Dr. Matt Kenney, associate professor of political science, will present “Obama the Socialist!” at 2 p.m., Tuesday, Nov. 3 on the second floor of Woodward Library. While APSU students are encouraged to attend, the event is free and open to the public.

Kenney first will encourage audience members to consider what it means for a U.S. president to act and govern in ways that might reasonably be characterized as socialist. Next, he will look at the unfolding presidency of Obama in light of the meanings of socialism that have been identified. Arguments for and against viewing Obama as a politician with socialist tendencies as well as policy goals will be discussed and debated. Questions from the audience will be invited.

The purpose of the Library Athenaeum series, launched in 2007, is to conduct events that promote and enhance the intellectual life of the University and the region, reach out to students and make connections with them in places other than the classroom and to portray the library as a place to share, explore, discuss and think about ideas and events.

The Library Athenaeum consists of speeches or presentations, panel discussions, debates, readings and performances. Faculty, staff and students are invited to submit proposals for future presentations. Proposal forms and additional information can be found on the Library Athenaeum Web site at http://library.apsu.edu/events/athenaeum.htm.

For more information about the Library Athenaeum series, contact Joe Weber, director of library services at APSU, by telephone at 221-7613 or by e-mail at .

President Obama debunks the myths around health reform, and discusses the public option proposal in which many of them are rooted. But he focuses his address on the stark moral and historical turn…

Click here to view the embedded video.

One male Caucasian McCain/Palin campaigner donned an Obama Halloween mask, of and by itself not a big deal, but then attached a hand-printed cardboard “Hamas for Obama” sign perpetrating a lie and creating an implication of terrorist ties to presidential candidate Sen. Barack Obama. On the flip side of the sign are the words “Honk for Socialism NoBama.”

Debating the issues, building an case for a candidate rooted in facts, is one thing. This kind of ill-informed misinformation and dis-information starts with the word “stupid,” meanders into “childish,” and continues with “dangerous” and “malicious.” Where it ends remains a question mark.

There are elements of racism, hatred and politics at a new low, in this display, and it is right here in Clarksville, Tennessee.  Election 2008 has seen levels of viciousness at the local, state and federal level that are appalling, prejudiced, intolerant and ugly.

The reference to “Hamas” is troubling, because Obama is as far removed from Hamas as an American can be.

Hamas, for those uncertain of just what it is, is defined as an organization created in 1987 by Sheikh Ahmed Yassin and Mohammad Taha of the Palestinian wing of the Muslim Brotherhood at the beginning of the First Intifada. Notorious for its numerous suicide bombings and other attacks on Israeli civilians and security forces, Hamas also runs extensive social programs and has gained popularity in Palestinian society by establishing hospitals, education systems, libraries and other services throughout the West Bank and Gaza Strip. Hamas’ charter calls for the destruction of the State of Israel and its replacement with a Palestinian Islamic state in the area that is now Israel, the West Bank, and the Gaza Strip. Hamas describes its conflict with Israel as political and not religious or antisemitic. However, its founding charter, writings, and many of its public statements reflect the influence of antisemitic conspiracy theories.

America has a lot at stake: economic and military issues compete for ranking as the crisis of the day. Instead of looking at qualifications and abilities, some are presenting incorrect information, blatant lies, as truth. And playing the race card and the terrorism card in the process. They are making judgments rooted in faith and fear, and fear of certain faiths and the color of a candidate’s skin. Never mind that Obama is a Christian  or an American.

This campaigner seemed to be having a good time with his personal little joke. Many  of us, however, are not responding with laughter. We are too disgusted. Appalled. Ashamed.

The Tennessee Code, Constitution, and at least theoretically the United States Constitution provide that private property may only be taken for ‘public use’ and then only after ‘just compensation’ has been given. The Tennessee Code theoretically should prohibit the proposed action, except for the minor problem that theory is fine and well, but as written the title does absolutely nothing to affect the actual eminent domain power with its list of exceptions and lack of definitions of the key terms involved.

This leaves us with a fall back to the United States Constitution. However, the Supreme Court has held that it is legitimate for a government to seize property from one private holder and transfer it to another private holder for virtually any conceivable purpose. The city in this case can simply declare swathes of land blighted and assign it to some entity to correct its status. This is wrong and all Americans should be morally opposed to this action and on the socialist/collectivist philosophy on which it rests.

Let us start by accurately defining eminent domain. The ‘definition’ generally given is “the taking of private property for public use.” However, a better definition would be “extortion by the governmental authority.” Why is this? To begin with, there is no such entity as the public because it consists entirely of individuals. Therefore the idea that the ‘public interest’ supersedes private interests and rights can mean only one thing: the interests and rights of some individuals take precedence over the interests and rights of some others, or more specifically the desire of some individuals for property they did not earn and freely obtain is more important than the rights of the individuals who did earn their property and do not wish to liquidate it. Therefore that which you own will be taken by force (police power of the government) and given to someone else (which is the definition of extortion).

Why can’t anyone stop this? The truth is that eminent domain itself is not the underlying problem, but a symptom of the perverse ideology that grips America. Recall that in the capitalist model of politics the individual and his rights are sacred, including his property rights. Eminent domain exists in such a situation solely as the extension of the legitimate police power (IE: if you use your property for illegal acts you have forfeited your right to said property).

However, America does not exist under such a system. Instead, politicians readily accept the idea that it is permissible to take from one individual and give to another. Actually, they even call it moral. The American political system is currently operating under the delusion that people have some right to something they have not earned, ranging from Medicaid to Food Stamps, Housing and Urban Development, Sub-Prime Bail Out, and yes eminent domain — which are all based on the mistaken idea that some ‘public good’ (a term which suffers the same exact problem as public use) makes the violation of the rights of man acceptable and moral. So long as this perversely immoral philosophical viewpoint is allowed to exist eminent domain will not stop and the Clarksville Center Redevelopment Plan will likely be continued as planned. Of course, the left really shouldn’t be so shocked. After all, their philosophy of altruism enforced by government power made it possible.