To appreciate the fundamentally underlying psychological projection of the intensely ideological right, you simply must read Rich Lowry's "Rush was right." It's a fascinating look into how a political observer can so misunderstand the world by approaching it from exclusively one-dimensional cognition. Lowry's opening "insight" reveals pretty much everything he has to offer:
If you listened to Rush Limbaugh, Sean Hannity and Laura Ingraham, you got a better appreciation of Obama’s core than by reading the president’s friends and sophisticated interpreters, for whom he was either a moderate or a puzzle yet to be fully worked out.
It's neither particularly friendly nor especially sophisticated to note what has been--to those of us who are resistant to Lowry's ideological macular degeneration--so plain to see, for years. Barack Obama is no determined centrist, but he's also no leftie or rightie, and what's more he's scarcely a "puzzle" to be worked out. He's simply a pragmatist, of the FDR school of incremental, conservative-progressive pragmatism, which means he favors whatever works in digestible portions--whether served from the left or the right or the moderate middle--and to hell with fixed philosophical preconceptions.
This is not hard. This is not complicated or abstruse. And this certainly, once again, is no modern-day puzzle. Pragmatism has been around at least since Christ--O, for heaven's sake, just go ahead and give unto Caesar and quit your bitchin' and all that--although, true enough, it was formalized as a uniquely American non-philosophical philosophy in the late 19th and early 20th centuries.
Yet, though not hard, complicated, abstruse or puzzling, pragmatism is indeed outrageously offensive to the ideologically fixated--to those who view the world from only one angle; and if distortion arises, then it's the world that must change, and not their views.