"Right," as defined by the extreme position of totalitarianism and/or fascism (as displayed to the world in the last century) or "left" as defined by Marx the century before that are the more accurate compass points for such discussion.

The progressive movement pushed forward by the likes of Teddy Roosevelt in the oughts and teens of the 20th century railed against "robber barons" -- unfettered corporate greed that marked a reverse Robin Hood era, where the rich took almost everything away from the middle so we nearly ended up with only rich or poor.

That situation differed from what Mussolini later defined as fascism only in two respects:

Fascism incorporated a religious/moral element to control the masses (as did Hitler's Nazism, though Adolf only used the religious symbology/iconography in his public ceremonies and power rituals).

Fascism and Nazism ("the State") owned all big industry.

In TR's time, as now, the problem was a mirror image reflection of the fascistic situation of State-owned big industry. Then, as now, the federal government bowed to the desires of corporations (or, at the least, stood/stands out of the way of those corporate desires... deregulation, anyone?). In a sense, then, the corporations own the government, not the other way around as conceived by Mussolini and Hitler.

Since that situation existed during the time of TR, raised its head under Harding and Hoover, and corporate control over federal policies empowered by the resurgence of the neo-Right of the past 30 years has led us to another economic disaster, I submit this country leans more to that extreme model of "Right" than anything like leaning left.

Even under FDR's New Deal or Johnson's Great Society, US industry has never been anywhere near the Marxist ideal of "Left", in that US industry has always stayed privately owned, and the owners are very, very few in numbers compared to the great mass of US citizens -- the fabled 1% (or .1% by other economic models).

When you combine the neo-Right co-opting the zealotry of fundamentalist Christian dogma over the past 30 years as being essential tenets around which to govern, you again come much closer to the "Right" defined by Mussolini's 1932 Doctrine of Fascism

And we've seen this country tilt toward fascism before. When FDR took office for his first term, and as a result of the great dislocations created by the Great Depression, there was a very strong movement in the United States leaning toward remaking the government as a fascist state.

In fact, Loyola economics professor Thomas DiLorenzo puts it this way:

But there was also an economic policy component of fascism, known in Europe during the 1920s and '30s as "corporatism," that was an essential ingredient of economic totalitarianism as practiced by Mussolini and Hitler. So-called corporatism was adopted in Italy and Germany during the 1930s and was held up as a "model" by quite a few intellectuals and policy makers in the United States and Europe. A version of economic fascism was in fact adopted in the United States in the 1930s and survives to this day. In the United States these policies were not called "fascism" but "planned capitalism." The word fascism may no longer be politically acceptable, but its synonym "industrial policy" is as popular as ever.

Read a copy of his treatise.

In the end, saying this country is "center right" or center-anything misses that fact we have been struggling against neo-fascism, or corporatism for well over a hundred years, if you take it back to TR's robber barons.

Why, after all, do the corporatists consider calling someone a "socialist" to be strictly a pejorative?

I remember seeing TV footage on the 15 minute evening news of Kruschev ranting "we will bury you!" Even though pretty young, I was left with a fairly clear sense that that particular Soviet leader wasn't too fond of our existence.

And yes, it just wasn't very fair to the Soviets that we had our missiles in Turkey and, if you are an adherent of the idea of the time, Mutually Assured Destruction (MAD), then I guess we should have let them put their tactical strike weapons 50 miles from Florida?

Maybe it was reckless to face down the Soviet attempt to put those nukes in Cuba; I know it scared hell out of me at the time.

But it worked.

And about the civil rights issues that came to fruition under the Johnson administration? Johnson is to be completely lauded for following through and putting that historic series of legislation into law. Thank our various gods he did.

But most of the connections to the black community were forged under the too-short Kennedy term. Perhaps the best example was AG Robert Kennedy calling out the National Guard to force Ole Miss University to accept James Meredith as its first black student in 1962, considered by very many as a signal event, a turning point for integration in the Civil Rights movement of the 50s and 60s. Whether or not it was done with relish or reluctance on the part of the Kennedy's it was certainly a "small" payback to the black community for mobilizing and helping to make him president.

