquote> <p>Of course, nowadays one of the characters would suddenly be black, another would be transexual, and all the girls would be quasi lesbians at least. :P</p> </blockquote> <p>Diversity isn’t bad, but using an outdated term for transgender people is. </p> <p>Please do NOT use transsexual. </p> </blockquote> <p>“ using an outdated term for transgender people is “<br/><br/>Who appointed you to the language police?<br/><br/>Trans <b>gender</b> doesn’t make sense, since gender is the psychological depiction of biological sex. A transsexual is someone whose brain doesn’t align with the body. They experience gender dysphoria, they don’t flip genders because it’s Thursday.<br/><br/>“ Diversity isn’t bad “<br/><br/>Bullshit. <i>Diversity </i>as it is used now is the opposite of what it used to <i>be</i>. Every story has to be the <b>same </b>because <i>diversity?</i> That’s some Animal Farm levels of crap. <br/><br/><a href="https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCrlzSqLSGj8GIOeT5jrQsJA/videos">https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCrlzSqLSGj8GIOeT5jrQsJA/videos</a><br/><br/></p> </blockquote> <p>1. Trans people themselves would rather people use transgender, regardless of whether or not it makes sense.</p> <p>2. Kek, I never said every story has to be the same because of diversity, you’re just pulling shit out of your ass.</p> <p>Diversity isn’t bad. It’s not going to kill you if there’s a story featuring someone that is gay, trans, disabled, of color, or anything else outside of what people usually choose to depict.</p> <p>It’s not that hard a concept to understand. If you get heated over there being diversity then you need to check yourself and your beliefs.</p> <p>Forced diversity is understandable to dislike, but I wasn’t even talking about that in the first place. I said a general statement. </p> </blockquote> <p>“ Trans people themselves would rather people use transgender “<br/><br/>And your proof is.. your opinion. Dismissed as easily. I’ve known transsexuals all my life, they used the word, that is where i heard it, I don’t care that your little group of 0.0001% of the english speakers want to control how english is spoken, any more than I care how scientologists want it to be spoken.<br/><br/>Authoritarians try to control minds by controlling words. It’s very revealing to read books like 1984. SocJus fits in perfectly to that world.<br/><br/>“ I never said every story has to be the same because of diversity “<br/><br/>And I never said you did. God, strawmannery already? I said ‘diversity’ makes every story the same. You have to have the trans, you have to have the black person, the gay, blah blah blah. Art has to serve the needs of the ideology, not the audience, in the SocJus worldview.<br/><br/><br/></p><figure class="tmblr-full" data-orig-height="1078" data-orig-width="881"><img src="https://78.media.tumblr.com/4d0465e9b6c0eee84fa8ff9bf3e14229/tumblr_inline_pcrreh11Tt1qj6ut1_540.jpg" data-orig-height="1078" data-orig-width="881"/></figure><p><a href="http://brettcaton.blogspot.com/2018/04/has-squirrel-girl-acquired-downs.html">Which results in… that.</a><br/><br/>“ Diversity isn’t bad. “<br/><br/>By that same logic, having every story push communism or fascism isn’t bad. I disagree.<br/><br/>“ It’s not going to kill you “<br/><br/>Bullshit. But even by that same bar, neither is pushing stories that talk about pushing transsexuals into gas chambers. Is that really the standard of morality you ascribe to? Something is acceptable if it won’t kill<i> you?</i><br/><br/>“ It’s not that hard a concept to understand. “<br/><br/>I understand it perfectly, just as I understand the claims of all sorts of religions and ideologies.<br/><br/><br/></p><figure class="tmblr-full" data-orig-height="546" data-orig-width="728"><img src="https://78.media.tumblr.com/ec0315ffbc32535d8b176e33bc0a4599/tumblr_inline_pcrrlfOi931qj6ut1_540.jpg" data-orig-height="546" data-orig-width="728"/></figure><p>There is something you - along with so many other fanatics do not comprehend. There are people who do not believe the same things you do, despite understanding your arguments. You cannot comprehend the idea that you may be…<br/><br/><br/></p><figure class="tmblr-full" data-orig-height="2592" data-orig-width="3888"><img src="https://78.media.tumblr.com/287067269a75c067af2f0325ca17e5e7/tumblr_inline_pcrrnh1mG01qj6ut1_540.jpg" data-orig-height="2592" data-orig-width="3888"/></figure></blockquote> <p>Lol have you ever tried to chill? You should try it sometime, you look like you’re desperate for it. </p></blockquote> <p>Why in the hell did a post about Peanuts turn into this shitshow?</p>
Being Alone, Ass, and Assassination: HI... I'M I'M VERY GLAD
 FRANKLIN.. TO KNOW yOU
 I )
 OPNTS
<p><a href="https://atomicsalmon.tumblr.com/post/176535484178/brett-caton-atomicsalmon-brett-caton" class="tumblr_blog">atomicsalmon</a>:</p>

