I must be seriously out of touch with mainstream populist views these days. The attack ads against a candidate seem to have the reverse effect on me; I end up liking the candidate more.

George Bush’s ads attack Kerry for wanting to lower social security benefits but HEY! that’s a good thing. As people live longer and live better into old age they can be more productive and they should rely less on social security to provide for them. After all how is the AARP selling to us that geezers in their 90s can be productive and active in society while still lobbying that young’uns only 65 need a government handout? Lowering benefits and raising the age are great ways to help SS stay solvent, and will decrease the burden on people working. The saved money could be used to fund Ws favorite pastime tax cuts for the rich!

The second attack that I remember was that Kerry voted to raise the gas tax in order to get people to drive less. Now that’s not a great idea during a recession or a tenuous recovery but I’m assuming this vote took place during the 90s when gas was like 90 cents a gallon. Not such a bad idea, discourages SUV ownership, encourages fuel efficient cars, helps the environment and wouldn’t have hurt the booming 90s economy. I don’t like the regressiveness of this tax but it could be used to give tax breaks to the poor and to businesses that use a lot of gasoline. It’s not some perfect solution but it sure sounds smart coming from ‘the enemy’.

Kerry attacks Bush for saying that outsourcing is good for the economy, WHICH IT IS. So Kerry’s economic advisor essentially disagrees with the total sum of all economic theory? Caveman economist say; Global economy bad, Protectionism good. Sure we don’t want to give special tax breaks for companies to move or hire abroad but that’s just stupid. Kerry’s talking out his ass on this one, telling ghosts in Flint MI and Gary IN that he can resurrect them.

Kerry’s attack that Bush didn’t beg the UN enough crap doesn’t fly with me either. C’mon, the UN and plenty of left Europe wants this Bush presidency to be seen as a failure only slightly less so than Osama Bin Laden. The UN didn’t want any part of this, France and Russia didn’t want to end the oil-for-bribes program and they sure weren’t going to do it for some right-wing religious nut, Bush.

Anyway, I’m starting to think that Bush and then Kerry presidencies would complement each other well. Bush took strong military action in Afghanistan and then Iraq, showed that we could win with even a small force of troops, showed that we weren’t afraid to fight back and put teeth in US policy against Osama and Saddam.

But now he’s stuck there a bit

Kerry would get more world support and be able to focus on getting out of Iraq. Kerry could negotiate with North Korea without looking like we’re giving in, and introduce a new Kyoto-like agreement that’s more favorable to the US. Maybe Bush gets the blame and Kerry gets the accolades but bad cop/good cop works very well together…