the i think really, really questionable ads on both sides, one on each side and if he would talk to the ad maker i think they would tell you that they made those usually when they've been working 14 hours straight and just went for it trying to respond because if you don't respond it can make you look weak. and occasionally the claims a bit suspicious and so some of it is human error. the more that we expect for the hourly news cycle turnaround there is bound to be more slippage in the search for truth - when it comes to where the candidates stand. >> we have time for one more question? i think we can get in one more question. sorry that last one will have to be of record. ..

panora radio station that suits me just perfectly. so, how scared are the campaigns of the difficulty of mastering the internet, the media message in the upcoming campaigns and then -- >> we will have to take it. >> is it scare of the internet the la?ut >> what i would say this for some people changing technologyo and i would say for someone

studying it's frustrating. to you think you know how to mao map the campaign and we did a very good job in this book.dob in 2012 it will be a whole nother laps as it requires a lot of shifting. the older you get the more y entrenched and the more uncomfortable comfortable our understanding seems but four other people, it will be a world of new opportunity so with each election cycle, one person's anxiety is another person's play box to try something new. so maybe people who are not used to the media are coming into the process, there are certainly opportunities for them. >> that will bring things to a close. the comment is buckle up america we're not going back to a gentler time but where

we go, politics make us in a call which has a new platform to stand on and our commitment to civil discourse that we can make an impact if i think our panelists the author schools for this role he argues portales the id is for all schools have migrated to the status of national policy. the discussion takes place at the heritage foundation in washington, d.c. and runs about an hour. what is taught in all schools and one generation would be widely believed by the bar in the following generation said one who great wall professor,

and he might have added that it will also because it is widely believed by the laureate will wind up being believed by much of the press and public. this wasn't a news story to me. i've written several books about the litigiousness of our legal system and in more cases than not that can be traced back to the academic origins. if you have a beef with the tort system you should take it up with the professor of berkeley. if you think that our system of sexual harassment law is less than ideal, your problem is with professor mckennon. so it is with class-action law employment law and many others, and this can be traced a big and small. he told the it story in my book

about the work place all of the then all of idea for those of you that are not out on looksism is the body is by which employers are constantly hiring great looking people and taking them more and promoting them further. in preference to the rest of us who are more homely. [laughter] yes it is on a fair but not until around the harvard law review ran if interminable i shouldn't say that and 80 or 90 pages didn't note on the need for all to come about homely. not until around them had been thought that it was much of an issue for the law. but, they're in i believe the year 1999 there appeared to be an extremely long harvard law

review student note and it didn't take too long before looksism became an interest for legislators and judges. indeed, the district of columbia right here has passed one ordinance banning looksism and so has a number of other municipalities. the one reported a couple of years of the gentleman who was finding it hard to keep at a retail outlet with as the multiple john piercy's that have inflicted on the speech impediment and this is what got me fired. [laughter] and he had called the lawyer i believe and was to contest this. the harvard law review article fought through a lot of these implications, and had gone to the extent of proposing wide use of telephone interviews for

applicants new jobs, and this is my favorite part, interviews behind screens. and we know that this is serious because the author of the harvard law review went on to write to the editorial for "the new york times" and the leader years. she's now left that teaching law at yale so help me. so the title for my book was ten bad ideas in the law school and how they change the world that's how i started out what became the school's four misrule. and i abandoned that title and i abandoned the framework for it because i couldn't answer the question really mr. olson only ten. where are you going to stop. how long is the book going to be any way when he and why we get some of these bad ideas, while

all schools keep turning out certain kinds of bad ideas, and it's not that they are just randomly generated bad ideas and some of it is ideological, todd mentioned that what we understand again they are not hot beds of libertarian and conservative thinking these days. it they are outnumbered, and it depends on which study you look at. in some studies it's only six to one or eight to one ratio of democrats to republicans. another found a 28 to one at stanford that much must be exaggerated to colombia. those figures may be exaggerated and harvard according to people who should know did go for without hiring a single

