« McCain's Econ homework & the Obama corps | Main | The Dog Ate My Homework »

Should be a lively scene in Exeter today as presump GOP presidential poobah John McCain returns to New Hampshire to say thanks. He will be greeted by the cheers of supporters -- and jeers from all sorts of folks who oppose McCain on a number of issues (Iraq and no economic policy beyond a fetish for tax cuts to name a few) that remind them of, well, George Bush.

In my daily link, Juan Cole in Salon counts the ways that McCain, knowingly or not, looks to be running for a third Bush term. Judge for yourself here.

Meanwhile the NH Dem Party wants to join McCain and Sen. John Sununu (who just happens to running for reelction) at the hip. They offered this touching portrait in a release (titled: Here's What 100 Years in Iraq Looks Like) sent out a few minutes ago (Wed, 11: 14 a.m.):
"While a clear majority of Granite Staters oppose McCain's plan to continue the Iraq war for the next century, he will find a supporter in Senator John E. Sununu, who is one of the most loyal supporters of the war and the estimated $12 billion a month that the U.S. is spending in Iraq... As McCain and Sununu spend billions in Iraq, Americans pay the price. Unemployment is up, job growth is stagnant, the housing market is in crisis, and energy costs are at an all-time high. If New Hampshire voters want a new direction, they will reject McCain-Sununu and 100 years in Iraq this November."

Dems find love and happiness -- not!
Ok, so Obama wins Mississippi handily and the delegate math doesn't look good (again) for Clinton and for our sins we have the pleasure of six weeks of watching a Waterloo-type showdown that may or may not prove decisive in Pennsylvania. At times this grudge match feels like one of those reality tv shows or professional wrestling exhibitions.
Here are a few examples of the intense backroom brawling:
Yesterday, the Clinton folks sent out this release of Hillary attacking Obama on energy policy --
"Today my opponent is here in Pennsylvania talking about energy policy and I think specifically talking about wind energy and that’s great. Except in 2005, when we had a chance to say no to Dick Cheney and his Energy Bill, my opponent said yes and voted for it with all of those tax subsidies and give-aways that have been used by the oil companies and others to retard the development of clean, renewable energy. Really, when you think about what we have to do, it’s not going to happen just by asking people. It’s not going to happen just by saying, “Don’t we all agree?” We’re going to have to fight to make the changes against the special interests that dominate Washington. When it counted, I said no, he said yes."

Gotta love the mention of Obama and his 'cousin' Dick Cheney in the same breadth. Alas, according to the Obama folks, Hillary should have done some fact checking.
“Proving once again that she will say and do anything to win this election, Senator Clinton today has unleashed a kitchen sink of distorted and discredited attacks that she knows aren't true.
“Barack Obama isn't about to be lectured on words from someone who's actions spoke much louder when she voted against renewable fuels and higher CAFÉ standards until she started running for President, championed NAFTA as good for America until she started running for President, and supported George Bush's disastrous war in Iraq until she started running for President.
“The fact is, the energy bill that Senator Clinton is using to score cheap political points actually raised taxes on oil companies and made the largest investment in renewable energy in our nation's history, including the tax credit that's kept the wind industry afloat and helped create jobs like the ones at the plant Barack Obama is visiting today. If Senator Clinton wants to have an honest debate about why she voted against that bill, we're happy to have it, but she owes the voters of Pennsylvania more than same old attack politics that Americans have already rejected across the country,” said Obama campaign spokesman Bill Burton.

And of course there is Clinton supporter Geraldine Ferraro to really stir things up: She had the insight to observe that Obama was a novelty candidate, a "concept" that was selling only because he was black (and reject criticism of her as reverse racism). This was a variation of the rich, latte drinking and Volvo driving generalization of Obama's support which Clinton surrogates have spread and of course according to Ferraro logic this mean there must be an outbreak of white guilt that has put Obama in the lead in every category except, you got it, being unable to cross the "commander in chief" threshold exam so helpfully set up by the Clintons. It's no wonder that even Nancy Pelosi said that a "dream ticket" was unlikely -- too much scorched earth and too many burned bridges.

Of course, Obama proved equally inept yesterday when he brought up the kitchen sink and that inane nonsense about wearing traditional African garb. If you can't mount a better counter attack than that, then perhaps its best to go back to the drawing board.

By the end of this Pennsylvania stretch run, it could be that voters (and the media hordes) will want to eject both of them from Survivor island.