You say: "Nixon showed amazing restraint in the 1960 campaign when he knew that JFK was making up the 'missile gap'."

I don't know about Nixon's sense of "restraint," and agree that Kennedy may well have used this "gap" as a political tool. That is certainly what the ginned-up stats declaring the presence of a gap were created for, as a political tool.

However, those false stats were created in a 1957 report to President Eisenhower by a group of civilian analysts called the Gaither Committee. Historical analyst David L. Snead found that "the Gaither Report 'significantly influenced Eisenhower’s national security policies for the remainder of his presidency' and helped shape the tone and content of U.S. strategic policy for years to come."

Meaning? Kennedy didn't "make it up." It's not far different from the Ahmed Chalibi false intelligence that gave Bush the Lesser "convincing" excuses to destroy Iraq.

I agree with your other assertions about Kennedy ramping-up our involvement in Vietnam, though, to be completely historically accurate, it was the Gulf of Tonkin resolution -- under Johnson -- that truly kicked that war into hyperdrive.

Electing Kennedy brought with it a clear relief at having broken the total Republican control over the executive and congressional branches of government. It marked the clear end to the era of McCarthyist witch hunts, of congressional committees dedicated to finding out who was pro-America or anti-America.

I would say that an Obama win, plus the subsequent down-ticket wins represent almost exactly the same sense of relief.

I mean, barring some "great changer" (Bin Laden tape, Biden accidentally slapping a baby instead of kissing it, McCain accidentally telling the truth at a rally and saying "You can't trust him to lead us (yet) because he's a black man", Palin accidentally saying "I'm a maverick and I think Alaska should be an independent country" etc.) the campaigning is really over.

What is not over: We just have to get to the polls, stick out whatever intimidation we find there, demand alternate paper ballots (not "provisional" ones) if things do go wrong at the polls, and offer to drive, walk, or carry any old or young voters we know to the polls.

In short: The candidates have done what they can. It's now all up to us, and we must not fail them now.

Oh yeah: Remember the down-ticket votes. No change will happen if Obama stands against a Congress that can filibuster any propositions of change to a standstill. The Senate Republicans of the 110th Congress obstructed bills and discussion of bills 104 times in the last two years alone. That, by the way, is an obstructionist record.

The Constitution is a shining example of a liberal document and thesis for how a country can operate.

Those reasons alone are enough to explain why the relatively new-to-the-American-scene neo-conservatives hate this country and our Constitution. That's why, over the roughly 40 year history of their existence (Reagan popping onto the national political stage during the Goldwater For President race), they have expended most of their effort to vilify the liberal founding principles and, over the past eight years, to shred the Constitution itself.

If there are, as Rep. Bachman (R-MN) alludes and Gov. Palin asserts, people or pockets of the nation that are anti-America, it's exactly the opposite of the people or segments of population they attest are pro-America.

It is the anti-intellectual, anti-liberal segment of the population that want to eliminate the dreadful "interference" the Constitution poses to their plans, they are the transformational characters -- who want to transform this country once and for all time to some more fascistic, imperial place our liberal founders would have recognized all too well...

...and against which they fought a revolutionary war.

When Mr. Welch asked Sen. "Tailgunner" Joe McCarthy "You've done enough. Have you no sense of decency, sir, at long last? Have you left no sense of decency?", was he attempting to convince McCarthy or his direct followers they were wrong in their depraved actions?

When you look around you, now, at the robocalls from the RNC and the all-too-obvious tactics of inciting the mob with their torches and pitchforks language being used by McCain and Palin, and if you label that as repugnant, no matter the labels you choose, are you trying to reach out to the ones holding the torches and pitchforks, or to those who may more rationally be able to see that these tactics really are being used?

This is a fight for the Constitution. This is a fight for our republic.

Every person living within the shores of what is now the United States did not agree with the characterizations our founders used of that King George or his regime, but they did not temper their fiery rhetoric to please those less certain. The cause was too important for them to be all nice and civil about it. It was a fight to put in place ideals we now must fight to restore.

Once that change has been put in place, and only if we have the resolve to put it in place, then we can focus on ways of reaching across to the torch and pitchfork crowd, of attempting to calm them or bring them back to reason, back to the form of republic we once had, lo this long eight years ago.

