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

Remember, Republicans are 5-0 in Congressional Races this year. The media refuses to mention this. I said Gillespie and Moore would lose (for very different reasons), and they did. I also predicted “I” would win. Republicans will do well in 2018, very well! @foxandfriends

— Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump) December 18, 2017

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

Analysis . . . is, in my opinion, a proper part of moral philosophy. Analysis is, however, merely a propaedeutic to using what has been analysed. Certain contemporary philosophers seem contented [sic] to regard moral action only as providing occasions for ethical remarks and are interested in these remarks only in so far as they provide exercises in linguistic analysis; these exercises, treated as games requiring no small degree of specialized skill, are, like chess-problems to an ardent chess-player, inexhaustibly amusing but of no practical concern in the business of living. Moral philosophers, I contend, must be concerned with the ways in which men live—their ways of life which embody their ideals. I conceive that it falls within the proper province of moral philosophers to formulate ideals worth living for and to attempt to make clear principles which may afford guides for action. This is a task singularly difficult to fulfil.

(L. Susan Stebbing, Men and Moral Principles, L. T. Hobhouse Memorial Trust Lectures No. 13 [London: Humphrey Milford, Oxford University Press, 1944], 4, reprinted in Hobhouse Memorial Lectures 1941-1950 [London: Geoffrey Cumberlege, Oxford University Press, 1952] [lecture delivered on 12 May 1943] [ellipsis added])

Note from KBJ: I have no objection to philosophers formulating "ideals worth living for," but I would insist that philosophers, as such, have no evaluative or normative expertise. In other words, the fact that the person formulating the ideals is a philosopher (by training, profession, or occupation) gives those ideals no more weight than they would have if they were formulated by a nonphilosopher.

Here.

Here.

Since there have been many allegations against President Donald Trump for sexual assault and harassment for so many years, it is time to think the unthinkable. An interview with former Miss New Hampshire Bridget Sullivan on TV Thursday brought the whole torrid story to the front, and I was shocked.

Although these allegations were being made before the election, and the alternative was another Clinton in the White House, it appeared reasonable to elect Trump. However, now the result of a successful impeachment would place Vice President Mike Pence in the White House, and that would be a great result.

I urge the Senate to get on with it. Pence would make an excellent president and rid us of a great embarrassment.

Vernon Reed

Liberty

As a candidate, I promised we would pass a massive TAX CUT for the everyday working American families who are the backbone and the heartbeat of our country. Now, we are just days away… pic.twitter.com/MADTGUMktX

— Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump) December 17, 2017

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

Here.

Here.

I'm writing this on an Apple iMac with a Retina 5K 27-inch monitor. It's been a year since I unpacked the computer and started using it. I must say, I love it. I used PCs for most of my life, but got tired of the spinning hard drives and constant updates. The iMac is silent. The screen is large and sharp, with vibrant colors. I never thought it would happen, but I've become an Apple man. I have an iMac, a MacBook Air, an iPad Pro, an iPhone 7, and an iPod (the latter of which I rarely use). I like stuff that works.