One thing you hear a lot these days is how it’s a lot like those days of 60 years ago. America attacked by a sneaky, cowardly enemy; Americans unite in determined, courageous response.

To a considerable degree, this comparison rings true. Just as in those dark days after Pearl Harbor, there is renewed appreciation for those precious things that make this country a target for attacks by tyrants and madmen. Families draw closer, charitable giving soars, helping hands extend in every direction; pitching in becomes the new national pastime. The level of cooperation and bipartisanship is so high in Congress right now it almost makes one wish the Maine Legislature was in session as well.

The are lapses, of course. After a good half century of looking out for No. 1, it is understandable that some among us would have a tough time catching on to this unity thing. Some, however, aren’t even trying.

My first hint that this is the case came in letters to this newspaper – 15 at last count – from readers asking precisely what kind of slimeball would steal the American flags they’d just hung from their porches and lamp posts. Although I consider myself fairly knowledgeable regarding the taxonomy of slimeballs, I have to admit flag stealers is a subspecies with which I was unfamiliar.

Wondering if this breed existed back then, I scoured through the news archives from Dec. 8, 1941, to mid-January of ’42. During that six-week period, a time when one would assume every Old Glory in eastern Maine was dug out of the hall closet and unfurled with pride, there was not one incident of flag theft.

This is not to suggest that every miscreant in eastern Maine suddenly straightened up and flew right after Dec. 7. Each day’s paper contained the usual mix of breakings and enterings, assaults and batteries, drunkens and disorderlies. The Dec. 23 paper contained this intriguiging juxtaposition of stories – the daily collection of dozens of briefs on “Eastern Maine boys in the war zone” was right next to a report on the arrests of four Eastern Maine boys – all age 18 and up – who’d been doing their bit for freedom by liberating at least one car a night for the previous two weeks. The exceptions that prove the rule.

The other major beef among readers of today, and one I share, is about advertising. A good many companies yanked their regular ad copy after the terrorist attacks and replaced it with heartfelt messages of appreciation for the heroes and sympathy for the victims. Some very good companies continue to do so.

Others, however, have wrapped their merchandise in the flag and turned Sept. 11 into cause for a Heroes and Victims Sale-abration. The attacks shook this nation to its core. We’ve all been forced to contemplate the values we hold most dear. And speaking of values, how about a new SuperEnormo 8000 pick-up truck at zero percent interest and no payments ’til bin Laden’s toast?

Even worse are the ads that say they’re going to eschew the sales pitch and then don’t. At Bob’s Bargain Barn, we usually talk about our great selection and low prices. Well, today we want to talk about the great pride we have in our country and the low opinion we have of Osama bin Laden. We stand behind our president and will continue to do so right here at 123 Main St. from 9-to-9 Monday through Saturday, 10-to-6 on Sunday.

Advertisers 60 years ago were not such… I have a word in mind and it’s not “sophisticates.” Of the hundreds of ads run in those post-Pearl weeks, most coming while the outrage was fresh and Christmas near, only one tried a war-effort spin. It intimated that the most pressing issue on Churchill’s mind at the time was life and casualty insurance. That particular insurance agency, incidentally, is no longer in business.

And not one business back then tried to lure customers in the door by promising to donate a certain percentage of sales to a particular relief effort or war fund. They just donated and kept quiet about it. How unsophisticated.

News reporting was different back then, too. If your journalistic taste runs to idle speculation and pointless observation, it wasn’t nearly as good, either. Reports from the fronts – mostly bad news – were straightforward, downright blunt. There were vigorous debates on America’s lack of preparedness and what the priorities for improving national security should be, but virtually none of the second-guessing, armchair-quarterbacking and pessimism for pessimism’s sake we so enjoy today.

Newspapers back then reported on the speeches of enemy leaders, they just didn’t gush over them. I’d swear “All Things Considered” gave more air time this week to statements issued by Taliban leaders than it did to State Department briefings. This job is a lot simpler when you don’t have to distinguish between propaganda and actual news.

I realized how far we’ve come, or sunk, while watching ABC the other night. For about the hundredth time in the last month, Peter Jennings and Andrea Mitchell were having a conversation about just how darned smart Osama bin Laden is. He’s so smart, one said, that when he had that video shot to be broadcast after the airstrikes began, he had the camera put on a tripod so it wouldn’t jiggle. Even smarter, said the other, is that he used a nondescript pile of rocks as background so his whereabouts couldn’t be traced.

It’s a good thing some hardnosed newsman of 60 years ago wasn’t in on that conversation. Imagine the questions that no-nonsense primitive would have asked. I use a tripod with my camera, but nobody ever tells me I’m smart. Did I buy the wrong kind of tripod? Given what Aghanistan looks like, wouldn’t the real trick have been to find a background that wasn’t a nondescript pile of rocks? If bin Laden’s so darned smart, why’s he living in a cave? And who the hell stole my flag?

Bruce Kyle is the assistant editorial page editor for the Bangor Daily News.