about immigration as well. i had the pleasure of naturalizing many immigrants who serve in our armed forces and became united states citizens. we deal with immigration, it is a huge complex matter. >> host: wish we had more time because callers are interested. thank you for being here as we close. the book is called "the shadow catcher: a u.s. agent infiltrates mexico's deadly crime cartels". lots of edge of your seat stories in this book. the author, hipolito acosta. available wherever you buy your books. we will show you what the crowd looks like here. very busy afternoon. lot of people taking advantage of the sunshine. this is only one of several walkways. they expect somewhere in the neighborhood of 400 or 500 authors and panels and eight

stages and 300 exhibit booths on this campus over two days of the weekend and lots of people taking advantage of it. we will take you into the newman hall building on the u.s. c campus for our next live panel coverage. it is a biography, the american century. three panelists. john farrell wrote about clarence darrow and eisenhower and richard res on his latest portrait of camelot. last night mr. farrell was awarded the book prize for biography. live coverage begins now. [inaudible conversations] >> good afternoon. can i have your attention please? my name is scott berg. this panel is called biography, the american century. before we get into it. one or two minor housekeeping

issues. immediately after this panel all the arturs will go and i hope you will follow to a signing area. lots of people directing you there. you can continue any conversations you might want to start over there. the second thing, i know i have been doing these panels since the festival of books began 15 years ago and i started each one saying the same thing which becomes truer and truer which is i can think of no greater gift then a newspaper has bestowed upon its community then this festival of books. [applause] we want our festival of books. now just to introduce our panelists and we will hop right in. to my immediate left is richard reeves, senior lecturer on this campus at the school for communication and journalism. he is here in some ways under

false pretenses in that this -- his latest book which is a real thriller actually is called daring young men, the heroism and triumph of the berlin airlift june 1948-may 1949. dick does have some credentials. he has written a dozen books. a baker's dozen books by my count three of which have been best selling presidential biographies. we might have him play double duty. those books being president kennedy, president nixon and president reagan. they were about president kennedy -- [laughter] -- you can fill in the rest. to his left is jim newton who is the author of a wonderful

biography of earl warren called justice for all, earl warren and the nation he made published in 2006. jim is one of these biographers who makes absolutely crazy because he writes these wonderful biographies but he has a day job. are rather big a job which he is editor at the los angeles times. we locals read weekly in a column he writes. he has served as a reporter and the bureau chief. he began his journalism career at the new york times atlanta constitution and he has most recently published this splendid biography on dwight eisenhower called eisenhower:the white house years. to jim's left we have john farrell who goes by jack. jack farrell began his career in journalism writing for such newspapers as the denver post and the boston globe. for the last three decades

washington has been his beak and he cover all three branches of the federal government which has included his covering every presidential election since 1980. he is a senior writer for the center for public integrity which is a nonprofit, non-partisan investigative news organization. in 2001 he published a real page turner. to the o'neal and the democratic century. his writing has received a slew of prizes including last night as you may know when jack receive a los angeles time book price for biography for clarence darrow. [applause] here are our panelists and off we go. before we get into the theme, who knows if we will stick to this scene or not? i have been looking for threads. having a devil of a time. i thought if each of you might begin we will start with you,

dick, perhaps talking about how and why you got into writing about the berlin airlift especially considering the books that preceded it. >> there are two reasons. one was that jim wrote about eisenhower. i originally planned on that. i learned that he and evan thomas, former editor of newsweek were doing eisenhower and my agent said you must be out of your mind. the real reason that i wrote that book was on abu ghraib. i was so disturbed about the way america was -- what america was doing around the world and the way it was behaving around the world and that was not the america i grew up in or believed in. i look for a subject that i thought showed america as i saw

