Brit Hume pours cold water on The New Republic's vision of Vice President Barack Obama

The editors of The New Republic apparently had thought they had stumbled upon a great way for presidential candidate Hillary Clinton to escape the shadow of her famous husband as she strikes out on her own on the campaign trail.

What better way for Hillary to break ranks with Bill than to have Obama as her running mate? http://t.co/aN1iBXctb2 pic.twitter.com/7iyKzZztvm

— The New Republic (@newrepublic) April 14, 2015

You are joking, right @tnr?

— Arthur MacMillan (@arthurmacmillan) April 14, 2015

@tnr is this a serious proposal or is the author off his meds?

— Angela in FLA (@Iloveperfumeso) April 14, 2015

The only problem — and it appears to be a recurring problem for President Obama — is the existence of that pesky Constitution. (Remember during the gun control debate when he bemoaned that he was “constrained by a system our founders put in place”?) The 12th Amendment might not be the most popular, but Fox News senior political analyst Brit Hume didn’t hesitate to remind The New Republic what it says.

.@tnr Um, "No person constitutionally ineligible to the office of President shall be eligible to that of vice president…" 12th amendment.

— Brit Hume (@brithume) April 14, 2015

https://twitter.com/Trombonasaurus/status/588087286186782722

@brithume Oh, for crying out loud, TNR. @BobHicks_ @tnr

— Mike (@ThePantau) April 14, 2015

https://twitter.com/Tark31/status/588086986931576832

@brithume @tnr another MSM embarrassment. Getting impossible to keep track of them all.

— Steve Tefft (@stevetefft) April 14, 2015

@brithume @tnr They can't even stand each other now and to think that GOD himself will take orders from Hillary is a joke!

— Steve (@MACHTink) April 14, 2015

Hold on a second; we have a couple of flags on that tweet. First, citing Cornell University law professor Michael Dorf as his authority on the subject, The New Republic’s Brian Beutler notes that the 22nd Amendment’s use of the word “elected” rather than “eligible” creates “a loophole large enough for a Clinton-Obama ticket to coast to victory through.”

@brithume @tnr Again…22nd amendment does not make Obama ineligible to be president — only denies him access to the ballot

— Mark Bennett (@MarkJohnBennett) April 14, 2015

https://twitter.com/RonDashpants/status/588102941065748482

https://twitter.com/JohnQAdams11/status/588088043099320320

And second:

@brithume @tnr Constitutionally? What difference at this point does it make?

— Preston Kennedy (@BankPres) April 14, 2015

@brithume @tnr since when has Obama or Clinton abided by the constitution?

— BAT (@bat211) April 14, 2015

@Tark31 @ThePantau @brithume @BobHicks_ @tnr Since when has Obama let the law stop him?

— Carl Gustav (@CaptYonah) April 14, 2015

https://twitter.com/Tark31/status/588088417814208512

@brithume @tnr Remember Brit, Obama and Hillary do not answer to the Constitution.

— BW (@Bam4022bam) April 14, 2015

https://twitter.com/MJP1313/status/588088768026038274

@brithume @tnr
Normally I'd say "uh oh" to @tnr but given BHO disregard for constitution and Rep lack of will to fight, who knows?!?

— D (@dabon8rr) April 14, 2015

@brithume @tnr So you are suggesting the Constitution be followed. Interesting concept? Wonder if someone might pick up on it.

— Jim Kipers (@JimKipers) April 14, 2015