The Ed Sullivan Show: Jim Morrison & The Doors (1967)

Source:Television Vanguard- The Lizard King Jim Morrison and The Doors, on The Ed Sullivan Show, in 1967.

Source:The New Democrat

"In part 2 of our two part clip of the Doors 1967 appearance on The Ed Sullivan Show, Doors keyboardist Ray Manzarek provides wonderful commentary on his and bandmates fateful visit to the Ed Sullilvan Show on Sunday night, September 17, 1967.

The Doors of course went on to great fame over the coming years.  Truly one of the recording industries most influencial bands, the foursome of Jim Morrison (lead vocalist), Ray Manzarek (keyboardist), Robby Krieger (guitarist) and John Densmore (drums) made the Doors remarkable in their groundbreaking approach to rock and roll music in the late 1960s and early 1970s.  From Light My Fire, to Riders On the Storm, the Doors were unique and one of the very best.

This video clip has been edited down to ensure we comply with any copyright requirements regarding the song 'Light My Fire.'

This video clip is presented here on YouTube for the entertainment and informational value of the viewer, and no copyright infringement is intended." 

From Television Vanguard

"The Doors "Light My Fire" performed on The Ed Sullivan Show on September 17, 1967. Subscribe now to never miss an update:The Ed Sullivan Show. The full performance by The Doors is available on "Ed Sullivan's Rock & Roll Classics", "The Very Best of The Ed Sullivan Show Vol. 1" and "Rock'n'Roll Forever" DVDs at:Ed Sullivan." 

Source:The Ed Sullivan Show- The Lizard King Jim Morrison and The Doors, on The Ed Sullivan Show, in 1967.

From The Ed Sullivan Show  

"Jim Morrison's leather pants get much higher" 

Source:Bod Mas- The Lizard King or The Leather King Jim Morrison, on The Ed Sullivan Show, in 1967.

From Bod Mas

Don’t get me wrong here, because I believe Jim Morrison and The Doors gave an excellent performance here and I completely agree with The Lizard King (or Leather King) about leaving the lyric higher in the song on free speech grounds. But one of the reasons why this performance is so memorable, is because you have the lead vocalist with a big boner sticking out of his skin-tight, black pants. Apparently Jim Morrison got excited right before he went out on stage or perhaps saw a beautiful, sexy woman while he was on stage during the performance. But that is what can happen when you are a man who perhaps is not completely sober when you go out in public and you wear skin-tight, black leather jeans almost everywhere you go in public.

Source:The Ed Sullivan Show- The Lizard King Jim Morrison performing on The Ed Sullivan Show in 1967. I guess he was excited to be there. After this performance Morrison should've been known as The Leather King, because this is the outfit that he made famous in rock and roll with his leather jacket, leather jeans, western belts, and cowboy boots, that gave him national exposure.

Good reason not to wear skin-tight leather jeans on national TV when you aren’t sober, as Jim Morrison did on a regular basis for visual effect and he wanted especially women checking him out. But the risk is you end up showing more of yourself than you perhaps intended. Especially when you get excited and you are right there for the whole world to see.

Unless no one actually saw The Lizard King go out on stage right before he went out and especially saw him up front and perhaps noticed something about his pants that his, well his thing lets saw was sticking out and he had a boner sticking out of his leather jeans. Or Morrison got excited as he was already on stage and perhaps saw a sexy woman or something. 

For the life of me I can’t figure why someone didn’t walk up to Morrison and say: “Uh Jim, you should go to the bathroom or back to the dressing room before you go out on national TV. Because you have a boner sticking out of your pants that everyone is going to see on national TV." 

Thom Hartmann: Caller: Could Restitution For Slavery Work?

Source:The New Democrat  

One big problem with restitution for slavery and that will be the one problem I’ll focus in this post, because it is a big enough problem by itself to make it a bad idea, is that it would open up new holes and other avenues for other communities to jump in. And say, “hey what about us, we’ve been discriminated against by the United States Government because of our race or ethnicity as well. Where’s our compensation?”