it and that was fascinating. when the amazing thing was all these young men particularly air force pilots and navigators and whether men, mechanics had been away from home for three four years and came back and started school and got married and bought a home and got a wife and what not and in the middle of the night in -- lost track of time. they got phone calls and many telegrams because there were no phones in every home and that time saying report to fort dix by 4:00 in afternoon three days ahead and put back on duty slept in barnes and the mud and what not and did what everyone knew was in possible which was to feed one of the largest cities

in the world by air. the planes they began with, these things were little d.c. 3s and move to d c 4s. this is very exciting book about how i like to see america as it sells. >> briefly for those who were not born until the 1980s. why was there an airlift? what was the berlin airlift about? >> incomplete treaties after world war ii. germany was divided into four zones. american, german, french and british. in the city of berlin, symbolic importance was divided into four zones, french, american, english and russian. berlin was 110 miles inside east

germany so that they controlled all the land routes between the western world and berlin and closed them. the train lines and canals and highways and they had five million troops surrounding berlin and east germany and we had 1500. and a cabinet meeting harry truman pull his cabinet, chief of staff, whether it could be done and they all said no. it was impossible to carry that much food in the air particularly since we demobilize totally at the end of world war ii and truman said i will thank you very much in stood in the doorway and turnaround and said do it.

and we did. >> i know the genesis of your eisenhower book. spend so much time doing earl warren. one day you are sitting in the office say i am not busy enough at the newspaper. i have written a book on earl warren. i will take autobiography of eisenhower. what happened one day? >> let me say how delighted i am that richard was excited about the berlin airlift. i got a call from an editor in new york that scott and i work with and she was convinced there was an important eisenhower presidency book and a lot written about eisenhower. [laughter] >> delighted to see the wrong number. because phyllis lieber and my

editor, observed that with a historiography on the eisenhower where period she felt the important niche was the presidency and since i covered some of the presidency in a course of the warren book i had a head start on it. the thing i should mention is when i started this book because i had seen eisenhower through the eyes of war and i thought i would write a different book that i ended up writing. warren and eisenhower -- he was appointed to the court -- grew apart during and after the presidency and really were not fond of each other in retirement. i imagine writing a fairly critical book about eisenhower. i wrote a very positive one to my surprise. looking back on how that happened for me the realization is if you view eisenhower through the prism of civil-rights and domestic affairs which is the only prison

the court sees him through, in comes much less flattering than if you see him through the prism of international affairs and diplomacy and military affairs where he was a much more adroit president. the books for of surprised me where it took me and it is not an example of expectations. >> one of the things that really makes your book pulsate is you oversee your recognition as eisenhower -- >> took me by surprise. >> it clearly does. >> don't they usually? >> yes. depends. often. jack. you too have a day job. you have written about politics and political figures. how is it that one day clarence darrow pops into your head? and i want to know has there not been -- had there not been a lot

about clarence darrow that put you off or was there not enough and did you think he spoke especially to today that you thought he would resonate in 2012? >> yes to the last one. i will get to that. the answer to the first part of the question is when i was 12 years old somebody gave me a the young adult copy of irving stone's biography of clarence darrow. i was 12 years old because i am now 59 and i still have that little yellow paperback book. he left a great impact on me. formed an awful lot of my political philosophy and beliefs over the years. i went to the university of virginia thinking i was going to be a lawyer but i graduated in 1974 and all the lawyers were being taken away in handcuffs. journalists were being portrayed

by robert redford. little did i know. after i finished i was casting about. i thought i might do a book about horatio nelson. the great british admiral. was the 200th anniversary of the battle of trafalgar. in america we think this is a big deal. you do a book for the year of the anniversary. in england he is sort of like lincoln. they did the nelson decade. as i was doing my research all these books kept coming assets -- in great britain in our language about nelson's a scratch them off. clarence darrow did not come to me immediately. i was googleing and learned this wonderful collector of letters from minnesota named randy teachham had gone to clarence darrow's granddaughter's house and asked if they had any papers left over from their famous grandfather and she said there

