The upside to this economic downturn or "Obama recession" as Rush Limbaugh calls it is that the price of imported commodities, especially petroleum are falling like a rock. For me, even more important, the price of cocoa beans are dropping fast too. In June, #1 cocoa beans were $3,000 a ton. Now they are $2,200. I spend a lot more on cocoa beans than gasoline, but I think for most Americans, its may be the other way around.

Notice the 80s were also economic hedonism but not the 90s.
Hmmmm, what similarity is there between the 80s and the 00s but not the 90s?

Your proposition is, I believe, correct - which disturbs me, because it tracks precisely with how the public viewed the stick market and broader economy after the 1929 crash. FDR certainly leveraged economic puritanism to get elected.

Pray God that Obama doesn't go down FDR's road, though you and I already know he's planning to.

"Stock" market. Whatever.

If everyone were honest and used the words they actually mean, then you might be on to something, Eric. Certainly, the admonishment against conspicuous consumption backs this up.

But I don't believe it. "Greed" is just a buzz word that doesn't capture how they really feel. The real word is "envy", and, among the dumber elements of the rich, "guilt". But not guilt over being rich, exactly. Rather, guilt over being seen to have betrayed their "authentic" roots and railing against money is a way they can reconnect with the authentic people without actually doing anything or costing themselves anything.

Greetings:

From Tuscon to Tucumcari, Tehachapi to Tonapah,
I've driven every kind of rig that's ever been made,
Driving the back roads, so I wouldn't get weighed,

Greetings:

"From Tuscon to Tucumcari, Tehachapi to Tonapah,
I've driven every kind of rig that's ever been made,
Driving the back roads, so I wouldn't get weighed,"

So, there really is a Tucumcari!

My faith in this nation is at an all time low, and going lower as I read more and more bloggers trying to apply more and more labels to the voting public. Your sleight of hand with words, eric, did nothing to make me feel any better.

The fact that so many people are feeling prouder than they've ever been about their country, in a Michelle Obama, "I've not been proud of my country before" kinda way, is honestly giving me a very unpleasant "out of body" experience.

Wealth creation has always been a cornerstone of our country's success, not conspicuous comsumption, although there is nothing wrong with that, at least to my mind, assuming you have the money to pay for what you buy. Therein lay the rub. We have become a country of conspicuous borrowers and unscrupulous lenders, and all this on top of what was already a CRAZY high number of people who already live off the "goodwill" of government programs and subsidies or those who sued their way to some other sense of get-even "equality".

Something is drastically wrong in my country, and I am feeling, at turns, sadder and madder than I have ever been.

To heighten my nostalgia level, eric, is blogging from Tukumcari? Now that is just "rich"!

I think you're on to something, Eric.

People were told in the '70s that casual sex had no consequences. It was all in the name of fun. The old fuddy-duddy rules of morality did not apply. The '80s, with herpes and AIDS, showed there were still consequences.

Fast forward to the early '00s. People were told that you could buy houses -- even multiple houses per family -- and pay for them simply with the ever-increasing value of the house. Real estate prices only go up! No money down! No credit needed! Ooooops. Turns out there were consequences.

Both stem from the belief that there would no longer be consequences to actions where, in the past, the consequences were obvious. It was a new world! Turns out: not so much.

I can see how a doctrinaire liberal could come across as the bigger scold. I also see how you could conclude that the average voter perceived Obama as the conservative. After all, more people were convinced that Obama was planning on cutting their taxes.

Obama sold a bigger lie (that he could cut taxes, balance the budget, and raise spending through the roof, simultaneously, simply by moving US troops out of Iraq and into Afghanistan, Pakistan and Darfur) much much better than McCain could sell a small lie.

Eric,

I have seen reports that Obama was perceived as more economically conservative.

RH,

The 60's was not our first sexual "revolution".

The first that I know about was the 1920s.

The cause in both cases was not some propaganda campaign (that was merely rationalization). The cause was Demographics.

Specifically a shortage of men. It is not clear to me why we dodged that bullet in the late 40s.

"Is it possible that (at least in economic terms) Obama was seen as the more conservative of the two candidates?"

It is interesting that Mr. Obama ran on a campaign of supposed tax cuts (for those making less than $102k/yr anyway). Given how Mr. Obama was able to outspend Mr. McCain by 2 or 3 to 1, he was able to get his tax cutting message out more. So I think, yes, in some respects he was perceived as more conservative.

What a post card! I live in England and love the English countryside (green!), but one thing I never see is a wide, long, straight road.