Do we really need "a stronger America?"

Maybe it's because I'm just back from two weeks vacationing in Canada, where people are harboring far fewer illusions about the messes America is in. Maybe I'm just sensitized.

But I can't be the only person put off by the tag line we're now seeing on John Kerry's bumper stickers and lawn signs. It reads: "Kerry/Edwards. A stronger America."

A stronger America? A stronger America? The last thing this country or this world needs is a stronger America. I can think of a lot of other things I'd like to see first. How about a smarter America? Or a wiser America? Heck, I'd settle for a saner America. One with more moral courage. A fairer America. More equitable. Less arrogant. Less obsessed with materialism. More just, more committed to democracy and peace, less prone to violence. I'd even settle for an America that doesn't embarrass me when I travel elsewhere in the world.

America doesn't need more strength. It's got too much already. We're too muscle-bound for our own good. All our guns and material goods are making us stupid and lazy when it comes to solving our problems. We use only hammers, and therefore see all problems as nails. But there's a lot of things hammers can't do. A strong dose of humility, and a wider selection of tools, would do us a lot of good.

So would a president that doesn't see our problems as stemming from a lack of strength.

There's only ten weeks to go. At this advanced date, the Kerry campaign seems just a little off. All Kerry needs to be is passable, a better alternative than a president widely regarded as incompetent or worse.

A presidential campaign is not about issues or ideas. It's a marketing campaign, a year-long effort to sell us one of two main competing products. John Kerry needs to establish himself as an acceptable brand, better than brand Bush.

So far, he's not doing a very good job. His endless qualifications on his Iraq stance don't play well next to George Bush's certitude. Even though Dubya's certitude about why we should have invaded in the first place shifted constantly for two years, it's Kerry who's getting the rap for flip-flopping. As for the Bush flips that got us into this mess, Kerry has all but dropped that issue.

Strength isn't George Bush's weak point. Competence is. The campaign branding process is also about branding the opponent. Bush has had no qualms about branding Kerry as too liberal, as indecisive, as weak.

What the Democrats are doing here is playing Bush's game: insisting that they're not weak, that they'll make America stronger. That's a losing response. Kerry needs to be about competence, not strength, and he needs to brand Bush for what he is: a president who has had a remarkable record of ineptness in nearly every major policy initiative he's taken in four years. Iraq has been a disaster. He's managed to alienate allies with his foreign policy, tarnishing America's image in the world, punting our claims to moral leadership. The tax cuts only helped the rich, not the economy. Decent-paying jobs are still disappearing, not keeping up with population growth. Corporate corruption is still flourishing. Bush's deficit spending has left the federal budget a smoldering ruin.

These are the ways in which Bush's presidency should be defined. And then Kerry should be presented as the alternative who would do a better, more competent job. After all, that's what we supposedly want in a chief executive.

Instead, Kerry is on the defensive, and this might explain why there's so little real enthusiasm for his campaign. That's not to say he won't win--there weren't a lot of true believers in Al Gore, either, and he still won the popular vote in 2000. And Kerry has the advantage over Gore of being able to point to four years of George Bush's record. It's not good.

The policy differences between John Kerry and George Bush are substantial. But that's not where the race will be won or lost. It will turn on what people think of the prospect of another four years or George Bush. And what they've thought of the last four.

So far, Kerry and his handlers don't seem to understand why people might not want Brand Bush. The issue isn't strength. It's wisdom. John Kerry needs to tell us he has a head on his shoulders.

And that his opponent doesn't.