David Bianculli

And so what they want to do is pull back on those benefits to encourage people to live in other situations that they think will lead to more stability and lead to better outcomes.

Right. And this is in some ways connected to the kind of faith-based push that we saw in the Bush administration. I think what sets it aside is both the scale, the way they want to use so many different departments of the government to do this, and the way they're willing to use a kind of coercive force of government in a way that conservatives in the past have found unacceptable.

Right. And this is in some ways connected to the kind of faith-based push that we saw in the Bush administration. I think what sets it aside is both the scale, the way they want to use so many different departments of the government to do this, and the way they're willing to use a kind of coercive force of government in a way that conservatives in the past have found unacceptable.

Right. And this is in some ways connected to the kind of faith-based push that we saw in the Bush administration. I think what sets it aside is both the scale, the way they want to use so many different departments of the government to do this, and the way they're willing to use a kind of coercive force of government in a way that conservatives in the past have found unacceptable.

Making benefits dependent on family structure and forcing people into these faith-based programs in order to receive their benefits are good examples of that.

Making benefits dependent on family structure and forcing people into these faith-based programs in order to receive their benefits are good examples of that.

Making benefits dependent on family structure and forcing people into these faith-based programs in order to receive their benefits are good examples of that.

Yeah. You know, they're a little bit shy talking about same-sex couples, although they say incorrectly that same-sex couples have a higher divorce rate. It's certainly not trans and non-binary people. And as we've seen, they want to rewrite the language of government to write these people out of the way we talk about them. Trans people do not exist in their vision.

Yeah. You know, they're a little bit shy talking about same-sex couples, although they say incorrectly that same-sex couples have a higher divorce rate. It's certainly not trans and non-binary people. And as we've seen, they want to rewrite the language of government to write these people out of the way we talk about them. Trans people do not exist in their vision.

Yeah. You know, they're a little bit shy talking about same-sex couples, although they say incorrectly that same-sex couples have a higher divorce rate. It's certainly not trans and non-binary people. And as we've seen, they want to rewrite the language of government to write these people out of the way we talk about them. Trans people do not exist in their vision.

And they think that the left has been pushing what they call gender ideology. And that needs to be taken out of schools. It needs to be taken out of the language of government. It needs to be taken out of the way, for example, the Department of or the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission works, for example.

And they think that the left has been pushing what they call gender ideology. And that needs to be taken out of schools. It needs to be taken out of the language of government. It needs to be taken out of the way, for example, the Department of or the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission works, for example.

And they think that the left has been pushing what they call gender ideology. And that needs to be taken out of schools. It needs to be taken out of the language of government. It needs to be taken out of the way, for example, the Department of or the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission works, for example.

I think they're willing to acknowledge that it's not a traditional conservative approach to government. And it's more of a question of means versus ends. They're willing to use the government and this more muscular government to achieve the end they want, which they see as being freer. I think there's a real conflict with the things that Musk and Doge are doing.

I think they're willing to acknowledge that it's not a traditional conservative approach to government. And it's more of a question of means versus ends. They're willing to use the government and this more muscular government to achieve the end they want, which they see as being freer. I think there's a real conflict with the things that Musk and Doge are doing.

I think they're willing to acknowledge that it's not a traditional conservative approach to government. And it's more of a question of means versus ends. They're willing to use the government and this more muscular government to achieve the end they want, which they see as being freer. I think there's a real conflict with the things that Musk and Doge are doing.

Because they've been cutting so aggressively and without consideration, what you're finding is they're cutting into the very things that they will need to implement these things. You can't have the education department gathering data if you have laid off all of the workers who know how to do that.

Because they've been cutting so aggressively and without consideration, what you're finding is they're cutting into the very things that they will need to implement these things. You can't have the education department gathering data if you have laid off all of the workers who know how to do that.

Because they've been cutting so aggressively and without consideration, what you're finding is they're cutting into the very things that they will need to implement these things. You can't have the education department gathering data if you have laid off all of the workers who know how to do that.

And so there's a conflict there that I think we're going to see, but that hasn't yet become so public or become prominent.