Cologirl..thanks for your insight, and sorry about the rudeness thrown your way..there was no excuse for it, and it was wrong anyway. To say you "have no idea what you are talking about" and that "you have no clue" is as short sighted and singleminded as it sounds.
You are correct in saying that the above programs you noted are "socialist" in nature. Additionally nationalizing the banking system is an example of "socialism" at its most basic definition.
Socialism is generally defined as "a broad set of economic theories of social organization advocating state or collective ownership and administration of the means of production and distribution of goods, and the creation of an egalitarian society", although this by no means a true comprehensive definition as there are several facets, levels if you will within the theories/beliefs about socialism.
It is clear to me that people from the time of pre-cold war and cold war eras may have a snap judgment and visceral reaction to the term socialism, perhaps unfairly painting others with a term without truly understanding it.
I do not want nor advocate a "socialist" society. I also don't think things are as black/white as they once were. A simple look at the examples listed above tells us we are not as free from the demons of "socialism" as we might like to believe.
Unfortunately people are tossing the term around in this election time as a tool of fear...accusing Obama of ideals and actions already happening NOW in a society that Republicans have dominated for some time now.
Anyone can (and will) twist things to make there point appear stronger. I am not satisfied with either candidate but have a hard time watching desparation tactics that are simply innacurate as they relate to either candidiate. The "spin" is a waste of time and intellect, and will likely appeal to only the least informed and most impressionable.
So Cologal, I appreciate your knowledgable input, whether or not I agree with it each time, and it is obvious that you do put that knowledge in your posts.