So Terry Neal of the WaPo tells us that "There's a lot of talk this week in Washington" about the "concerning" problem of the lily-white Kerry campaign, and how they'd better get a swift color-injection "before a damaging perception is created among Democratic voters."

Weird thing is, aside from the "lot of talk" about the "damaging perception," it's damn hard to find mention of any actual person who has showed "signs of concern."

In the last couple of weeks, several news reports have examined this subject, beginning with CNN’s Carlos Watson, who wrote on CNN.com recently that "this year President Bush may argue that his administration is more diverse at senior levels than John Kerry's would be."

Although it's unclear whether or not "CNN’s Carlos Watson" is a minority--and thus counts as someone showing "signs of concern"--it is clear what the response to this "argument" would be, were it to be made: "BRING IT ON" (followed up by an enormous bag of horseshit hurled in the direction of Condoleezza Rice).

Last weekend, The Washington Post's Colbert I. King wrote in his column that Kerry "has an innermost circle of advisers that is practically as white as the driven snow."

That's a keen perception on the part of Colbert I. King--except that Neal's article is filled with instances of senior members of the Kerry campaign--black senior members--calling Neal to correct this "perception."

The Associated Press also moved a story on the wires Thursday about the perceived lack of color at the top of the Kerry campaign.

Once again--"perceived"--but by whom? Don't you need to answer the "by whom" to know whether anyone should possibly give two shits about the "perception"? So finally Neal gives us two concrete instances:

The AP story quoted, among others, Rep. Jesse L. Jackson Jr. (D-Ill.) saying: "I am concerned about diversity, but more importantly I am concerned about the experience in that diversity -- senior policy people who know people from one end of the country to the other...The senator should remedy this very quickly."

OK, fine--Rep. Jesse L. Jackson Jr. (D-Ill.) is "concerned." And--

Raul Yzaguirre, president of the National Council of La Raza, sent a letter to Kerry chastising him for having few Latinos in senior positions and relegating most to "outreach" roles.

Indeed--Raul Yzaguirre, president of the National Council of La Raza, is "concerned"--or at least concerned enough to "chasten" Kerry.

So maybe the title of this article should have been "Jackson and Yzaguirre Show Signs of Concern."

One might also recall that Al Gore's 2000 campaign was a shitty fucking campaign. Not because of or despite the fact that Gore had a prominent black campaign manager--but simply because it was a shitty fucking campaign.

Still, Donna Brazile is left with the only valid point in this entire worthless article:

"This is not a question of how many people are in the room, on the phone calls or on the bus," she said. "The issue is, what is the plan to inspire, motivate and turn out record numbers of Democratic voters in the fall. And the plan must have the significant input and support of those whose votes are needed to ensure a Democratic victory this fall."

Indeed. How about going out into the country and asking black and Latino voters what they think of George Bush and whether or not they plan to vote for John Kerry? Are these puffed-up chatterbox "signs of concern" at all relevant to what's really happening on the ground--the biggest and most intense get-out-the-vote effort in black and Latino communities, like, ever? Does Neal quote anybody who actually speaks to, and hears from, these communities?

As Neal himself says, "Whatever."