Keith Burgess-Jackson, J.D., Ph.D.

Here.

Academia is overwhelmingly leftist. When heads start to roll, it's going to be fun to watch.

Here is Kurt Schlichter's latest column.

The United Nations found a backbone that the U.S. Congress lost long ago.

This slap in the figurative face should be expected more often in the future as this administration pursues foreign policy that suffers from ignorance and ideologically vapid initiatives. History will record this period as the beginning of the end of United States’ world influence and leadership.

Those favoring this administration’s actions would be well advised to spend their massive tax savings not on frivolities such as a third or fourth home, but on something more practical such as Chinese language lessons.

John Lell, Seattle

“On 1/20 – the day Trump was inaugurated – an estimated 35,000 ISIS fighters held approx 17,500 square miles of territory in both Iraq and Syria. As of 12/21, the U.S. military est the remaining 1,000 or so fighters occupy roughly 1,900 square miles..” @jamiejmcintyre @dcexaminer pic.twitter.com/OgYEuDgzD2

— Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump) December 28, 2017

https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js

Our subject is arguments for the nonexistence of God—which, as I’ve tried to show, must be philosophical arguments. Let me lay those arguments aside for the moment. I’ll make a generalization: with the possible exception of some arguments for the nonexistence of God, there are no compelling arguments for any substantive conclusion in philosophy. I offer the following argument for this generalization (and if you’re waiting to catch me out in a contradiction on this point, I’ll tell you right now that I don’t regard this argument as compelling; I just think it’s a pretty cogent argument): on both sides in every important philosophical dispute there are extremely able philosophers. Are there objectively true moral principles, or is morally [sic] an entirely subjective matter? Can a purely physical thing be conscious? Do we really know anything, or is knowledge an illusion? Has the state the right to compel us to do things that benefit others but not ourselves? Is it in principle possible for science to explain why there is anything at all? For each of these questions, you can find able philosophers who will answer it Yes, others who will answer it No, and some who will say Maybe.

I think we must admit, therefore, that a pretty strong—but not, of course, compelling—case can be made for the conclusion that there are no compelling arguments in philosophy (with the possible exception of arguments for the non-existence of God)—no proofs.

(Peter van Inwagen, "Can Science Disprove the Existence of God?" Philosophic Exchange 34 [2004]: 39-53, at 47-8 [italics in original])

Here.

Here.

Here is Ann Coulter's latest column.

Mike & the Mechanics (1985). Achingly beautiful.