I’m not trying to put this lightly, but has the African-American community been through the worst or racial or ethnic bigotry in America? Maybe, but the American-Indian community who has it worst and has had it worst since the African slaves were officially freed hundred and fifty years ago. Could say, “the Europeans stole all of our land and we want to back.” They would be right to with that and they could say, “this is our country and we are going to decide who get’s to stay and who has to go.”

Japanese, Italian and German-Americans could say, what about us? How about World War II and being forced to live in those detainment camps simply because of our ethnic heritage and the Roosevelt Administration holding us against our will because they thought we were on the side of Japan, Italy and Germany during World War II.” Their motherlands even though a lot of these people had been loyal Americans for over hundred years at that point when they started immigrating to America from Japan, Italy and Germany.

Is racism still a problem in this country and do we still have racists? Sure and by the way not all racists in America can track their roots back to Europe. No race of people has a monopoly on racism or tolerance. But the bigger problem and an issue that can be addressed by government that we could all fix together is empowering people regardless of race and ethnicity to be able to live in freedom. Making liberal democracy work for all Americans and that get’s to things like infrastructure. Having a real national infrastructure system that builds up the communities that have been left behind. And a quality education and job training system for everyone so we all can have the skills needed to live in freedom.

Thom Hartmann: Dr. King's Economic Bill of Rights

Source:The New Democrat   

President Franklin Roosevelt had an Economic Bill of Rights that he released to the public after the New Deal. He tried to pass it in I believe 1944 and it had similar goals to what Thom Hartmann was talking about in Dr. King’s Social and Economic Bill of Rights. Right to a job, right to a good income, right to not want. I guess meaning not to be selfish. Right to health care and probably health insurance as well. And a right to education. President Roosevelt didn’t get his bill passed, but this was to be the next phase of his administration. But he died before he could get it passed through Congress.

And Thom Hartmann in what he was saying about Dr. King was basically the same goals. Past racial equality under law the next goal of the United Sates was to achieved economic equality as well. That regardless of race that all Americans should be have a good life in America and not to have to live in poverty at all. That these things are so important and critical to American democracy that the Federal Government should guarantee these things when American capitalism fails to achieve them.

This wouldn’t be my approach as a Liberal. I’m all for equal treatment under law regardless of race. And other classes as well and I’m also for the right to a good education. That we all deserve as Americans the right to be able to go to good schools and have good teachers. And those are really government’s main two roles when it comes to the economy. To see that everyone has a good opportunity to be able to do as well as they can and what they do with those opportunities is up to them. And have to live with the consequences of their decisions for good and bad.

Salon Magazine: Fred Jerome: 'Lets Nationalize Fox News, Imagining a Very Different Media'

Source:The New Democrat

Imagine a country where the state meaning the central government controlled all the news and media. I know in the 21st Century that is very hard to imagine with so much of the world moving in a least in a Democratic direction if not a liberal democratic direction. And even countries in the Middle East and not just Turkey and Israel can people there get access to non-state-owned media and Saudi Arabia is one of them thanks to satellite TV, the internet and smart phones.

So this is really not possible anymore, but let’s say somehow the United States nationalized the media here at least the domestic media. And now you have the Federal Government with the National Security Agency and everything else now in control of even more information. And who get’s to see it and when. Even if you can forget about the fact that this would be unconstitutional because of our first amendment. Meaning this could and would never happen.

All of that power and information inside of the hands of the people with the power in the country getting to decide for the most part what we can read and listen to or watch. And when we could do those things. Now if you are going to imagine these things, you might as well imagine living in jail because the same thing happens there. You can’t have a Democracy especially a liberal democracy something that is covered a lot on this blog, without Freedom of the Press and the ability for people to get the information they need to be able to managed their own lives. It is really this simple, you put the power of media in the hands of government, you get what they want you to hear, when they want you to hear it.

What I just asked you to do, was to imagine a nightmare. Unless you are a fascist and statist who is so power-hungry that you can’t imagine anyone especially not with your government and political faction having any real power of their own affairs. That you see people as stupid, who can’t control things like information and how they get it and can’t manage their own affairs. What Fred Jerome is proposing here, especially to nationalize Fox News simply because it is kicking MSNBC’s butt in ratings, is nothing more than pure leftist statism and fascism. That the Far-Left likes to accuse the Right of all the time.