may be some boxes in the basement. sure enough they went to the basement and there with a box that said christmas ornaments and they opened it up and there were a thousand letters to and from clarence darrow that he had not given or his family had not given to irving stone when he wrote clarence darrow for the defense. the university of minnesota bought them and have put them on line on a marvelous website, the clarence darrow collection. in research for this book i came to los angeles and spent a week reading the transcript of his bribery trial. year later the university of minnesota put it on line. in the future any of us could do the research from our kitchens using the internet. that is why i picked clarence darrow. there was something new to be said. i had admired him for many years and finally got back to the original part of the question. in this new gilded age, large parts of his story that we don't know because most of us come

through the monkey trial but the economic populism, the act of the robber barons and corruption in politics, they all resonate loudly. >> the christmas ornaments were in the nature of what? >> the family kept the best stuff. sledders to and from his first wife about their divorce. the second bunch of letters that randy also found that were love letters between clarence darrow and his second wife and a lot of stuff about his finances and relationship with his son who was his financial adviser that really gave me an idea as to how -- would horrible investor he was. >> you really personalizes an icon and bring him to human scale which is really interesting.

we will take a stab at addressing this scheme that brought you all in here which is the american century. as you may or may not know it was a term coined by henry luce in a famous as a hero in life magazine which he could do whenever he wanted. in february of 1941, in which he said throughout the seventeenth century and the eighteenth century and the nineteenth century this continent teamed with manifold project and magnificent purposes above the mall and leaving them together into the most exciting flags of all the world of all history was the triumphal purpose of freedom. it is in this spirit that all of us are called each to his own measure of capacity and each in the widest tori's of his vision to create the first great american century. disagree? are am wondering -- i was going to say.

>> couldn't get away with that today. >> it was his magazine. he could say whatever he wanted. if you can, in some ways there's a through line. as does the phrase the american century resonate view anyway. i will start for you to chime in and you can comment on your other characters too. reagan and nixon and kennedy and so forth. if you might address the american century however strikes you? >> we have distorted it but most of the 20th century, it certainly was an american century and i mean that as a complement.

the people who talked about it, it was -- i would say this -- about harry lewis's definitions which i read many times. used the phrase many times, described a country which we would like and in many ways still are. the beginning of the 20th century, the average life span of a white man in the united states was 42 years. for a black man was 32 years. our public health system which typified us. we felt we had to do something about that. we felt we had to do something about a lot of things and many of them technological so that we got a jump on the world in terms

of technology. we also had a history, not fighting bosnians and the xhosa mars and the serbs. there were no a eleventh century wars to continue to refine. we really did come. one thing i am doing in the book on the japanese in turns is the role of the founding fathers though they were brilliant wonderful men is exaggerated. what made this country great was one group after another came from other parts of the world where there were russians legal irish, japanese, chinese, and fought their way and because in every case the people who were already here, latinos being the newest example tried to keep them out and do was the energy

of people trying to move in and building up the contract that made us. during the cold war and certainly now where american exhibition alyssum -- exception alyssum --exceptionalism is being cheered on and on by conservatives and whatnots, but they do it from the base. the s they have a lot to do with that. we are better than other people. and other people all want to be like us. my own conclusion is other people want to have what we have but they don't want to be like us and we are perverting the american century into an american world all over the planet and a high price and not

succeeding very much at it. >> in some ways dwight eisenhower is almost the icon of the american century. i wonder if he might address that. >> in both of the great phases of his life, in one way or another worked off of the notion that this was a uniquely american century. his victory over hitler in world war ii which had a nice side effect of setting him up for politics clearly was an expression that this was a special country. and his administration, particularly his handling of cold war politics really suggested eisenhower's strong belief was american values would persevere and there was something special about american values. he would not of use the phrase exceptional was some -- exceptionalism and something to

