Layman Joe
2.1K posts
To be fair, it must be difficult to face the possibility that your advice—your empire of books, podcasts, courses, online universities, certifications, coaches, real estate agents, mortgage brokers, accountants—is growing less relevant.
@TaraAnnThieke This is downstream from loss of virtue among the public. Being good is no longer a function of active virtue. Instead, appearing politically orthodox has become synonymous with being good. Signal more valuable than substance. For the left moreso than the right.
WATCH LIVE: King Charles III delivers historic joint address to Congress twitter.com/i/broadcasts/1…
In the past, reputation was a function of action. In Socialmedialand, reputation is a function of appearance. In the past, to be known as caring for the poor you had to sacrifice your time and care for the poor. Today, the same reputation is obtained by writing words, sharing pictures, saying phrases, planting yard signs.
The path from believing you have a lockdown on the definition of empathy to believing you have a right to perpetrate violence against your enemies seems like a straight line these days.
Cole Allen’s manifesto from the WHCA Dinner shooting is a textbook case of radicalization by extremist rhetoric. He didn’t invent this language—he echoed it. Direct from his manifesto: “I am no longer willing to permit a pedophile, rapist, and traitor to coat my hands with his crimes.” He calls Trump admin officials “targets,” says attendees are “complicit,” and rejects “turn the other cheek” because it would make him “complicit in the oppressor’s crimes.” He justifies violence against the “oppressed” (detention camps, executions, abused children) while minimizing collateral damage. This isn’t original. It’s straight from far-left playbooks 2016–2026: “Rapist”: After the 2023 E. Jean Carroll verdict (civil liability for sexual abuse), progressives and Democrats repeatedly called Trump a “rapist” as fact. AOC explicitly labeled him a “rapist” in an Epstein-files rant. Countless left voices: “Donald Trump is a rapist—it’s a fact, not an argument.” “Pedophile” / Epstein ties: Rep. Ilhan Omar: “The leader of the Pedophile Protection Party is trying to deflect attention from his name being all over the Epstein files. At least in Somalia they execute pedophiles not elect them.” House Oversight Democrats pushed Epstein docs/photos to attack Trump. Social media and left activists amplified “Trump is a pedophile” relentlessly. “Traitor”: Standard far-left line post-Jan. 6 and impeachment. Protests, signs, and commentary called him “Traitor Trump” or a traitor to democracy/America. It was mainstream progressive framing for years. “Complicit” / “blood on his hands” / oppressor language: Progressive mantra since BLM/anti-Trump era: “Silence is complicity” and “Silence is violence.” Left repeatedly said Trump had “blood on his hands” (COVID, Jan. 6, border, etc.). Allen’s “coat my hands with his crimes” + “complicit” for mere attendance is identical framing—oppressor/oppressed binary straight from critical theory/social justice rhetoric. Twisting Christianity: Allen's rebuttal to “turn the other cheek” (“when someone else is oppressed… it is complicity”) mirrors progressive Christian/left arguments that non-resistance to “systemic oppression” makes you an oppressor. Allen was a teacher who thanked “acquaintances… online” for “perspectives and inspiration.” He didn’t radicalize in a vacuum. This manifesto is the logical endpoint of years of “pedophile, rapist, traitor + complicit enablers” rhetoric from the far left and progressives. Rhetoric has consequences. When you mainstream “he’s literally Hitler/rapist/pedophile/traitor and silence makes you complicit,” some people stop debating and start acting. Allen is the proof. #RhetoricMatters #PoliticalViolence
@FeserEdward Liberals, unwilling to police their own, will create the monster they make-believe Trump to be.
Moments Ago: A visibly agitated Hakeem Jeffries says “I stand by” calling for “maximum warfare” against Republicans. “You can continue to criticize me for it, I don’t give a damn about your criticism!” Unhinged.
I've wondered what motivates leftists to want to destroy America when they have nothing to replace it with. But when we witness the palpable hatred they emanate we must conclude they're not motivated by anything constructive, but only destruction, driven by pure discontentment, malice, and hatred. It's quite ironic, when you consider how much they go on and on about "hate," because deep down, at some subconscious level, they must believe everyone else is motivated by hatred too. For the most part, they are joyless, godless, chaos machines.
I’ve never had a student who I took to be a potential murderer or assassin, and very few have been politically radical, but many times over the years, I’ve had conversations with them about morality that left me disturbed. So many of them just take it for granted that there is no alternative to moral relativism. They’re simply unable to conceive of another way of thinking about right and wrong. Sometimes I can poke holes in their relativism when I ask them questions about it, but many of them are invincibly committed to it. And the brighter ones (admittedly, these are rare) are adept at sophistry. They can rationalize any position that they want to. The thing is, I teach freshmen and sophomores. They haven’t been indoctrinated by my colleagues (most of whom are not politically radical, anyway). They are fully committed to relativism (and even nihilism in the case of some) when they get to college.
The NYT ran a special wedding planning section, and this quiz on preferences seems to omit one notable, traditional option.
The headline from last night is that a potential assassin was stopped before anyone was killed. But it shouldn’t be the takeaway. The real story—highlighted by journalist @mirandadevine—is far more unsettling: “Security seemed lax.” And not in some vague, hindsight way. In basic, preventable ways. She got in without a ticket—just by showing a PDF invitation on her phone for a different event. No QR code. No verification. No ID check. “The security coming into the studio today was better.” Let that sink in. The magnetometers weren’t at the perimeter—they were inside the venue. Meaning anyone intent on harm could already be inside before being screened. Even attendees noticed. People were reportedly eyeing exits before anything happened because something felt off. And then the most alarming detail: Scott Bessent said to her, “I can't believe that you've got the President and the Vice President on the table at the same time.” In the same room were the top EIGHT in line of succession, a concentration of leadership that represents a real continuity-of-government risk. This is the Washington Hilton—the same venue where President Reagan was shot. We spend billions preparing for worst-case scenarios. Yet sometimes the greatest vulnerability isn’t the threat—it’s complacency. The Butler assassination attempt, the golf course incident, now this. Patterns of close calls demand accountability and reform—not complacency wrapped in “they did a fantastic job once the shooting started.” An assassin only has to get lucky once. Last night should be treated as an urgent warning.
At some point you’re going to have to pick between following Rome and following Christ. The two paths are not the same.
