Well, what is a socialist? Is it someone who shares some goals with Europe, or is it an advocate of 'an economic system characterised by social ownership of the means of production and co-operative management of the economy', according to Wikipedia. Obama does not support complete social owenership of factors of production, nor does he support social co-operative management of the economy/businesses. Therefore, he is not a socialist.
What the article you are reading does is take aspects of socialism which many people agree with. Now, considering that the positive aspects of socialism is essentially equal to all of the negatives of a purely free market (as they're pretty much opposites), that list is quite long, and probably quite similar for a lot of people. Most people agree that people should get fed, should get educated, if people are taxed it should be fair, think it would be better to be green, think high inequality is bad, and that market failure is bad. Now, the article makes out that because there are all of these similarities, that they must be the same.
But, this completely misses the idea of magnitude - how far people go from correcting these market failures, towards state control of a market. The latter is a socialist, but to what magnitude must you go before you are also considered one? That's where the main idea of the debate lies, and where the obvious differences between Obama and a true socialist lies.
A true socialist would advocate a very strong military. Obama has cut the power of the military. A true socialist would raise taxes on all citizens. Obama has lowered taxes on the vast majority of citizens. A true socialist would employ many people under the federal government. The government now employs hundreds of thousands less than when he came into office. A true socialist would not advocate the vital role of the free market in peoples live. Obama has done this. A true socialist would give government control over all firms. Obama has never advocated such an idea. A true socialist would advocate government funded universal healthcare. Obamacare was originally a Republican plan, put forward by the Heritage Foundation.
That is more than enough evidence that Obama is not a socialist. I recommend you provide some of your own arguments, rather than relying on others (especially such a biased other, his blog is nothing but attacks on Obama).
--------------
Also, try this video, I think it's somewhat relevant.