<blockquote><p><a href="http://brett-caton.tumblr.com/post/176509323667/atomicsalmon-brett-caton-atomicsalmon" class="tumblr_blog">brett-caton</a>:</p>

<blockquote><p><a href="https://atomicsalmon.tumblr.com/post/176489965878/brett-caton-atomicsalmon-brett-caton" class="tumblr_blog">atomicsalmon</a>:</p><blockquote>
<p><a href="http://brett-caton.tumblr.com/post/176488525882/atomicsalmon-brett-caton-libertarirynn" class="tumblr_blog">brett-caton</a>:</p>

<blockquote>
<p><a href="https://atomicsalmon.tumblr.com/post/176487882003/brett-caton-libertarirynn-on-july-31-1968" class="tumblr_blog">atomicsalmon</a>:</p>
<blockquote>
<p><a href="http://brett-caton.tumblr.com/post/176468087807/libertarirynn-on-july-31-1968-a-young-black" class="tumblr_blog">brett-caton</a>:</p>

<blockquote>
<p><a href="https://libertarirynn.tumblr.com/post/176420298534/on-july-31-1968-a-young-black-man-was-reading" class="tumblr_blog">libertarirynn</a>:</p>
<blockquote>
<p>“On July 31, 1968, a young, black man was reading the newspaper when he saw something that he had never seen before. With tears in his eyes, he started running and screaming throughout the house, calling for his mom. He would show his mom, and, she would gasp, seeing something she thought she would never see in her lifetime. Throughout the nation, there were similar reactions.</p>

<p>What they saw was Franklin Armstrong’s first appearance on the iconic comic strip “Peanuts.” Franklin would be 50 years old this year.</p>

<p>Franklin was “born” after a school teacher, Harriet Glickman, had written a letter to creator Charles M. Schulz after Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. was shot to death outside his Memphis hotel room. </p>

<p>Glickman, who had kids of her own and having worked with kids, was especially aware of the power of comics among the young. “And my feeling at the time was that I realized that black kids and white kids never saw themselves [depicted] together in the classroom,” she would say. </p>

<p>She would write, “Since the death of Martin Luther King, ‘I’ve been asking myself what I can do to help change those conditions in our society which led to the assassination and which contribute to the vast sea of misunderstanding, hate, fear and violence.‘”</p>

<p>Glickman asked Schulz if he could consider adding a black character to his popular comic strip, which she hoped would bring the country together and show people of color that they are not excluded from American society. </p>

<p>She had written to others as well, but the others feared it was too soon, that it may be costly to their careers, that the syndicate would drop them if they dared do something like that.</p>

<p>Charles Schulz did not have to respond to her letter, he could have just completely ignored it, and everyone would have forgotten about it. But, Schulz did take the time to respond, saying he was intrigued with the idea, but wasn’t sure whether it would be right, coming from him, he didn’t want to make matters worse, he felt that it may sound condescending to people of color.</p>

