(FB 1550065822 Timestamp)
by Daniel Roland Anderson
Several years ago, I was discussing how pilpul had transformed rule of law into rule by discretion.
I was having the discussion with a Millennial who has never been to college.
I showed him what the First Amendment actually said, and contrasted the text with the current interpretations.
What he told me then goes right along with what John Mark says about the inability of the Right to conduct a reverse long march though the institutions:
–âLies mislead you little by little, but the truth slaps you in the face.â–
No, we canât do a long march to retake the Cultural Heights. But the fact is, we donât have to.
âOur rise to victory will be much quicker than oursâ
—“I mention it because it is fresh in my mind. Justice Scalia’s scathing dissent in the Obergefell v. Hodges (gay marriage) case provides an insightful (and savage) analysis of the majority’s replacement of law with pilpul.”—Brad Lehman