I'm just not comfortable claiming that they oppose Obama because he's black.

In my state (MD), Michael Steele won the white vote against Ben Cardin in the US Senate race.

I have republican relatives and business associates...they aren't batsh*t crazy racists.

Right, and my impression is that the real issue is the perception of govt overreach is what's driving this catch-all phrase, 'socialism,' based on:

1. Save a few sectors, the only employment available is in the public sector. Large swaths of the country have little or no access. Much of the available employment is temp in nature (cesus, stimulus).

2. Lack of liquidity. I know small business people who are functioning as their own banks, so they have little patience for any discussion of "taxing the rich," esp issues like raising the SS cap.

3. The perception that the economy isn't priority #1 for this admin. IMO, a real mistake was made by championing 'never waste a crisis.'

4. The govt ownership stakes in banks, insurance, automotive, etc.

5. The health insurance mandate & potential taxation of health benefits.

An actual socialist :-) , Bill Blum, put up an essay today Team Obama/Cult Obama in which, well, he goes there:

But since others have been pointing out these lies very well I'd like to try something else in dealing with the problem -- the problem of well-educated people, as well as the not so well-educated, being so moved by a career politician saying "all the right things" to give food for hope to billions starving for it, and swallowing it all as if they had been born yesterday. I'd like to take them back to another charismatic figure, Adolf Hitler, speaking to the German people two years and four months after becoming Chancellor, addressing a Germany still reeling with humiliation from its being The Defeated Nation in the World War, with huge losses of its young men, still being punished by the world for its militarism, suffering mass unemployment and other effects of the great depression. Here are excerpts from the speech of May 21, 1935. Imagine how it fed the hungry German people.

I haven't read what Voight said about 'false prophets,' but I don't think the discomfort is limited to the right-wing.

So, what conclusions to draw? Perhaps we should eschew the extremes and comfortably sit in the middle.

There is one problem, for me at least. In my first post here, I described receiving a solicitation from OFA to act on its behalf in promoting its (vague) agenda.

Fundamentally, I am uncomfortable with the executive branch of govt contacting me directly (and that's what it is), requesting that I do its bidding. Does that make me an extremist? What if I throw the solicitation in the trash? Consequences? After all, since I was contacted personally, the executive branch will be quite aware of those who did not comply, correct?

It's a bit like the recent post offering one of two options: Yes, I'll join and donate, No, but here's $5.

My view is that the problem isn't the extremes. The right-wingers are almost incoherent, and this particular example of a known left-winger, while raising excellent points, will be instantly dismissed for raising that which is forbidden in our discourse.

The real problem is that the vast middle is either saying nothing, or basic criticisms/concerns (that I'd file under 'loyal opposition') simply aren't getting heard in this climate.

I do buhleeve we ought to be lookin' out for the night riders.

clarify a bit? Thanks.

No matter how much is tilted in their favor the scream like banshees and fight like rabid dogs.

I don't think the Democrats are stupid or incompetent. I think the leaders are part of Versailles, just like the GOP leaders, and are content to let the status quo be fiercely defended.

My point -- as it often is -- is that the "left" rarely acts anything vaguely like a mirror opposite of the extreme right (which is much of the right). The so-called left burnishes the mythology that Obama represents some abrupt and extreme change from Bush.

And one that I understood from the get-go of the post. The rhetoric is hotter, more volatile, more sinister, more strange, etc...then for most Democratic presidents. For all of the wing-nut conspiracy theories about the Clintons, if even they were believed by more people than one would expect, they weren't often talked about in polite company. It's only anecdotal, but I've seen seemingly intelligent people, in public, talking about Obama and a New World Order, etc. As you said, it's a plethora of things that lead to this the biggest of which you accurately described, I think: i.e. race, the current economic situation, and the left not keeping the conservatives in check.

Oh, and yes, race is definitely a part of this. They were calling the guy a fascist, militant, socialist before his policies were even fleshed out, and before he (seemingly) went back on many of his campaign promises to go in a more conservative direction. Just because damn-near the entire left blogosphere misrepresented the racism and where it came from doesn't mean it didn't and doesn't exist. That point is very important to make.

American politics has a right, and a center. The bipolar media paradigm turns the center into America's de facto left. I believe this is what gets everybody confused.

In order to seriously move the Overton window to the left, you need to have an organized socialist/Communist presence. Not necessarily in power, but in sufficient numbers to keep pressure on the left edge of the political discussion. I think most progressives know this in their hearts, but few have the desire to make the leap of faith. It doesn't help that if you declare yourself to be a socialist, people start backing away from you as if you have the bubonic plague. The perception many hold that a socialist is merely someone who desires activist government doesn't help, either.

more or less is non-existent (in an organized fashion) online -- the progblogs represent Reagan Youth all grown up. Alex P. Keaton turned pragmatist.

the extreme right (which is much of the right)

I don't know about that. The GOP does well with upper income marrieds. Not all evangelicals are WorldNutDaily readers. I also know quite a few black conservatives. The area of sharpest disagreement between us would be over abstinence education and the distribution of anti-immigrant/homophobic literature ... but ... there's a part of me that recognizes that these folks are going into neighborhoods that "progressives" won't look at twice (in fact, they're gentrifying them).

Progressives tend to be upscale, professional/managerial class, which includes people of color, although not in proportion to distribution in population.

I thought Michelle Obama's UG thesis was quite interesting -- she learned early on that a significant fraction of her brothers/sisters were all too quick to abandon the community once they'd 'made it.' Similar to well-established Hispanics who aren't necessarily very pro-immigration reform.

Of course racism exists, but progressive outrage seems to be limited attaching the 'racism' label to the GOP party, nothing more, nothing less (similar to the primary). There's little activity on behalf of POC on the butt end of policies that discriminate systematically, like sub-prime lending, etc. Recently, I read an investigative report of police in the Norfolk area of VA targeting poor black communities for ... get this.. their bicycles. There's some silly law about getting a registration sticker for bikes, so police were scooping them up for profit while carefully avoiding upscale/white neighborhoods. Guess who did the investigative report? The FOX affiliate!

I no longer see many 'left' activists for issues like low-income housing. Part of the reason is there are no more tools --- the income levels to qualify for assistance are sky-high in my area.

So, the problem you describe (and I agree): cements Obama's "centrism" as the fringe-left edge will only be solved when ppl for whom the system isn't working make life miserable for the rest of us.

We have several alternative economies. Urban/drug and rural/drug, shadow immigrant, for starters. It's not a black/white trash/Latino thing -- it's alternative economies for those who are not stakeholders in the mainstream economy, for which the number of stakeholders is on the decline. We're going to get to a point where events like the Sotomayor presentation no longer suffices in selling the bootstrap mythology, a key plank of the Reagan era.