<p>Glickman did not give up, and continued communicating with Schulz, with Schulz surprisingly responding each time. She would even have black friends write to Schulz and explain to him what it would mean to them and gave him some suggestions on how to introduce such a character without offending anyone. This conversation would continue until one day, Schulz would tell Glickman to check her newspaper on July 31, 1968.</p>

<p>On that date, the cartoon, as created by Schulz, shows Charlie Brown meeting a new character, named Franklin. Other than his color, Franklin was just an ordinary kid who befriends and helps Charlie Brown. Franklin also mentions that his father was “over at Vietnam.” At the end of the series, which lasted three strips, Charlie invites Franklin to spend the night one day so they can continue their friendship.</p>

<p>There was no big announcement, there was no big deal, it was just a natural conversation between two kids, whose obvious differences did not matter to them. And, the fact that Franklin’s father was fighting for this country was also a very strong statement by Schulz.</p>

<p>Although Schulz never made a big deal over the inclusion of Franklin, there were many fans, especially in the South, who were very upset by it and that made national news. One Southern editor even said, “I don’t mind you having a black character, but please don’t show them in school together.”</p>

<p>It would eventually lead to a conversation between Schulz and the president of the comic’s distribution company, who was concerned about the introduction of Franklin and how it might affect Schulz’ popularity. Many newspapers during that time had threatened to cut the strip.</p>

<p>Schulz’ response: “I remember telling Larry at the time about Franklin – he wanted me to change it, and we talked about it for a long while on the phone, and I finally sighed and said, “Well, Larry, let’s put it this way: Either you print it just the way I draw it or I quit. How’s that?”</p>

<p>Eventually, Franklin became a regular character in the comic strips, and, despite complaints, Franklin would be shown sitting in front of Peppermint Patty at school and playing center field on her baseball team. </p>

<p>More recently, Franklin is brought up on social media around Thanksgiving time, when the animated 1973 special “A Charlie Brown Thanksgiving” appears. Some people have blamed Schulz for showing Franklin sitting alone on the Thanksgiving table, while the other characters sit across him. But, Schulz did not have the same control over the animated cartoon on a television network that he did on his own comic strip in the newspapers.</p>

<p>But, he did have control over his own comic strip, and, he courageously decided to make a statement because of one brave school teacher who decided to ask a simple question.</p>

<p>Glickman would explain later that her parents were “concerned about others, and the values that they instilled in us about caring for and appreciating everyone of all colors and backgrounds — this is what we knew when we were growing up, that you cared about other people … And so, during the years, we were very aware of the issues of racism and civil rights in this country [when] black people had to sit at the back of the bus, black people couldn’t sit in the same seats in the restaurants that you could sit … Every day I would see, or read, about black children trying to get into school and seeing crowds of white people standing around spitting at them or yelling at them … and the beatings and the dogs and the hosings and the courage of so many people in that time.”</p>

<p>Because of Glickman, because of Schulz, people around the world were introduced to a little boy named Franklin.” (Source: The Jon S. Randal Peace Page, Facebook)</p>
</blockquote>
<p>Of course, nowadays one of the characters would suddenly be black, another would be transexual, and all the girls would be quasi lesbians at least. :P</p>
</blockquote>

<p>Diversity isn’t bad, but using an outdated term for transgender people is. </p>
<p>Please do NOT use transsexual. </p>
</blockquote>
<p>“
using an outdated term for transgender people is

“<br/><br/>Who appointed you to the language police?<br/><br/>Trans <b>gender</b> doesn’t make sense, since gender is the psychological depiction of biological sex. A transsexual is someone whose brain doesn’t align with the body. They experience gender dysphoria, they don’t flip genders because it’s Thursday.<br/><br/>“
Diversity isn’t bad