But, until then, this is a fight, and there are no Marquess of Queensberry rules. We're talking about a seismic shift here, politically, this "change" away from the money changers holding all the reigns of power as they have for almost 30 years now.

I'm not voting for Obama because he's a nice guy. I'm voting for him because he's smart, and because he appears to have the personal mettle and communications skills needed to coax us back together once this seismic battle for restoration is won.

Sadly, while this has been mainly a Republican — okay, "neocon" or "neo-fascist" would be more accurate — effort, there have still been Democratic and Independent enablers in the ranks.

To me, this only seems the next logical step in the process.

We have Bush the Lesser stationing the 3rd Infantry's 1st Brigade Combat Team on active duty within our borders (against the spirit of the Constitution) with special training and a package of "...nonlethal weapons designed to subdue unruly or dangerous individuals without killing them." When this story was originally published at the time this group was activated, they said this package of non-lethal measures could be used within the US borders. When this got attention, they have now made a "correction" suggesting these "tools" are not for use in the U.S.

Next, we have the RNC, McCain, Palin — and now rabid congressional members — attempting to foment racists and lib-hating fascists with fear tactics.

Maybe they're hoping for some "domestic unrest"? Why not: That's one reason Bushco. had NorthCom activate the 1st Brigade Combat Team on American shores. Oops. So now they say they didn't mean to admit that. Bushco: Sorry for the slip folks.

Yes, we have to make it through the next two weeks, past all the neo-fascist meddling with state voter registrations, and hope that the mob they are inciting to riot doesn't.

But that's only the initial step (if Obama has enough votes to make it through the tampering).

We are not going to really be safe from these true anti-Americans until Bush the Lesser exits the back door to the White House for the last time.

We MUST be successful in staging the most huge peaceful demonstration we can -- by putting every last warm-bodied, breathing and sentient Obama supporting voter in the lines to those polling stations on November 4. We MUST speak in numbers that will even give these crazy fascists pause, otherwise we could be in for a rough ride.

We have to walk with, carry, drive or push every last possible registered warm body that would dimple the chad for Obama down to the polling places and be prepared to stand in pouring rain or hip deep in Katrina-like floodwaters for 10 hours to ensure every last non-disenfrachised vote gets cast.

This ongoing Republican plan to steal elections allegedly disenfranchised as many as 1.1 million votes in the 04 election (according to a just published Rolling Stone investigation co-authored by Robert Kennedy Jr.) -- and that is out of a total of 121,069,054 votes. But those votes all came from just a couple of swing states (Ohio included), which likely stole that election.

We have to ensure that if it was ever possible for an un-seen landslide to occur, it must occur on November 4 to bury the effects of these undemocratic, un-American Republican tactics.

After all, when Right-Wing nutbags like Michele Bachman (R-MN) talk about left-wingers being un-American, or McSlime talks about ACORN threatening the very fabric of our republic, they are guilty of psychological "projection".

So I have this "work across the aisle" idea for Obama, and a way to ensure the DoJ gets cleansed from top to bottom: Maybe he should name Iglesias as his Attorney General? I daresay that, at this point, you could probably find no one more dedicated to eradicating partisan practices within that organization -- and the law is not left-wing or right-wing when executed in a non-partisan fashion: It's just the law.

Heck that president who served 4 terms in the Illinois Senate and only completed one term in the US Congress named his top opponents to his darned cabinet after taking office. You remember that "inexperienced" president? Abraham Lincoln?

I'm just sayin... .

Assuming we get through the election without Bush/McCain/Palin fomenting right-wing riots, thereby allowing Bush the Lesser to fully activate the 1st Brigade Combat Team of the 3rd Infantry Division answering to NorthCom in the United States, specially trained to "help with civil unrest and crowd control" -- assuming we make it to and through election day...

...I have a crazy suggestion for someone Obama should name as his Attorney General: David Iglesias.

Sure, he was an up-and-coming Repulican, but I would lay extremely heavy odds that if we want a cleaned-out DoJ that dishes justice equally, that guy would get it done.

Just a thought.