In addition to the entire U.S. being given the progressive leadership that’s been the fate of New York City and Chicago, here’s what could be on tap, and just for starters:
Newly restored due process rights on college campuses, such as the ability to defend oneself if accused of sexual misconduct and to receive a fair and impartial hearing, will be revoked, as they were during the Obama administration, a move which Biden whole-heartedly champions.
8-year-olds who don’t conform to gender stereotypes are encouraged by their parent and the U.S. president to embrace gender reassignment rather than to grow up to become adults who are gay, lesbian, bisexual or simply gender nonconforming.
New legislation and regulations will roll back protections for religious conscience and require owners of small businesses to use their talents to advocate views that violate their faith or be fined out of business.
Government employees and workers at companies with government contracts will be required to participate, with enthusiasm, in “critical race theory” sessions in which white workers must confess their racism and embrace the principle that America and everything about the country—other than the Democratic party’s agenda—is a tool of white supremacy meant to perpetuate systemic racism.
Corporate boards and executive ranks will be based on racial and demographic factors rather than business acumen. There will be no requirement for ideological diversity and nonprogressive viewpoints will be deemed part of systemic racism and not tolerated.
Pension funds will be required to make investments based on social, environmental and public policy factors, rather than risk and return potential. The stocks of companies that support the Democratic party agenda will be deemed to meet the public policy criteria.
9 Comments for “Joe Biden’s America?”
posted by Tom Scharbach on
Hysteria is a treatable condition, Stephen.
posted by Jorge on
Joe Biden has Bill de Blasio’s optimism without the emptiness and Andrew Cuomo’s guile without his sociopathy.
So you’ll be able to go to the bathroom, and travel to Saudi Arabia, too.
The jury’s out on public safety and corruption… okay NM we’re doomed. More tax breaks for farmers.
posted by Jim Michaud on
Wow, a teensy weensy bit over the top aren’t we?
posted by Kosh III on
You forgot to say that they’ll take away your guns.
LOL
posted by Jorge on
Mr. Miller has always been more social conservative than a tough-on-crime conservative. He might even support the Defund the Police movement (disarming the police benefits the 2nd Amendment wackos because there’s not enough political capital to disarm both, so they’ll own an even greater share of firearms–the left miscalculates this at their peril).
posted by Tom Scharbach on
To be fair to Stephen, he self-described as a libertarian in the for many years in past, and he posted any number of times (pre-Trump) explaining that libertarian thinking supports both marriage equality and religious exemption for conservative Christian discrimination. See Libertarians and Religious Freedom (April 7, 2015) as an example.
In the Trump years, Stephen has posted less and less about libertarian thinking**, making it more difficult to differentiate his views from the views of the social conservatives that dominate the Republican Party. I have no idea what he really thinks at this point. At this point, he lashes out in anger at the left, libertarians and “Never-Trump” conservatives who refused to climb onto the Trump Train, without explanation of his own views. So who knows what he thinks? I don’t think that Stephen is a social conservative, but I have wondered in recent years if he’s has a change in thinking.
=============
** I think that the last post directly mentioning the libertarian movement was “A Libertarian Moment” (May 29, 2016) in which Stephen endorsed the Johnson-Weld ticket. We all know how that turned out, and libertarian-aligned Republicans more or less sank beneath the waves during the Trump years.
posted by Jorge on
In the Trump years
The Trump “years”. The name of the era is an epitaph now 😐
You don’t support Donald Trump without giving either giving something up or holding something in reserve. I believe that is true of politics in general; but Donald Trump represented a paradigm shift, such that you had to put forth this price in order to *stay* in politics if you were already politically alert, especially if you are on the right.
Mr. Miller’s ideological core is anomalous and opaque as we have often observed. I assume it’s in the midpoint of his alliances (and ultimately raging against the left cannot help but form alliances), but if could be somewhere else. I make my accusation to make the argument that Mr. Miller, by a small apparent preference, believes that the individual is closer to the fundamental truth of a strong and stable society than the community. Okay, that sounds pretty libertarian. What I see is that Mr. Miller spends a considerable amount of time highlighting or condemning the corruption of the individual, a typical exemplar (often but not always a media elite) who is caught up in a given moment’s ideological boilerplate and acts in a distorted manner. His style is not one of linking multiple events from different times to show a trend or to focus on a single opponent. Each post stand on its own, a new corruption. That creates an emphasis on the ideologically corrupted individual at any one time. He doesn’t present it as someone with the wrong political beliefs; it comes across as someone who, because of the blindness of ideology, is disordered. That kind of focus, even if by default, strikes me as a concern with the moral purity of someone the speaker has nothing to do with, and of the corruption that could infect society because of that person’s taint. It is different than a concern that the wrong ideas, per-se, are what corrupts society or what harm people. That is what I mean when I say Stephen Miller is more socially conservative than… I suppose the other side would be populist.
posted by Tom Scharbach on
What I see is that Mr. Miller spends a considerable amount of time highlighting or condemning the corruption of the individual, a typical exemplar (often but not always a media elite) who is caught up in a given moment’s ideological boilerplate and acts in a distorted manner.
I agree with Stephen on that score, but Stephen’s very selective about that, though. He makes much of the folly of identity politics on the left but turns a blind eye to identity politics on the right, for example. If you were to take his perspective as Gospel, you’d never know that right more or less parallels the left in enforcing ideological boilerplate.
The hard-core right is as awful as the hard-core left in this regard. I’m laughing up my sleeve this morning because the Trumpistas are furious at Tucker Carlson — demanding a boycott and that he be fired — because he dared suggest that conservatives might have to accept the fact that Trump has lost the election and that President-elect Joe Biden will take over the White House in January.
posted by JasonG. on
None of the above comments deals with the fact that Mr. Miller provided links to every one of his charges. None of the above responses deal with the facts at all. That’s because he’s on target with his statements, and those responding have got only insults and smug self-assertions of their superiority as Biden-Harris supporters.