Obama and McCain recently offered distinct definitions of patriotism.  McCain said it means doing what's best for your country no matter what.  Obama said it means having faith in one another as Americans.

Many here are aware of a long-running survey question that has been asked using identical wording and offering identical answer choices going back to at least the early 1960s: "How much of the time do you think you can trust the government in Washington to do what is right--just about always, most of the time, or only some of the time?" (prefaced by instructions asking the respondent to think about government in general)

Forty-five years ago or so, something like 60-65 percent of respondents said either all or most of the time they trusted the government to do the right thing.  With short-term fluctations such as just after 9/11 (64% answered just about always or most of the time on 9/25/01-9/27/01), that figure has plummeted to where far less than half of respondents give either of those replies.

I am wondering if a parallel question, along the lines of the following, has been asked in any reputable survey going back many years: "Do you trust a typical fellow American citizen to do the right thing just about always, most of the time, or only some of the time?" 

If any of you reading this are aware of such a question and data collected on the responses over the years I'd be interested and appreciative if you could share that information.

I would like to be able to look at a graphic overlay of the responses over the decades to these two questions to see whether they tend to move in parallel or not.

Social trust is of course vitally important for the health of our country, and for the success of a progressive political agenda.  I find Obama's choice to make this the focus of his definition of patriotism interesting in that McCain went for the abstract definition while Obama gave a more interpersonal definition. 

I suspect more Americans would find McCain's definition familiar and comfortable.  Not sure who, in addition to one of my college professors, said it's a whole lot easier to love one's country than it is to love an individual human being, warts and all. 

But that outlook may be pertinent in how many Americans today think about the idea of patriotism and what it means.  To the extent Obama means to move patriotism away from the realm of comfortable, currently undemanding and too often cheap abstraction, and make it both more real and more demanding, that seems to me all to the good.

While I think Frank Rich is a bit overstated in his worries about the "complacency" of the early-summer Obama (as well as McCain--I don't think McCain is clued into reality enough to merit the charge of being "complacent": "complacent" compared to what?) campaigns, his column yesterday <a href = "http://www.nytimes.com/2008/07/06/opinion/06rich.html?_r=1&scp=1&sq=Frank%20Rich%20Wall-E%20for%20President&st=cse&oref=slogin">"Wall-E for President"</a> is otherwise worth the read. 

I saw it Saturday with our 10 year old son.  I would say it isn't "just" an exceptional "kid" movie but an exceptional movie, period. 

Especially for us adults, because we have to act now in order for the next generation even to have a chance.  They won't be able to avoid hearing all about the environment and energy issues even if they might want to.  For those, adults and kids, for whom "An Inconvenient Truth" is still a little too left-brain oriented, scary, or bleak, this is a worthy alternative.

Also, between the angst created by gas prices and the growing awareness about global warming, you know the public mood has changed when Exxon runs TV ads featuring two of its late-career scientists talking into the camera about the groundbreaking research they are doing on alternative technologies.