republican elena kagan i believe. and for that time harvard maintained a committee over its lot of diversity. while it wasn't hiring any republicans. john mcginnis of northwestern put it this way even as the tory party or rather in sorry the anglican church in great britain has been described as the tory party of the pulpit for the legal and most good all schools can be described as the democratic party at the lectern. now, that has been changed and i mentioned it's been changed at harvard and indeed most schools that have any self-respect these days will house a libertarian or conservative of spoken law professor. they may hesitate to have more than one for fear that they will

breed so things are changing. and this is not new, this ideological slant goes back a good long way, and if you wanted to you could trace it back to roscoe about a century ago who said that the law should be conceived as applied social engineering. isn't that a wonderful phrase, which means the law schools might think of themselves as schools of engineering. but it really began taking up momentum during and after the new deal. various law professors joy and the administration even more notably people in the fdr administration went over to law school after they left and became professor. and the stage was set in 1943 for the publication of the most widely cited and i believe most

influential article letter published about legal education not being the mcdougals education and public policy and let me set the stage for just a moment she was a new deal official who sometimes described his father of modern propaganda a public will scientist at the time he and mcdougal was a professor it had just changed and a tectonics' 9.0 richter scale waved because the supreme court had given him in the switch and time had decided that after all the u.s. constitution did not present the government from running the economy to not strike down most regulatory programs. in which the government will be

doing more than it ever did and here we have all schools teaching the same old curriculum. this was the beginning of the articles on the argument. they are still teaching mostly about so-called private law and property and other topics that were hit indeed typically fall that as necessary training for main street private lawyers who were going to go out and began arranging business deals resulting in disputes on main street advising affluent clients as to how to keep their money out of the government hands. this is of the lawyers learning to mauro ought to be a will to do. drilling students and half outdated matters the new curriculum should be determined quote in reference social objectives and toward

achievement of space values but he went on with some specifics as it is often identified as the key author here. and i'm quoting here as contract and property would much favorite instruments of the laissez-faire society if you have to have a course in property law they ask why not take the construction of public housing projects or land use as the proper jumping off point for the property of course. worse yet, they argued the public law the constitutional law even though the supreme court made clear that it was now going to change to accommodate the government he complained that its public law courses are so organized with too much difference with jurisdiction,

due process, equal protection of interstate commerce etc. trust in estates, schools should recognize private inheritance will be kept to a minimum in the news as i become a local government law they should realize the lawyers a piece to deutsch random the forms of government like the authority and how they are set up. the conscious efficient and systematic training for policy-making. now this was an ingenious per the part of the ingenuity is the schools would just stop training you have to be a main street private lawyer that whole segment of society would stop being so important, and yes, it was so terrible, it was terrible on any number of levels let's face it, but let me stress how terrible it was of predictions

because if you treat even a policy lawyer let alone a practicing main street lawyer, the last thing you would have wanted to do was to substitute the tendency of the authority organization for the government law to indeed if you turn to the areas every single one of the concepts they want to deemphasized turned out to be vitally important and is remained vitally important to this day how the lawyers practice law and the supreme court of lies at. so as a prediction of what lawyers would need to know, and i could add parenthetically that every time you hear someone from law school predict one area of law will bloom in the future should be should train more lawyers there so we should train fewer ignore them because they are approximately always wrong. back in the 70's they thought the energy law was going to bloom, which it didn't and no one predicted the trade mark licensing law was going to boom which it did. they predicted the group legal services would boom which they didn't and the force would

shrink which it didn't fit. but it wasn't just of course a matter of prediction. the work ideological about it and as i will mention in a moment no one adopted the program whole and a couple of influential la atmospheric influence is one of them was that it got the professors used to the idea that their students will be out there and in the world and the policy sense rather than just doing business deals and planning and they themselves taught might one removed be shipping the world shipping the prestige from law as it should be was up and prestige from then on, and although some might say there was a possibility of indoctrination here, fossil and mcdougal had the answer which is when you teach students the old

