Fox anchor Brit Hume took a creative approach this weekend to defending President Bush’s embattled U.N. nominee John Bolton. Here he is responding to the news that 59 former U.S. diplomats, including many conservatives, signed a letter condemning Bolton:

WILLIAMS: What about the 60 diplomats, including many Republicans, who have sent a letter to the Senate committee, saying we think it’s a mistake to approve John Bolton. That was based entirely on his views on the U.N.

HUME: I would hope that they would be — frankly, if I were the president and I was trying to get my foreign policy accepted, adopted, or imposed, if necessary, on the State Department, and I had someone for the U.N., I would hope there would be at least 60 diplomats and maybe many more who would find him an unattractive candidate.

See, by Hume’s logic, all you have to do to be a good candidate for the Bush administration is be considered “unattractive” by at least 60 bipartisan well-qualified observers. You have to wonder, where was Brit when Bernie Kerik needed him?

Last week, Congress passed and President Bush signed legislation that will make it more difficult for average Americans suffering from financial misfortune to declare bankruptcy.

Today, the Wall Street Journal reports, “United Airlines and a federal pension insurer announced a settlement that would allow the airline to hand over its four underfunded pension plans to the government in the largest corporate-pension default in U.S. history.” The move, which still needs approval by a bankruptcy-court judge, would allow United Airlines to shed $9.8 billion of retirement applications, saving the company $645 million a year for the next five years.

As for United’s employees, they will “receive less than they had expected from the company” as a result of the settlement. The Association of Flight Attendants, representing 15,500 active workers and 5,100 retirees, said it is “morally criminal” for United to abandon its pension promises. It is planning a strike if the bankruptcy judge abrogates the contract.

The point isn’t so much that United Airlines should or should not be able to declare bankruptcy and slough off promised benefits – maybe that really is what’s necessary for the company to become a “competitive enterprise for the long term.” The bankruptcy judge will decide.

The point is UAL is dumping $9.8 billion in retirement obligations on the federal government – in other words, on taxpayers – so it can get on stable financial footing. Besides hurting taxpayers, UAL’s failure to meet its commitements will adversely affect UAL workers. And last week, President Bush signed legislation that will make it more difficult for those same workers to file for bankruptcy and receive the same privilege as United Airlines – that is, of being able to start over when faced with an unforeseen financial crisis.

In General, the legislation will make it harder and more expensive for millions of average Americans to be forgiven trifling sums – most of which would barely make a mark on the $30 million per year credit card industry profits.

During the debate over the bill, Americans were repeatedly accused – despite directly contradictory evidence – of “abusing bankruptcy laws.” We’ll see who speaks up about UAL’s “abuse.”

Sunday’s New York Times reported yet another piece of evidence that John Bolton, President Bush’s nominee for U.N. Ambassador, sought to bully and intimidate career intelligence officials into accepting his pre-conceived hard-line conclusions. The article cites recently declassified email exchanges between Bolton and one of his aides, in which the aide boasts of his efforts to bring intelligence officials in line with his boss’s view:

“I explained to [the career intelligence professional] that it was a political judgment as to how to interpret this data, and the [intelligence community] should do as we asked.”

Why is the White House willing to promote someone willing to so brazenly politicize intelligence?

- Andy Grotto

In their attack on those who would think twice on President Bush’s judicial nominees, Focus on the Family has targeted several senators by launching an ad campaign in the officials’ home states, “urging calls to U.S. senators in support of an up-or-down vote on President Bush’s judicial nominees.” Focus on the Family provides some of the statements these Senators made that they find objectionable. Apparently, the group has a problem with responsible deliberation:

Sen. Susan Collins (R-ME)
- “I am very concerned about the overuse of the filibuster,” said Sen. Susan Collins, a Maine Republican who said she remains undecided. “But I am also concerned that a rule change will further charge the partisan atmosphere to the point that we will not be able to conduct business.” – Washington Times 3/23/05.

Sen. Chuck Hagel (R-NE)
- Hagel spokesman Mike Buttry said his boss “wants to see how the debate plays out. He is very frustrated with the treatment of the judges,” Mr. Buttry said. “At the same time, he was here in the ’70s, when there was a Democrat in the White House and the filibuster was a very important tool for Republicans.” – Washington Times 3/23/05 Read more

DeForest Soaries, the first chairman of the Election Assistance Commission, has announced his resignation. As part of the Help America Vote Act of 2002, the Election Assistance Commission was created “to help states enact voting reforms.” Although Soaries “cited personal reasons” for his resignation, he had some scathing parting words:

All four of us had to work without staff, without offices, without resources. I don’t think our sense of personal obligation has been matched by a corresponding sense of commitment to real reform from the federal government.

This morning at 9:30, Senator Robert C. Byrd (D-WV), American Progress president and CEO John Podesta, and several other distinguished speakers will discuss Sen. Bill Frist’s plan to trigger the nuclear option and torpedo filibusters against President Bush’s most radical judicial nominees. Sen. Byrd has told us he plans to deliver a particularly meaningful address today — you can watch the event LIVE via streaming webcast here, or on C-SPAN2.

Feel free to use this thread to comment on the event while you watch.