For those who object to Manton's ongoing use of the "Berkeley" reference, allow me to recall the following from personal history and sans point-of-view. I entered the American university system in 1968. Yes, I really am that old. When I did, upperclassmen were kind enough to instruct, nay, indoctrinate, our frosh class on the most important aspects of college: 1] Berkely and Columbia were marching in the forefront and setting the goals. They were our 'leaders'. 2] It was our responsibility at S.U.N.Y Stony Brook to become the third institution with "the right stuff". 3] Although studies were important, the overarching concern of all students was "the telephone tree" ... that predecessor to e-mail by which all members of the campus were to be instantly aware should the "pigs" enter the sacred University. And with that, my first semester term project became performing my part to insure that we succeeded at having appropriate mini-riots and that we attack a symbol of the Establishment. In our case, that meant burning down the guardhouse. Yes, there are students at Berkeley who are there to learn. But what is it that the faculty is there to teach? Do they do so from a particular point-of-view? And if that is the case, what do the students learn? As a result, is the student body as a whole swayed from center to left? I believe, to quote some famous old dead guy, that these truths are self-evident. Somehow, I get the feeling that documenting the righteousness of the Establishment has not, in the intervening 37 years, risen to the pinnacle of the overall Berkeley 'to-do' list.