The admirably moderate Calpundit has been posting about feeling equally alienated by the extremes of left and right. But the difference between the two is illustrated perfectly here. On the left, an untenured professor at a "teach-in" who calls for a "million Mogadishus." On the right, the New York Post, circulation 600,000.

Hey, if a campus crank can wish for personal calamity to befall U.S. forces in Iraq, why not fantasize about a volley of Kent State-style militia musketry rattled off in his general direction?

There was little confrontation at the theater, mostly each side yelling to its own, until Condon worked out a plan to drown out the anti-war speakers. Some of his group rode motorcycles, and they dropped the machines into neutral and blasted their engines at deafening volume

But I'm starting to get the sense that it doesn't matter. They want us silenced. They'll wear away at the left and the antiwar movement, using every Professor DeGenova example they can find. Then when they've disposed of us, they'll come for Kevin Drum.

If diversity works as advertised, we surmised, then those at institutions with higher proportions of black enrollment should rate their educational and racial milieus more favorably than their peers at institutions with lower proportions.

The results contradict almost every benefit claimed for campus diversity. Students, faculty members and administrators all responded to increasing racial diversity by registering increased dissatisfaction with the quality of education and the work ethic of their peers. Students also increasingly complained about discrimination.

Moreover, diversity fails to deliver even when all else is equal. When we controlled for other demographic and institutional factors . . . the results were surprising. A higher level of diversity is associated with somewhat less educational satisfaction and worse race relations among students.

The challenge to minority scholarships and summer programs, often intended to encourage students who might otherwise not go to college, represents the widening of a separate but no less ideologically charged front in the fight over affirmative action.

Unlike Michigan's admissions policy, which considers race as one of many factors in reviewing applicants, many scholarships and enrichment programs serve minorities exclusively, often helping only a handful of students.

Though the value of such programs is not in dispute, their racial exclusivity creates what the two anti-affirmative action groups call "ill feelings, racial polarization and a general fraying of the fabric that holds our multiracial society together."

Edward Blum, legal director of the American Civil Rights Institute, said: "We're not out to kill these programs. What we're out to do is expand them to everyone." The institute's chairman, Ward Connerly, led the 1996 ballot initiative to ban affirmative action in California's government-sponsored programs.