The New York Times tells us Former President Bush Backs McCain in “a President’s Day endorsement.”

George High Wire Bush called McCain “the best candidate to lead the country.” He dismissed the conservative criticism of McCain's candidacy as “absurd.” But don’t worry, the evangelicals feathers won’ be too ruffled. Junior will be there to soothe evangelical fund-raising pockets across the country, in important races for House and Senate, like Idaho and Kansas, not critical destinations for the nominee, but votes he could certainly use.

Poppy reminded us at his news conference that “[McCain’s] character was forged in the crucible of war.” The senior Bush said this at a news conference with McCain, and their wives, in an airplane hangar, perhaps reflecting on his own son who flew the coop on the Texas Air National Guard back when.

As to McCain, Poppy added, “His commitment to America is beyond any doubt. But most importantly, he has the right values and experience to guide our nation forward at this historic moment. And so I’m very proud to endorse John McCain for the presidency of the United States of America.”

In fact, “Mr. Bush wore a blue necktie with a pattern of little aircraft carriers running across it, and Mr. McCain noted that he and the former president had two things in common. ‘One is that we were both naval aviators, and the other is that we were both shot down,’ he said."

But perhaps Mr. McCain was not aware of that ugly tale from airmen at that WW II scene when Poppy, the pilot, parachuted from his hit Avenger torpedo bomber into the water. The plane was built to land on water, but Bush did not choose that option. So the plane spiraled out of control and crashed. The two-man crew who did not have parachutes went to sleep with the fishes. Poppy went back to the carrier to write home to mom, upset.

Here’s the full story: George Bush Parachutes Again To Exorcise Demons of Past Betrayal. In the words of Chester Mierzejewski, an old Bush war buddy who was about 100 feet away in another plane, "I think he [Bush] could have saved those lives, if they were alive. I don't know that they were, but at least they had a chance if he had attempted a water landing."

Perhaps Mr. McCain wasn’t aware of this incident, which is why he said, “I’d be honored to have President George Bush’s support, his endorsement, I’d be honored to be anywhere with him under any circumstances.” Well, what you don’t know won’t hurt you, sometimes, though what you do know, if you’re not careful, can return to haunt you. That brings us to Junior.

The NYT tells us McCain Facing Delicate Choice: A role for Bush. That is, to look for Junior on the daises at big time Republican fund-raising dinners. After all, Junior spearheaded a $273 million fundraising drive in 2004, along with his fellow scooper Mercer Reynolds. Yet they want John McCain to “shine in the sun alone,” that is, without the baggage of Junior’s all-time low 30 percent approval rating among Americans. But then, he is president and Republican, and you have to stand by your man, and he you.

After all, Reagan showed up at a bash or two for George H.W. Bush when he ran for president, despite the fact that he might not have appreciated that assassination attempt by the son of one of Bush's closest friends, John Hinckley Sr. The two families were as close as pigs in a poke down home in Texas, pumping oil profits for the high life. It is strange how Neil Bush and Scott Hinckley, brother to Hinckley, Jr., had dinner the night before that shoot-out at the Washington Hilton Hotel, and how NBC correspondent Judy Woodruff noticed a Secret Service man on the hotel’s marquee shooting in the direction of the felled Reagan.

I suppose all’s fair in love and war, and then some in politics, especially if you then have to wait seven more years to be president -- which brings me to my main reminiscence. That would be back in 2000.

The Boston Globe tells us in The anatomy of a smear campaign, “In South Carolina, Bush Republicans were facing an opponent who was popular for his straight talk and Vietnam war record. They knew that if McCain won in South Carolina, he would likely win the nomination. With few substantive differences between Bush and McCain, the campaign was bound to turn personal. The situation was ripe for a smear.

“It didn't take much research to turn up a seemingly innocuous fact about the McCains: John and his wife, Cindy, have an adopted daughter named Bridget. Cindy found Bridget at Mother Theresa's orphanage in Bangladesh, brought her to the United States for medical treatment, and the family ultimately adopted her. Bridget has dark skin.

“Anonymous opponents used ‘push polling’ to suggest that McCain's Bangladeshi born daughter was his own, illegitimate black child. In push polling, a voter gets a call, ostensibly from a polling company, asking which candidate the voter supports. In this case, if the ‘pollster’ determined that the person was a McCain supporter, he made statements designed to create doubt about the senator.

“Thus, the ‘pollsters’ asked McCain supporters if they would be more or less likely to vote for McCain if they knew he had fathered an illegitimate child who was black. In the conservative, race-conscious South, that's not a minor charge. We had no idea who made the phone calls, who paid for them, or how many calls were made. Effective and anonymous: the perfect smear campaign.” Well, there you have it, but . . .

“Some aspects of this smear were hardly so subtle. Bob Jones University professor Richard Hand sent an e-mail to ‘fellow South Carolinians’ stating that McCain had ‘chosen to sire children without marriage.’” That’s not too subtle at all. “It didn't take long for mainstream media to carry the charge.

“CNN interviewed Hand and put him on the spot: ‘Professor, you say that this man had children out of wedlock. He did not have children out of wedlock.’ Hand replied, ‘Wait a minute, that's a universal negative. Can you prove that there aren't any?”

Well, that’s universal bullshit, but nevertheless it stuck.

As the Globe tells us . . ."Campaigns have various ways of dealing with smears. They can refute the lies, or they can ignore them and run the risk of the smear spreading. But ‘if you're responding, you're losing.’ Rebutting tawdry attacks focuses public attention on them, and prevents the campaign from talking issues.”

But McCain chose “to address the attacks by trying to get the media to focus on the dishonesty of the allegations and to find out who was making them.” He made a pledge “to raise the level of debate by refusing to run any further negative ads” -- a promise that was kept, though it probably cost McCain the race. McCain & Company never did find out who perpetrated these smears, but they worked: they lost South Carolina by a wide margin. So it went. So, with friends like these who needs enemies?

Paul Joseph Watson at Prison Planet reports on this story: Top Cop Says McCain Was Never Tortured. The subhead adds, “Former Vietnam vet with top secret clearance [says] Republican frontrunner is a ‘lying skunk.’” I don’t know if I give this piece as much credence as the GHBW one. Nevertheless, here it is for your smearing pleasure.

Bottom line, McCain seems a bit between a rock and a hard place with this double-barreled endorsement. On one hand, it may bolster his popularity with various shades of Republicans. On the other hand, you don’t want to cross either of these guy’s suggestions or advice or you might wind up in the shade for good.

As they say, politics make for strange bedfellows, and one kiss by McCain on Bush’s cheek in 2004 at a campaign stop in Florida may have soothed all that. But then, as the old radio Shadow used to say, “who knows what evil lurks in the hearts of men,” especially these vultures. In any case, sleep tight, John, and may the best man win, though probably the worst man or woman will. For sure, it’ll be interesting, if not honest and/or thoroughly orchestrated by the puppeteers on high, who somehow seem to be pulling the strings of our lives one more time.