From transcript of White House Press Briefing, January 9:
Q: You said that the President is very sensitive to issues regarding diversity. Is it possible that lingering raw feelings over the Lott debacle are a factor in your cautious approach on whether to weigh in on the affirmative action case?
MR. FLEISCHER: No, I think it’s fair to say that the President approaches this issue the way he has a governor of a very ethnically diverse Texas, as somebody who was very sensitive to the importance of issues involving race and diversity and opportunity for all. I think I said diversity and opportunity for all. That’s how the President approaches this. He approaches it out of a lifetime of care and concern on these type of important, sensitive issues involving civil rights. And that’s how he approaches it.
Q: Setting aside the affirmative action case for a moment, or whether he’s going to weigh in on it, does the policy of adding 20 points to minority students, does that comport with his policy of affirmative access, or does it contrast with it?
MR. FLEISCHER: Well, that’s what is exactly under review among a number of other factors in the current case pending before the Supreme Court. And I think that’s the type of thing that the deadline is next week for weighing in on any type of amicus curai, and we’ll wait and see.
Q: It would seem on its face that adding 20 points to the score of blacks and Hispanics and not giving those 20 points to whites would, on its face, not be consistent with the President’s policy. You’re saying it might be?
MR. FLEISCHER: Bill, it’s under review and we’ll know when the review is complete.
What’s “diversity…for all”? Everyone get’s to have some diversity?
I will now channel sam heldman: “This is my new website, ignatz, and i hope to be respectful of others and i hope folks will take my comments in the kind spirit they are offered. oh, and here’s a list of people you should consider racists and fascists. hate them. let’s keep them from taking over the world and pass on any dirt we can find. here’s about 20 links to other little websites that deal in character assassination and unsubstantiated baloney. but why or why can’t the rightwingers just be civil in their discourse? something about them. i know they don’t believe it, be we know they are evil. but i love you all and dig alt bluegrass the most.”
I don’t understand the above anonymous comment, and so started to delete it … and may still. Meanwhile, let me state that ad hominem attacks or personal invective are not appropriate or welcome here.
i think the point of the sam heldman post is that heldman and others he promotes on his site (and who promote him, e.g., atrios) have taken to splashing desperate slurs on their sites, suggesting that any political opponent of theirs is a racist. this after heldman started out his site with a disingenuous disclaimer indicating that he believed in civility and would try to be respectful of other points of view. the term “mccarthyism” may be overused, but i don’t know what else to call the race-baiting engaged in by heldman, atrios, nathan newman, pandagon, and various other denizens of the left-blog demimonde. it is extremely frustrating to see these folks blithely tossing about allegations of racisim while they pretend to be engaging in civil discourse. that’s my view, anyway.
I would agree that too many lefties believe that anyone who disagrees with them is a racist, but Sam Heldman does not seem to me to be one of them. Although I tend to disagree with him on a number of issues I have found his arguments thoughtful and his manner civil.
Well, let me say that I respect your opinion on this and other subjects, and I agree that Heldman usually affects a tone of civility, but I see him more and more frequently joining in with the mean Left’s dirty trashing-machine tactics. I have little doubt, based on his recent postings, that he will post any anti-Pickering smear that “comes across his desk.” In addition, he has tried to suggest that Trent Lott’s retro views are typical of GOPers in general and Southerners in particular. He has also cranked up the get-Frist smears. Witness the following Heldman post regarding Frist’s old invocation of Marion Barry. (I don’t know who Heldman’s drinking buddies were, but I think his take on their amusement with Barry says more about his [Heldman’s] smug sense of self-superiority than it does about his friends’ supposed hidden racist agenda.) Heldman’s post re Frist was as follows: