Fair question.
1. I believe that much of the GOP opposition comes from the fact that Obama is a Democrat & that the present day GOP leadership puts party way above country. (Disloyal Opposition)
I agree with the first part and don't entirely disagree with the second part, but the Democrats are no better when they're in the minority. So, vitriol should not be reserved for one side of the aisle alone.
2. I do believe that if Obama was a white Democrat, the GOP leadership opposition (the basis of most opposition against Obama) would not be as strident against him.
Why? Opposition to the LAST health care bill was every bit as strident.
I therefore think they (GOP leaders) are cynically using the fear of a black man as their BASIS for most anti-Obama rhetoric & opposition.
How? You can't just say that; you can't just point to examples of racism; you need examples of things they're doing to foment this.
(I think they'd be much more prone to negotiate their differences with a white President than with Obama, just because they think they can get away with being stubborn when race is taken into account)
Which does not follow from the last time a huge health care bill came along. They were just as animated and managed to parlay it into a Congressional election landslide.
Also keep in mind that Obama is doing some unprecedented things -- such as the most insanely huge budget deficit ever, and one which will carry from year to year -- and even if he makes good on his promise to cut it in "half" in X number of years, it'll still be about twice the deficit of any previous president.
And, we have not had a president since Carter with an agenda as unabashedly left-liberal.
So, there are many, many novel factors in play other than just race.
In terms of winning elections, the GOP's fear tactics have turned into a nightmare for GOP supporters & a Godsend for the Dems.
Polling data doesn't show that. Dems are slipping; self-identified conservatives are on the rise.
Witness, too, the terms in which proponents of this bill feel they need to couch the arguments for this bill --
conservative-sounding terms like "controlling costs" and "increasing competition." If they thought left-liberalism was in ascendancy, why would they bother? This is a left-liberal bill.