A law professor recently included a thought experiment on a constitutional law exam: suppose Lincoln had survived the assassin's bullet, and later wound up facing articles of impeachment for some of his actions during the war. This is obviously a useful exercise, since many people feel an emotional connection to Lincoln and his cause, but this is precisely what law school is supposed to be about: can you suspend such thoughts and think entirely about the law? Well, guess how one critic characterized the exam. You already know the language used to condemn it. Brion McClanahan and I review the accusations against this professor, and the extremely valuable and thought-provoking questions on his exam. Subscribe to the Tom Woods Show: <br /><a href="http://www.TomWoods.com/1325" target="_blank" rel="nofollow">http://www.TomWoods.com/1325</a><br /><a href="http://www.SupportingListeners.com" target="_blank" rel="nofollow">http://www.SupportingListeners.com</a><br /><a href="http://www.RonPaulHomeschool.com" target="_blank" rel="nofollow">http://www.RonPaulHomeschool.com</a><br /><a href="http://www.FreeHistoryCourse.com" target="_blank" rel="nofollow">http://www.FreeHistoryCourse.com</a><br /><a href="http://www.TomsFreeBooks.com" target="_blank" rel="nofollow">http://www.TomsFreeBooks.com</a><br />...<br /><a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JRi-InCS7gw" target="_blank" rel="nofollow">https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JRi-InCS7gw</a>