Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search
15 replies = new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight: NoneDon't highlight anything 5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
Charles Schulz got it right in this Peanuts toon (Original Post) Playinghardball Jan 2013 OP
he drew the gun wrong tiny elvis Jan 2013 #1
The clip's in backwards ... GeorgeGist Jan 2013 #2
also, dogs do not carry guns that way tiny elvis Jan 2013 #4
SOME breeds of dog do! Nice broad brushstroke, tiny elvis. gateley Jan 2013 #8
That should probably be the pistol grip - There is no clip in that weapon. TheDebbieDee Jan 2013 #11
Schulz actually went to war. Robb Jan 2013 #3
...when you get snoopy going against you then...it's time for change uponit7771 Jan 2013 #5
Not to mention licenses to get married but no license to be a parent TexasBushwhacker Jan 2013 #6
This Peanuts episode... ReRe Jan 2013 #7
Nightmare AverageMe Jan 2013 #9
Secretary of State? Benton D Struckcheon Jan 2013 #13
It's pretty easy to do. Jim Lane Jan 2013 #14
Madmen... icarusxat Jan 2013 #10
hmmmmmmmm Takket Jan 2013 #12
My Not Actually a Peanuts Cartoon alarm is going off. FredStembottom Jan 2013 #15

tiny elvis

(979 posts)
4. also, dogs do not carry guns that way
Fri Jan 18, 2013, 07:15 PM
Jan 2013

and do not get me started on trying to identify the manufacturer of that chimera of a firearm

TexasBushwhacker

(20,165 posts)
6. Not to mention licenses to get married but no license to be a parent
Fri Jan 18, 2013, 07:29 PM
Jan 2013

Also licenses to cut hair and do manicures.

ReRe

(10,597 posts)
7. This Peanuts episode...
Fri Jan 18, 2013, 08:03 PM
Jan 2013

... is a treasure and a keeper... going in the scrapbook! Thanks, Playinghardball!

 

AverageMe

(91 posts)
9. Nightmare
Fri Jan 18, 2013, 08:14 PM
Jan 2013

Those Republicans who are against an assault weapons ban are crazy. I could not imagine why anyone would be against controlling the availability of assault rifles with clips of up to 100 bullets after Sandy Hook (Newtown). I support the right to defend yourself, or go hunting, with a handgun, rifle or shotgun, but I see no reason for the assault rifles. So I went to Free Republic (a conservative Republican web community) to see their reasons.

These Republicans want the assault weapons to defend themselves, but not against criminals. They want these weapons of mass destruction of children to defend themselves against the US government. They see the US government, particularly President Obama, as their enemy who is taking away their freedom and liberty. They believe we are headed down the road to a dictatorship under Obama. They see the taking away of these assault weapons as just the required first step Obama needs to accomplish this. They see themselves as patriots who are defending the Constitution. Some are calling for a revolution now, as in 1776, after all the Boston "Tea Party" was one of the first acts of that revolution.

The current presidential line of succession, as specified by the United States Constitution and the Presidential Succession Act of 1947 is: Vice President of the United States Joe Biden (D), and secondly Speaker of the House John Boehner (R). Very few times are the President and Vice President together in a non-tightly controlled environment, the presidential inauguration is one such occasion in which this is true. If the unthinkable happened, and both President Obama and Vice President Biden should die, a Republican, John Boehner would be our President. John Boehner's policies would be the exact opposite of those of President Obama and Vice President Biden's. The presidential line of succession should be changed so that the presidency would not switch parties if there was a co-ordinated attack by madmen on both the President and Vice President.

Benton D Struckcheon

(2,347 posts)
13. Secretary of State?
Fri Jan 18, 2013, 09:30 PM
Jan 2013

That would actually be a hard thing to set up, not having it switch parties if both Prez and Veep go at the same time.

 

Jim Lane

(11,175 posts)
14. It's pretty easy to do.
Sat Jan 19, 2013, 05:30 AM
Jan 2013

The current line of succession is:
Vice President
Speaker of the House
President Pro Tem of the Senate
Secretary of State
then the rest of the Cabinet in a specified order (roughly, order of creation of the department)

It's the inclusion of the two Congressional leaders that raises the possibility of a party switch effected by violence. Just delete those two positions from the list. (One argument that's been made is that it's unconstitutional to have Congressional leaders in there, anyway, because the separation between the executive and legislative branches should be preserved.)

The succession after the Vice President is merely a matter of statute. It could be changed without a constitutional amendment

Takket

(21,552 posts)
12. hmmmmmmmm
Fri Jan 18, 2013, 09:29 PM
Jan 2013

Obviously he hated America.

Schultz? Hmmmmmmmmm where have i heard his name before? Oh yeah, he was a NAZI!!!!!!!!! I saw it all on Hogan's Heros!!!!!!!

Signed,

Typical Republican moron.

FredStembottom

(2,928 posts)
15. My Not Actually a Peanuts Cartoon alarm is going off.
Sat Jan 19, 2013, 06:11 PM
Jan 2013

Why would Charlie Brown (a child ) get a driver's license?

And I can't recall Schultz wading into anything political in his toons.

I would like to think that he did do this, however.

Latest Discussions»General Discussion»Charles Schulz got it rig...