curriculum after all so you might start indoctrination it's just which kind and we've heard a lot of that in the leader here since. as i say, no one adopted the program whole because it was just too impractical to drop the curriculum entirely in the ten years later something very noteworthy happened which got a lot of people's attention which is that yale law school dropped property as a required course and this is almost unheard of because property in the first place is terribly important on the bar exam it is terribly important in all sorts of areas of real-life legal practice. but the yale students then as now or so smart as they were so agile and they could cram for that stuff when it came time to prepare for the bar exam and in the meantime think of the time you every happened in truly

stimulating interesting things and this ties in the yale than as is now the most prestigious of all law schools, and this is intimately related to the fact that jeal was most in practical and philosophical all all schools and it was kind of famous they would be adorably close if you have been a legal problem you need someone to salles from someone you need to bail out of jail or something. it was if the professors admired the schools who were the most had a loss when confronted the actual sick patient. this transmittal of servile schools through the competitiveness that so characterizes the law school world there is an irony here is the talk is free egalitarian game about being on the same

society and there are no debutantes who are half as jealous of each other as law school's art. there are none who are as obsessed with ratings and technical orders as law schools with the u.s. news orders and between the accreditation there is an enormous pressure to become more yale like there's an interesting article by malcolm coyot well in the last months, one of last month's new yorkers which he talks about the failing of the university ranking systems, and he points out with respect to the undergraduate experience that all schools are under pressure to pretend to be more jail research oriented to have interdisciplinary this and the famous brandt professors in every area but actually works for most schools in like a

parent to someone who looked at the entertainment world and the most famous act was lady gaga and recommended all acts became more lady gaga through code like. she's the only one who can get away with that stuff and it is with a jail and philosophical policy oriented way of legal instructions so it did work for yell because without as much time spent on the things like the old property and all they were able to generate all sorts of very influential new ideas. i will briefly summarize your because of all schools like a business schools go every five or ten years in which some new ideas so you have charles with a new property of the ideas and the right to a government job or

teacher tenure or the right to some regulatory favors was a new property you should be entitled to keep much preferable to the old property. this is credited with touching off much of the rights revolution of the 70's when of the new process and sometimes substantive rights with consequences we see today of the difficulty of the badly functioning employees to the public interest of the 90's a project marshall after the of all schools and through the new conceptions of the constitutional law in which it was believed that the u.s. constitution properly read would require the institution will of the more or less the entire agenda of "the new york times" op-ed page down through identity

politics with its notion that pretty much everything in the law even though the secured transactions into bankruptcy law should be brought up as charged with the race and gender and every other personal category and. its more successful than others. i praised in the book some of the successes as with the rights of the revolution and some of the failure as with the reparations and other areas where the ideas were so impractical they fell flat on their face when they came to the actual courts. but the story culminates certainly the latest episode of it is the rise of international human-rights one the law schools in the interest of international human rights there are dozens of projects in litigation in the clinics and all schools, and if you are still thinking of international human rights as

some think that is primarily meant for dissidents running away in dungeons and against the sort of news or the sort of regimes where they closed down the opposition's newspapers you are much behind the times that is still part of the agenda, and yet there is much, much more as you can see if you go to many of the university sites or groups like human rights watch and amnesty international where you are just as likely to see the articles about the need for changes in domestic violence or sexual harassment law and the need for quotas in the right to health care, the right to minimum income, the right to collective bargaining and not the right of free speech but the right to be free of hate speech depending which group you go to and this has been creeping into american discourse in a variety of ways primarily i think to the influence of legal like edemea

and they criticize the law and international human rights violating human rights and the laundry list went on and on and dozens of different things with the u.s. was doing wrong often by not having a big enough government, and the obama administration response to this i thought was fascinating because the prominence in the response was it is so unfair for the u.n. to set the u.s.'s systematically violent human-rights because we passed obamacare and tester by the towards recognizing the international human rights organization to and this falls into the category of reassurances. as i find it bother some and i think that would have been an additional reason to vote against the obamacare of people argue it is required the international human rights obligations and animals, and i wish i had a dollar for every

