[Savage Beast]

"The rather toxic implication of this proposal is that one side respects the Constitution and the other doesn't."

That's right, Ez. Ezra is like a parrot. He can say the words, but apparently he doesn't understand what they mean.

[Publius]

Ezra is like a parrot. He can say the words, but apparently he doesn't understand what they mean.

In 1984, George Orwell referred to this as "duckspeak".

[conservatism_IS_compassion]

"The rather toxic implication of this proposal is that one side respects the Constitution and the other doesn't."

That's right, Ez. Ezra is like a parrot. He can say the words, but apparently he doesn't understand what they mean.

That implication certainly is "rather" toxic. But it is the direct implication not of this proposal in isolation but of the explicit words of people on "the other side" when they said that "You have to pass the bill in order to see what is in it" and "We can do anything we want."

Son, that is toxic. In November you got an indication of how toxic that can be to "the other side's" chances of winning election in any jurisdiction where a majority of the electorate actually thinks of themselves as free, responsible adults.