“<br/><br/>Bullshit. <i>Diversity </i>as it is used now is the opposite of what it used to <i>be</i>. Every story has to be the <b>same </b>because <i>diversity?</i> That’s some Animal Farm levels of crap. <br/><br/><a href="https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCrlzSqLSGj8GIOeT5jrQsJA/videos">https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCrlzSqLSGj8GIOeT5jrQsJA/videos</a><br/><br/></p>
</blockquote>

<p>1. Trans people themselves would rather people use transgender, regardless of whether or not it makes sense.</p>
<p>2. Kek, I never said every story has to be the same because of diversity, you’re just pulling shit out of your ass.</p>
<p>Diversity isn’t bad. It’s not going to kill you if there’s a story featuring someone that is gay, trans, disabled, of color, or anything else outside of what people usually choose to depict.</p>
<p>It’s not that hard a concept to understand. If you get heated over there being diversity then you need to check yourself and your beliefs.</p>
<p>Forced diversity is understandable to dislike, but I wasn’t even talking about that in the first place. I said a general statement. </p>
</blockquote>
<p>“
Trans people themselves would rather people use transgender

“<br/><br/>And your proof is.. your opinion. Dismissed as easily. I’ve known transsexuals all my life, they used the word, that is where i heard it, I don’t care that your little group of 0.0001% of the english speakers want to control how english is spoken, any more than I care how scientologists want it to be spoken.<br/><br/>Authoritarians try to control minds by controlling words. It’s very revealing to read books like 1984. SocJus fits in perfectly to that world.<br/><br/>“
I never said every story has to be the same because of diversity

“<br/><br/>And I never said you did. God, strawmannery already? I said ‘diversity’ makes every story the same. You have to have the trans, you have to have the black person, the gay, blah blah blah. Art has to serve the needs of the ideology, not the audience, in the SocJus worldview.<br/><br/><br/></p><figure class="tmblr-full" data-orig-height="1078" data-orig-width="881"><img src="https://78.media.tumblr.com/4d0465e9b6c0eee84fa8ff9bf3e14229/tumblr_inline_pcrreh11Tt1qj6ut1_540.jpg" data-orig-height="1078" data-orig-width="881"/></figure><p><a href="http://brettcaton.blogspot.com/2018/04/has-squirrel-girl-acquired-downs.html">Which results in… that.</a><br/><br/>“
Diversity isn’t bad.

“<br/><br/>By that same logic, having every story push communism or fascism isn’t bad. I disagree.<br/><br/>“
 It’s not going to kill you

“<br/><br/>Bullshit. But even by that same bar, neither is pushing stories that talk about pushing transsexuals into gas chambers. Is that really the standard of morality you ascribe to? Something is acceptable if it won’t kill<i> you?</i><br/><br/>“
It’s not that hard a concept to understand. 

“<br/><br/>I understand it perfectly, just as I understand the claims of all sorts of religions and ideologies.<br/><br/><br/></p><figure class="tmblr-full" data-orig-height="546" data-orig-width="728"><img src="https://78.media.tumblr.com/ec0315ffbc32535d8b176e33bc0a4599/tumblr_inline_pcrrlfOi931qj6ut1_540.jpg" data-orig-height="546" data-orig-width="728"/></figure><p>There is something you - along with so many other fanatics do not comprehend. There are people who do not believe the same things you do, despite understanding your arguments. You cannot comprehend the idea that you may be…<br/><br/><br/></p><figure class="tmblr-full" data-orig-height="2592" data-orig-width="3888"><img src="https://78.media.tumblr.com/287067269a75c067af2f0325ca17e5e7/tumblr_inline_pcrrnh1mG01qj6ut1_540.jpg" data-orig-height="2592" data-orig-width="3888"/></figure></blockquote>

<p>Lol have you ever tried to chill? You should try it sometime, you look like you’re desperate for it. </p></blockquote>

<p>Why in the hell did a post about Peanuts turn into this shitshow?</p>

<p><a href="https://atomicsalmon.tumblr.com/post/176535484178/brett-caton-atomicsalmon-brett-caton" class="tumblr_blog">atomicsalmon</a>:</p...