time someone from the academia has argued that what governor walter did in reviewing some of the old public union rights actually was a violation of international human rights vary widely argued and turn up in litigation. so there's a pattern here. much as it was reached in the 1970's that the u.s. constitution required a properly read court enforcement of the agenda of "the new york times" editorial page from somalia is increasingly argued the international human rights is the proper way though somewhat vague as to how this will happen requires the same "new york times" editorial page agenda. it gives the government more to do, and in that it is very much like most of the other ideas i talked about from legal academia. after that point it just sounds kind of most left ideas gives the government more to do, but it tickets to specifically

lawyers and judges more to do which is and always and it was actually not always fdr views that litigation should have a bigger role in society. in particular gives the legal intellectuals more to do because they are the ones who often we listen to when we decide to resolve everything through litigation and legal processes rather than to the legislatures or other ways of doing things. so, frederick hayek i think would have understood fogle to the power of yet another genre of intellectuals who have arranged in such a way as to make the road preachments more influential, and important it is certainly good news for the graduates of the law school's. it is perhaps even better news for the faculty. i am not so sure that it's good news for all the rest of us. thanks. [applause]

>> i'm going to ask the first question and then we will let walter choose his allin clauson terse, but i will remind you all to wait for the microphone especially since we are reporting this for heritage and for our c-span guests. please state your name and identify any affiliation before you ask your question, and keep it to the question. i said i would mention my one criticism, and walter has actually touched upon it although i don't -- i think that his original idea for the title may be wasn't the this either. ten - ideas from all schools. i'm not thrilled with the title that he chose so i am going to ask a very well pragmatic question. it's not a screed so it doesn't deserve a screed title. one title that might sell but to be misleading is how the law schools are destroying america so i don't think that would have worked either but do you mind

telling us what the process is to focus group a book titled how you settle on this one may be whether i have any talent with with your title? >> first you're absolutely right i didn't want to signal discreet because i didn't want to write a screed, and it's not easy to come up with titles, but the last week i would try to do is focus group because it would wear off all the images. i was thinking i'm afraid of in part to the school for scandal as a phrase from what was the restoration company in part of the lord of misrule at the public festivals to make fun of the high and mighty and i wanted to make fun of the high and mighty, and partly i was looking for words that had not been overused, and how it is

destroying america has lost all shock value aside from its creed. misrule is still a word people haven't been using entirely. so, that is as unfocused of a group as i can think of. >> fred smith from cei. >> walter, i haven't read it in your book yet, but you make a very good place that the intellectual self-interest will be state is in and pursue it rate because of their ability to be moral prestige over the greedy capitalist and also the power both in the government and the private sector. why, i ask and media telling the paper, given the threat to the entrepreneurial businesses and the business point generally light of business is so pacifist the a great command of the legal resources, the general counsel and so forth, they are faced with things like the act and

others and yet the business in this area and so many other areas seems to be passively waiting for the fruit to be ripped out. >> that is a good question. why has the business and those who are interested in the phrasing of an entrepreneurial capitalist system why do they pay attention to law schools and make you could ask it even more poignantly after reading the book because i tell at considerable length how it very different group of mainly the foundation starting in the 1940's and 50's and later joined by other liberal philanthropist's they were not neglecting law schools. they were put through a vast amounts of money and a great deal of clever organizational skills into making false schools they sought more socially conscious introducing various activist themes sometimes highly successful and sometimes not so. but they were working more or less on their own and i suppose

if more of conservative libertarian donors had been making a similar effort he would have seen whether the university administrations would have led it in. it should be said parenthetically for the one economics movement did spring up and have very considerable influence as it continues to have as kind of a counterweight to some of the low bad thinking in some areas. ..