persuade the world to come around our values in the context of the cold war and american values would persevere, outlived soviet communism so that guided his strategy as president. his fear as president was this country would lurch into a conflict and end up as a nuclear conflict and urged him to use nuclear weapons to resolve crisis here or there in the world and his contribution as president was to say no over and over again to the use of american force and american nuclear force. that was because he believed there was something special about this country and the country would prevail if given the time to do so. the great statistic of the eisenhower years is through all the crises of those years, crisis after crisis, guatemala, iran. those occurred in the 1950s,

soviet invasion of hungary. the number of american soldiers killed in battle in the eisenhower administration, ended six months into the presidency. from the end of the korean war to the presidency killed the battle was won. that is a remarkable act of restraint. and prosperity as well. back to your question, was guided by the notion that this was an american century and ultimately good for them. >> was this a memorial? >> i have ducked it largely.

are there two -- and they feel doesn't do enough to herald his life and too modest? and out of the desire -- on the sidelines. i am no art critics as anyone who knows me knows. i am not the right person to weigh in on the esthetics of it. lovely they're building a memorial. it is overdue. i happen to be fond of the design but i understand why susan has reservations. >> we won't get any more? >> i am dancing here. we are loving it. >> jack, even though the blues phrase, loose talk, the american century comes after your man has

died. are there themes or thoughts about it? >> he would laugh us out of this room. he was a strong supporter of woodrow wilson. and the first to raise alarms about hitler and mussolini which i didn't know about. it was one last mark in his favor on the score sheet you keep as a biographer. basically clarence darrow started out giving a speeches on manifest destiny when he was 20 years old and made this long progression to a deeply cynical viewpoint against the robber barons in the 1890s but by the turn of the century was big government using classic libertarian when he finally settled into an identifiable ideology. he basically -- i call him

jefferson's air. he thought american liberty had been destroyed by the industrial age and with the coming of massive government power to the state, prohibition and the death penalty in the early 20th century we were questioning -- the phrase he used was liberty had given us these blessings and prosperity was now strangling liberty in its cradle. >> it occurs to me what is a line in all three books we're talking about immediately, there is the presence of communism, socialism, if you will, and certainly in clarence darrow's life, i am wondering how that figures into clarence darrow's life for addressing this century. >> he flirted with a lot but never actually settled on

anyone. he would short o if anyone call him a communist or socialist. he would adopt what he liked of human believe but as soon as he got acquainted with true believers and saw their minds were closed it would turn him off completely and that applies to both left and right. >> curious what his relationship but babson is like. >> he was the lawyer. great unknown forgotten chapter of american history is the deb this rebellion in the 1890s one american railway shutdown the economy of the united states and grover cleveland, democratic presidents and the u.s. army into the streets of chicago to restore order on behalf of the railroad corporations against the working men. clarence darrow was a turning point because he had to decide which side he was on whether he was going to continue as a prosperous corporate lawyer or if he was going to start taking

the rebels and the represented eugene debs in a series of cases. telos one and had to go to jail for six months. that was a big case in his life turning him away from -- i always thought when someone asks how the come down on clarence darrow and i said he could have been the most successful corporate lawyer in america. that have been fantastically wealthy man. he chose instead to defend the little guy. that is why his life is worth reading about and why he is arm and so fondly. >> did you want to address communism? >> certainly. certainly the defining feature of the eisenhower administration is its position in soviet and chinese communism and i touched on it already but it is really -- it is the reason why my book

ended up being a positive book that it is because i think the strategy pursued by the eisenhower administration in the cold war ultimately is vindicated by time and has a lot of residents for today by the way. .. embarked on a military and diplomatic strategy precise of the one rejected by the most

skillful military commander to serve as president in the 20th century. so i'd date that his dealing with communism, both domestic and more importantly foreign is real important lessons for people to think about today. >> as someone from washington i can say that we don't even talk about it anymore. the discussion is when set of weather. arrange stand right now is on such a war footing that okay we are finished with it. what is next? okay, a rant. serious. it's astonishing and almost reflected that it's time to use american armed forces overseas to implore our wealth and value and to go back and see eisenhower's great restraint is remarkable. >> i think all of that is true. i think everyone in the audience who knows anything about eisenhower and those years would want to ask you about senator joe the, right? [laughter]

