Skewed again!

The New York Times did an analysis of hiring for top White House positions in the Obama administration and found that it "skews male."

The skew was widespread: male appointees under Mr. Obama outnumbered female appointees at 11 of the 15 federal departments, for instance. It occurred at all levels of government service, from the highest-level advisers on down. In some cases, the skew was also deep. At the Departments of Justice, Defense, Veterans Affairs and Energy, male appointees outnumbered female appointees by about two to one.

Pardon me for being nitpicky but "widespread" and "deep" sounds like more than a "skew." Help, help, I've been deeply skewed!

I love this reaction:

White House Press Secretary Jay Carney said that “diversity is important,” but defended President Obama from the suggestion that he isn’t appointing enough women to his cabinet by noting that expertise is the most important factor.

“The President does believe that diversity is very important and he also believes that picking the absolute right person for each job is very important,” Carney told CNN’s Brianna Keilar during the White House press briefing.

All righty then, the "absolute right person for the job." What a concept! Say, haven't I heard that somewhere before? These people never did quite grasp that "best people for the job" and "diversity" are often mutually exclusive goals. If your goal is diversity, you may or may not get the best. If your goal is diversity, yor staff may or may not be diverse. Even when they're violating their own preachings, they don't get it.