Campaign For America's Future: Terrance Heath: Utah Is Ending Homelessness By Giving People Homes

Source:The New Democrat

I gotta admit, the Utah approach to deal with homelessness in this country is a hell of a lot better than locking these people up who really do not pose any real threats to anybody away in jail. Or waiting for them to come down with some serious illness and then they end up in the emergency room. This wouldn’t be my approach because it still costs taxpayers in Utah or anywhere else actually a hell of a lot of money to simply give away free housing even if it is cheaper than jails or hospitals.

What I would like to see nationally and what some big cities are already doing, like Sacramento and San Antonio, is to create public/private partnerships that create life building centers. For lack of a better term designed to bring people off of the street into these centers. Where they would get a short-term studio apartment or motel room inside of the center. Where they would live short-term as they are getting the healthcare that they need. As well as vocational skills and help finding a job all provided by the center they are staying at. And then would leave the center with a good job and their own apartment and become self-sufficient.

The beauty of the life building center approach is that we wouldn’t need government really at any level to run it. So you are really not talking about needing new tax revenue to pay for this. Because the money people at these centers would need to stay there as they are building their own lives, could be paid for out of current public assistance budgets. Medicaid, Welfare Insurance, Public Housing, Food Assistance, educational grants. That could go to tenants at these centers to pay for their stays. As well as you could put these people to work at these centers so they could earn their own keep.

The Big Picture With Thom Hartmann, America's Real Welfare Queens

Source:The New Democrat

The way to get corporations to pay their fair share in taxes, is to have them pay in taxes what they do not pay their low-skilled workers in income that get’s passed down to middle class taxpayers. To pay for low-income workers Food Assistance, Public Housing and Medicaid. Have them pick up half of the costs for these public assistance benefits. And workers of all income levels pay the other half sort of like another payroll tax. But we would be talking about one-two percent tax to pay for these benefits. And tell corporations they can get that money back by paying it to their workers instead.

I’m not a Socialist or a Social Democrat unlike Thom Hartmann here. And I’m not anti-capitalist, anti-for-profit, anti-private-enterprise either. But it is completely unfair for corporations or any employer to be able to past their employees cost of living on to middle class taxpayers who work very hard for a living just to pay their bills. Especially as the big employers are making record profits while everyone else is struggling to pay their cost of living.

I’m not interested in taxing business’s out of business either. And would like to see a much lower tax rate in this country on private enterprise. But not as long as we are paying out all of these subsidies to American business’s and being stuck with the bill to cover their own employees cost of living as well.

SPOT TV: Stevie Wonder's Happy Birthday to Martin Luther King

Source:The New Democrat

I can’t think of someone more qualified to sing Happy Birthday to our most effective and greatest American. At least when it comes to equal rights in America and applying our United States Constitution and the constitutional rights that we all have as Americans and applying the principles of our Founding Fathers to all Americans equally than Stevie Wonder singing Happy Birthday to of course the late, but still great the Reverend Dr. Martin Luther King.

There will be plenty of more posts on this blog in the future about what the rest of the life of Dr. Martin L. King could’ve looked like. Had he been able to live a normal life at least as far as years. But what we would’ve seen is phase two of his national campaign for equality and justice in America. The Poor People’s Campaign would’ve had a real agenda and policy initiatives behind it that was sort of dropped after he was assassinated that would’ve moved onto into the 1970s. Giving millions of Americans a very good idea of what Dr. King’s complete political brain would’ve looked like.

About MLK’s birthday today keep in mind he would’ve been eighty-five today had he lived. And not saying he would’ve still been alive today had he not have been assassinated, but a lot of men in his generation are not only still alive in their eighties, but a lot of them are still working as well. And it is very likely he still would’ve been a major political force at least into his seventies. Had he not have been assassinated in 1968, or not have been assassinated at all.