us-made? and while you are not necessarily his apologist, but i would like to hear because you are his explainer. i'd love to hear. >> it was certainly the most pitch criticism of eisenhower and his first term is that he did not do enough to cut him off. i guess i would say again, not to apologize, but explained that the course of my research would suggest in the book portrays it does say that eisenhower was doing much more at the time that people knew, the notion of the hidden hand presidency about eisenhower was very much at play in the course of maccarthy commit eisenhower while not speaking publicly about mccarthy was meeting with newspaper publishers, captains of industry, members of congress and really cutting off sources of support for maccarthy. he believed rightly or wrongly is to engage maccarthy directly would be to allocate maccarthy's criticisms and get them a

national platform that eisenhower sought to deny him. there is also a more practical, cynical if you will view of this, which is that eisenhower never enjoyed the enthusiastic support of the right wing of his own party and maccarthy was threatening to him in some eyes in that regard and you could imagine a situation where the right wing conservative wing of the party could've bolted on and. and eisenhower, because he really was a determined centrist can never really had the strong loyalty of that part of the party and confronting mccarthy could have exacerbated. so there were practical, cynical and also understandable reasons why he would decline to take on maccarthy directly. what is also clear is once maccarthy altered in the beginning of the end of maccarthy has been eisenhower directed his subordinates not to testify about conversations and the white house, that he invoked executive privilege in order to do that come to power by the way he probably did not have heard

that the home of the constitutional conversation. he invoked privileges he may or may not have had and used it to cut off access to maccarthy. that is the beginning of the end of maccarthy. at the end of 1954 he came in early 53, but in the 54, mccarthy was done. said that is too long and i think the country would have been better off had he been cut off earlier. but once he was caught off comeliness cut off thoroughly and permanently. >> the words i thought would come up about eisenhower was patients. he had a patient's test the patience of an old man, really that people don't have today. he knew, i think in his heart how these things are going to hand and probably even had a timeframe in his mind. in doing books on the presidency , really books designed to show what it a

president dies, i came to the conclusion writing about breaking of all people who i didn't agree with unmatched, but i think was an extraordinary man and extraordinary political leader is there something to be said for having altman who are already famous in the white house. they are not opening. they've seen enough to know that waiting out is always a good strategy and that is harder to flatter a man who astarte famous white eisenhower. those circuits are attributes, which i think people have really mentioned interns and that i had to learn by spending eight years with ronald reagan. >> that is one reason why my old friend, tip o'neill did so well is that in the other side, tip was old enough yet been

announced, started politics before the new deal. so he knew that cycles change come at this come around and how to play that same thing. >> poker completely, but their import attorney general once said that eisenhower is the most respected man on earth a four he became and that is a good platform to start from. but second, if anything from the presidency in some ways diminished the esteem because it made him a more partisan figures so you're absolutely right there is a sense in which he could make decisions and breakout things in a way that might've been more difficult for them aren't fatuous person. >> for all of you actually, how real to linger on communism for a moment? how do you really do think the communist threat was? i mean come endearing and then certainly the centerpiece of it in eisenhower's life, how could he know how short it might be?

and even in the case of darrell, you have these early socialists was her real extremists. these were terrorists. >> garrett defended the american communists during the red scare. the authorities came in and said everybody who was an immigrant or had a temporary papers and just put them on about and shipped them out. the american committee for an communists had a little bit more difficulty. so they had to pass laws and then prosecute and they're basically a bunch of crack pots and cranks. and in many of garreau's speeches defending them in trial, he says it's ridiculous the communist party, he was defending in illinois is three people on the entire track sure he is 30 cents and the district attorney thinks it's important

