Thomas Backers Adopting Policy of Instant Rebuttals : Judiciary: Strategists see nominations to the Supreme Court as political campaigns. They move quickly to fight potentially explosive charges.

When foes of Supreme Court nominee Clarence Thomas charged that he once had kept a Confederate flag on his desk--an indication that he was out of touch with his black roots--his Senate champions immediately leaped to his defense.

Sen. John C. Danforth (R-Mo.) said that the emblem is the flag of Thomas’ home state of Georgia, which includes a modified Stars and Bars. The judge kept the flag as a reminder of the legacy of the slaveholding Old South, not as an expression of sympathy for the Confederacy, the senator said.

The quick counterattack prevented the flag issue from becoming ammunition for the critics. And the episode is a small example of the strategy adopted by White House and Senate champions of Thomas. It is a policy of instant rebuttals of any information that might adversely affect his chances of confirmation.

The Thomas camp reasons that Supreme Court nominations now have become much like political campaigns--as evidenced by the successful effort to stop U.S. Judge Robert H. Bork from moving up to the high court in 1987--and must be fought the same way as a tough election contest.

“If there’s a charge out there, you’ve got to respond,” explained an aide to a senator in the Thomas camp. “If you get hit, don’t let it hang out there.”

Another example of countering a potentially explosive charge was Danforth’s swift reaction to a report that Thomas had said in 1983 that he admired Louis Farrakhan, leader of the Nation of Islam, who has made anti-Semitic and anti-white remarks.

Within hours after the report was published in the Dallas Times-Herald, Danforth issued a statement by Thomas indicating that he admired Farrakhan’s self-help philosophy but that he always has opposed bigotry and racism.

White House media managers then arranged for a photo session with Vice President Dan Quayle so Thomas could distance himself further from Farrakhan in front of television cameras while the vice president lashed out at the Congressional Black Caucus for declaring its opposition to the nomination.

The same approach has been taken by Danforth in dealing with the Senate. The respected Missourian, who gave Thomas his first job out of Yale Law School in 1974, has accompanied his former protege on visits to 26 senators--more than a quarter of the Senate--and intends to make more such calls before Congress takes its August break. Normally, nominees to the high court pay courtesy calls only on the 14 members of the Senate Judiciary Committee.

“Sen. Danforth knows that Judge Thomas is Judge Thomas’ best advocate,” said a spokesman for the senator. “The more the Senate knows him, the better Judge Thomas will be regarded.”

In addition, Danforth and other Republican senators have used the Senate floor to rebut criticism of Thomas and to deplore personal attacks on the 43-year-old judge of the U.S. Court of Appeals here.

While Danforth plays an inside role in the Senate on the nomination, President Bush has put former White House official and Washington lobbyist Kenneth M. Duberstein in charge of overall strategy.

Duberstein played a similar role for David H. Souter during his relatively smooth confirmation proceedings earlier in the Bush Administration but everyone expects a far tougher--and nastier--struggle for Thomas’ nomination.

When the Congressional Black Caucus called a news conference to explain its opposition to Thomas, his supporters arranged competing news events by Rep. Gary Franks (R-Conn.), the only black Republican in Congress, and a group of black conservatives, to endorse him.

In addition to the Black Caucus, Thomas has been under attack from women’s organizations, senior citizen groups and Latino representatives for the way he ran the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission for eight years. Abortion rights advocates also regard him as a sure anti-abortion vote if he is confirmed.

In Atlanta, National Urban League President John E. Jacob expressed frustration, resignation and a bit of black pride recently in discussing the nomination of Thomas--whose hard work helped him overcome a background of poverty and discrimination.

“It’s a helluva dilemma,” Jacob said before the recent Urban League convention. While he opposes Thomas’ ideology and reserves the right to criticize him, Jacob said, the League will be neutral while the Senate considers his nomination.

“I’m also pragmatic enough to recognize, if not Clarence Thomas, who?” Jacob added. “There’s no question that I’d like to have an African-American on that court, even if he’s not (my ideological choice).”

But he suggested that the Thomas fight might prove to be a valuable lesson in affirmative action.

“When you had one vacant (Supreme Court) seat to fill and you select an African-American, it is not because you’ve run out of smart white boys,” Jacob said.

Staff writer Lee May contributed to this story from Atlanta.