No, I clearly see it. I just don't ignore it or or sugar coat it. It is what it is - the color of your skin is a factor in gaining admission.
(I use the term "affirmative action" to refer to the class composition goals.)
Correct me if I am wrong... but the whole idea about affirmative action is not, IN THEORY, to give people preference due to their skin color, but rather the person's BACKGROUND. In THEORY, a hispanic would have a different background than an african american, which would have a different background than a caucasian, which would have a different background than a native american, and so on.
I've seen arguments that the THEORY is good but, in practice, it may not really work that way - I think I read SOMEWHERE (don't remember where, don't know if it was true, etc) about how minority students who make use of affirmative action are in fact not so different (background-wise) from those non-minority students who can't make use of it (they attend similar schools, parents have similar jobs, etc). This is beyond the point... WP should decide whether it is still advantageous to have class composition goals or not.
Anyways... the whole idea is to get all these different people with different backgrounds and put in the same place - in this case, WP - to try to get something nice out of the mix (and other reasons in the Officer Corps). IN MY OPINION: for SOME reason, they decided to use skin color as a factor to differentiate people's backgrounds.
I believe it is the same idea as the nominations - they serve, among other things, to provide the Service Academies with some nice geographical mix. Besides using where the candidate LIVES, they use what the candidate considers his/her skin color as well. They also like getting soldiers into the SAs. Why? They have a different background... I see that as SOMEWHAT the same idea behind the minority outreach program.
I have always imagined the Service Academies as being institutions where "the best of the best" attend.
So maybe some candidates are not "the best of the best"... but the idea of Service Academies (and colleges in general) is NOT to educate "the best of the best". There are SO MANY other goals... And the idea of "the best of the best" is very, VERY relative, in my opinion. One is not "better" than the other because they do better in school and sports and whatnot. Each single person has something to offer to the world... WP's Admissions Committee sets some requirements to attend the USMA (because, even though every person is great in some way or the other, that won't make them a good Officer, necessarily). However, I believe they understand that there are SO MANY other things that go beyond what can be objectively analyzed. For some reasons, they use skin color for it. They also use geographical location.
One person is NOT better than the other - they are DIFFERENT. They may be better in SOME aspects - and some of those aspects ARE considered in the admissions process. But not all of them... it's impossible to do so.
Can class-composition goals be somewhat "unfair"? Of course they can, depending on the perspective. But I don't believe that is the intention. As with everything ELSE in this world, this works well on one hand, and awfully on the other. I don't think a perfect system will ever be found. But meanwhile, I believe we should understand the idea instead of simply shooting it down.