that we bring this man to trial because he thinks some data might be a debtor by working together. but the threat within the united states i would suggest there's not a word to say how bad the over exaggerated it was. >> the foreign threat was much for real estate. and now we see it's much easier to see how hollow the communism was and how quickly fell once it started to fall. but from the dead and 1950 or 1955 it was much more is at stake. it was a genuine competitor for third world allegiance. a militarist country. it was an alliance although we now know them very shaky alliance of chinese communism. and you had a really nuclear arsenal. again a smaller one than we knew at the time. but this is not to be taken lightly. i think he was genuinely preoccupation of those years. it even guided the

administrations in eisenhower's view towards many domestic issues, including the budget. one of thinks eisenhower would not have believed communism and fall as quickly as it did. he did believe we were for the multigenerational struggle. about the reasons why you felt so strongly balanced budget and the american economy needed to be found over very long period of time, even at defense spending comment about the united states ultimately to persevere, he inherited and can toss in recession inherited a 10-dollar deficit from the truman administration when he left in 1961 that the country with a surplus. he's the last president to that the country with the surplus. >> he left the country? [laughter] >> not in his view, that's for sure. >> so this notion of a long thread in a long struggle was very much a part of the eisenhower years. >> i was if there were two things. totally agree with those viewpoints. it is never that serious of a

threat here and many people used it to advance their own careers as they did put the feelings in world war one. but i think there are two things that talk about how real a threat communism was. one is looking at the history of french elections in the 1940s and 1950s. if the communists took over france, which they very nearly dead, the biggest party in the country, that would've changed a lot of history. and the second thing that i would remind people of was john kennedy and the berlin wall. the berlin wall went up in 1962 and it was put up -- actually kennedy knew it was going to go up and he was practically a co-contract or with khrushchev thought it because they both had problems that while salt.

khrushchev's problem was people in eastern europe were bullying at the rate of 2008 people who fled with the young people and educated people are doctors, lawyers could not continue to allow that to happen. kennedy's problem was that almost all of germany was occupied by soviet troops. they had much more military power than we did and our only option if we had decided in 1962 to fight for berlin, which means germany, which means europe college by using atomic weapons and he was determined not to use atomic weapons. so what was the real thing. >> you might jump back to 48 and 49. >> started too for that matter. >> stalin is so interesting and

the most interesting thing about him is the life of the men who know no one would tell the truth to so that stalin personally ordered the berlin air lift was totally incomplete intelligence and knowledge of what it could lead to. he thought because there were so few people from the western countries in berlin, i want to add in a print fees, the russians considered berlin a slavic city that it was theirs by right of history. we didn't even bother with history, but he was the man who again and again meet some of the most vicious and decisions because he was a dictator you could not tell the truth to.

so he was the boy in the bubble. [laughter] >> jack, just to dip into your tip o'neill for a moment, you're entitled that the, the sub title -- the democratic century, to what extent do you think that is the case there is the american century and democratic century one in the same can't do in many a's? >> welcome to two great moments of tips via for the establishment of the new deal and the new deal coalition under roosevelt in the 1930s. and then it's falling apart being counted by conservator revolution which is why i thought that was a good set title. but i think that we have seen the country reject those big

government programs that care to raise the new deal. the reagan revolution really has changed washington a great deal in many ways and i think that a lot was timing but when you saw panama go back for national health care that democrats do that when they got back into power, it was a tactical mistake that caused a great deal of problem he is facing now. who is focused on jobs and the economy from the start and maybe even health care as part of that he would done much better. the worst thing i ever heard his chief of staff, rahm emanuel. one of the stupidest political things ever said was decided wracking as soon as obama was elected that we are not going to let a good crisis go to waste. a sort of immediately said we don't really care about country and which are facing, but we are going to use this as an

opportunity to push through something we want this government program and we think is great and take advantage of this and manipulate you. i think that is a large part of the problem obama is facing. >> and because he cuts the new deal and the democratic structures still imposes the infrastructure of where we are today. and certainly in eisenhower's years, how did eisenhower feel about everything that had immediately preceded him and was he interested in dismantling? >> the moment is fair and he clearly came as a republican and the new deal and that campaign of a pamphlet the government publish in the 40s the top people have washed the dishes and he just thought this was the apex of silliness that the government entering people's lives. he believed in a natural goodness of the american people

and thought the american people would be better off left to their own devices and not manipulated by pushy government. that said, he came to office leader of the party that had very much advocated dismantling the new deal and never lifted a finger to dismantle it. and so social security obviously not only survived but was expanded under the u.s. and our administration federal income taxes. we argue now in washington about whether it will revert to the pre-bush cut tax cuts and top tracks has had the whole tie yourself into knots about 4.5% higher. the top bracket was 91% and was in 1953 and was in 1961 when he left. so his principal preoccupation was with foreign affairs and the cold war. while his party would love to have seen him do more about dismantling the new deal, he never evidenced much enthusiasm.

>> the 91% was at the top level. >> $400,000. >> it was a lot of money. >> but it's a very impressive structure. so you're right that not many people were paying taxes of 91%. although eisenhower wrote his biography was the first mr for saving europe in theory could have paid him that although he worked at a deal that my fellow panelists will appreciate. as far as i know, no other book author has gotten. he got the irs to sign up on the notion that if you find the book to his publisher that is her six-month study claimed it as a capital gain rather than income. [laughter] >> again -- >> is there a website? >> it helped in world war ii. >> to put on one of your modern

times. is the new deal over? should it be over? is there too much? >> who said it is still the framework? i've been wrong about this in the past. i thought after the reagan years the country would -- i wrote a small book called the reagan detour, which i would like to destroy, but the country would snap back to accepting the welfare state, the new deal welfare state, a democrat welfare state and i underrated the power of american business and of the republican party and this desire, which we see today and laughable -- what are the republicans running against? they are running against either sex or the 1960s. and contraception is now an

issue for these people, but not with anybody in the country. i think it was karl rove who said, we should not take this an issue. most people think sex is fine. except for rick santorum. [applause] now, i think we see this endless attack on games. i was reading a lot of romney is specious in the last couple of days dunwoody at that. and of course he said something that's not going to work politically. that is that we are all right. no one who now has these benefits, social security and medicare will lose them.

new people will be under a new system. impossible to impose. so i think the new deal with the new deal but it was locked. the ideology is going to scramble. >> just to shift gears a bit, how well at no ethanol was clarence terra internationally and the causes and the people he fought for? people know about him beyond our borders? >> he was very popular in great britain. for some reason the british press like 10 any sort of capture an american character

they like to publicize. and the monkey trias changed everything. it was truly an international phenomenon. the internet allows me now to check and see what the book is selling and it has fans in india, australia, new zealand because they know if clarence darrow and the trust probably through inherit the wind and spencer tracy's great performance. the monkey trial was a phenomenon, comparable to the o.j. simpson trial. running against the pass, that is part of what the republicans are doing. and i don't know how you get a political benefit out of that. i'll talk about the governor of tennessee. >> here we are almost a century later. it's happening all over again.

it's quite extraordinary. and molly have you here, too even though this isn't directly in the american century thought you might say a few words about the leopold trial. it's a sensational part of your boat. >> because it is los angeles fossae because all the portraits of clarence darrow, or some of that asininity compulsion publishes a movie a movie about leopold, it was truly -- they were part of the two hideous defendants but he defended here they were too rich spoiled geniuses from chicago who decided they wanted to commit the perfect crime because they're above ordinary morality and make to 12-year-old boy and killed him and of course the perfect crime crumbled immediately when one of them dropped his expensive eyeglasses as they were trying to dispose the body. it was the 1920's and it was the jazz age and these two creeps

became national celebrities. it was one of the greats first celebrity trials. derwin went and defended them, perhaps lately because he needed the money, but that always played a factor. he did have many women that he had to support. but basically you but he couldn't stand with the idea there were still in their teens and they wanted to put the death penalty. this would've been the first time he had dropped in the state of illinois below 21 or 20. couldn't stand setting a precedent that is why he did that great defense. his closing argument went on for three days without notice. he spoke off friday afternoon, all saturday morning and came back on and do an spoken by the end of it he was totally exhausted, slumped back into his chair. and it is one of the great

closing arguments and pieces in american history. >> i would say certainly part of the american century. they say nothing of murder. >> 's crimes that can lead to characterize the rest of the century. >> exactly. certainly a great team domestically in the american century is raised throughout our centuries. and i think jim, if you could comment on somehow eisenhower and his race again. this is another area in which people have accused him of doing way too little. i would make the argument that eisenhower's record somehow and that better than his instinctive civil rights. he grew up in segregated kansas, what to west point, odyssey was reciprocated as harry. many of his closest friends in the post-presidency were

southerners. he loved to golf in the gas to georgia. there's nothing about his experience to give him much empathy for african-americans. and yet, the supreme court followed with far more appointments to the court. obviously the support of education and just as importantly before the justices put on the court always voted to hold ground and extend it in every case that came before them throughout the whole period. and somewhat overlooked, eisenhower was also responsible for the appointment of the appellate judges and district court judges who at the hard work of making round front a statement of reworking doctrine. and not because i do want to go too far down the path that around two to case the following year in which the remedy for brown is hashed out and specified that desegregation would precede a somewhat infamously said that paul delivers speed. that language was unfortunate in

many ways because it allowed a lot of deliberation and not very much speed. but what it also meant is that thought the district court judges to decide whether it official desegregation plan full text that requirement. so the appointments he made to those benches who did a great deal today from work also were very important. he secured passage of the civil rights act in 1957, not terribly ambitious fact, that happened before since reconstruction therefore sort of laid the groundwork for the more important civil rights acts of the 1960s and then of course most famously he summoned the 101st airborne the same unit to soften the beaches at normandy to ask what the little rock nine into school in little rock when obstructing desegregation era. on the last episode in a funny way to one eisenhower gives the most credit for civil rights in order to always the one that actually says the least about 10

in terms of civil rights. really what he was fighting for in little rock was not so much the print both civil rights as it was the principal federal authority. i am convinced if orville fought with type to block a highway construction project in little rock that i could have done the same thing. he could not allow a governor to use federal trips to thwart the authority of a federal court. to do so wish us to to break down and if i could do anything, he understood authority. so, interestingly i think his record on civil rights and have been quite positive, even though i don't think there's much cared to cost 10 to see it as a matter moral urgency. he did better than he thought. >> i would add to that is certainly true of segregated country in a segregated part of that country. one of the marks against him in the war was certainly be that he

basically did not want to have like soldiers in the american army. but i would see the thing that most interested me when i was thinking of writing an eisenhower book -- [laughter] was that he kept his mouth shut. if dwight eisenhower let the country know in 1954 what he really thought of brown v. topeka and that the troubles in the country, we would be fighting right now. he did not oppose the decision and any railway and now is a very common to report an american decision. >> is, two days after the supreme court ruling in brown was the court has spoken and i will obey. and those are not the words. but the other worries in the military life understand

separation of powers. >> i've always thought it was great. >> you think race is a great character test and the heroes of that century. and the one thing when people ask me, how do you support this guy who did so many awful things and good things, how do come down to whether he's a good guy or bad guy, but after he accurately opposed and was fantastically famous could have commanded highest piece on wall street and chose to go to detroit at the height of the ku klux klan popularity in the 1920s and defend the sweet family, which was an african-american family that had been trapped inside a home buy a white mob fired into the mob and then charged for murder. and he did one try, in a mistrial to another and got a not guilty and suffered a massive heart attack that summer from strange and was never quite the same. so we almost capped his career.