History Channel: Jonestown Nightmare in Paradise

Source:The New Democrat

To understand Jonestown, you first have to know about the People's Temple, which started out in downtown San Francisco, one of the most beautiful cities in the world, and in a many ways an actual paradise, which is where a lot of members of Jonestown were from or at least were living before they moved to Guyana in South America in the early to mid-1970s to build what became Jonestown, which at the end of the day was not much more than a prison camp.

The People's Temple in San Francisco was put together by a Socialist Christian, the Reverend Jim Jones, who moved his organization from Indianapolis, Indiana, where it was unwelcome because his group was a biracial multi-ethnic church. Far-right religious conservative Indiana in the 1960s and early 1970s did not accept non-Caucasians and people who didn't believe in their American way of life, whatever the hell that was supposed to be, so the group moved to San Francisco, which was seen as progressive or socialist, and sufficiently tolerant to allow them to build their community.

I think this is where the paranoia of Jim Jones comes in, because San Francisco, for whatever reasons, was not not acceptable for what he wanted, which was to build a community and an organization, where people literally took care of each other and lived off each other in a socialist communitarian Christian way of life, real Christianity if you will, and not the religious-right silliness that is more common in America.

The People's Temple in San Francisco comprised American outsiders of all races and ethnicities, including Jim Jones himself, people who couldn't make it in America for all sorts of reasons, including drug addiction, who were looking for something that would give their lives meaning.  They wanted to make a difference or hoped to make the world better. These were the people who made the People's Temple run and did much of the work.

If you take Jim Jones out of the picture here and replace him with someone like Dr. Martin King or Dr. Andrew Young or Reverend Jesse Jackson, or even Dr. James Dobson, a leader of the Christian Right, the People's Temple, I believe, is still in business today because it had the strong moral leadership of people only interested in serving the then under-served and would have the financial backing to be in business today

Dame Elizabeth Taylor: Who's Afraid of Virginia Woolf? (1966) Elizabeth Taylor & Richard Burton Star

Source:Dame Elizabeth Taylor- Liz & Dick.

Source:The New Democrat 

Who's Afraid of Virginia Woolf with the great Taylor/Burton combo is supposed to be a drama but  I always laugh throughout this movie, which I've seen now four or five times and saw again over the weekend. I've been thinking about this movie a lot for some reason but for me this movie turns into a 2-hour comedy that is so great that Turner Classic Movies with Robert Osborne did a special about it about a year and a half ago and brought in actress Ellen Barkin to give an expert analysis of it.

If you are not that familiar with this movie perhaps you are very young, with not much respect for movies that weren't made in this century, which I'm afraid is very common among the younger generations. Think of Married With Children or The Honeymooners from  the 1950s, which are about married people who seem to love each other but can't go very long without pissing the other off and spend a lot of the marriage beating the hell out of each other verbally.

Virginia Woolf is one long argument between a couple, George and Martha, who have lost their son (fantasy perhaps?), with the mother especially not ready to accept this reality and not quite there mentally and taking out her anger on her husband, who is the father of their son.  He is having issues with his wife about why their son is no longer there, and they go through these issues as they are entertaining guests.  The man is in direct competition with George to the next professor at their school, yet they do not know each other very well.

I laugh through most of this movie because the shots that they take at each other are dead on because they know each other so well.  The sarcasm is so direct and on target, and even though they are supposed to be entertaining guests, they can't stay out of each other's way for most of the movie and even bring their guests into the never-ending argument about what happened to their son and why he is no longer with them.
Source:Dame Elizabeth Taylor

Kyungho Dean: Documentary- Edward R. Murrow vs. U.S. Senator Joseph McCarthy

Source: Kyungho Dean- Edward R. Murrow and his son?

Source:The New Democrat 

"Regarding Television, Edward R Murrow said:

In 1958, Edward R. Murrow stated, "Our history will be what we make it. And if there are any historians about fifty or a hundred years from now, and there should be preserved the kinescopes for one week of all three networks, they will there find recorded in black and white, or color, evidence of decadence, escapism and insulation from the realities of the world in which we live." 

From Kyungho Dean

To quote Edward R. Murrow: "We must not confuse dissent with disloyalty", which pretty much sums up the difference between people who believe in free speech and fascists. "We cannot defend freedom abroad when we are making it weaker at home". Going to other countries to defend freedom and American values as we are crushing those values at home for the American people. That is what this debate in the early and mid 1950s was about.

Ed Murrow and his nightly newscast See it Now and their investigation into Senator Joe McCarthy's committee hearings about supposed Communists inside of the U.S. Government put CBS News on the map as far as TV in this country. And probably led to the CBS Evening News with Walter Cronkite that eventually became a half-hour show. Because Murrow and See it Now took down a movement that was trying to destroy free speech and assembly for the rest of the country. Which is what Joe McCarthy and his supporters were about.

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

Source:The Ed Sullivan Show- 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:The Ed Sullivan Show." 

"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- 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 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."

Salon: Fred Jerome: 'Let's Nationalize Fox News, Imagining a Very Different Media'

Source: Salon Magazine- FNC's Sean Hannity, Bill O'Reilly & Megyn Kelly.

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.
Source:The Young Turks

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.

The Tavis Smiley Show: George Carlin On Freedom of Choice

Source:The Tavis Smiley Show- The great comedian George Carlin, on The Tavis Smiley Show.

Source:The New Democrat

"The important big things no Choice.  Fewer banks, news media, oil companies etc.

For consumers though more choices as to what to buy." 

From Golcynski

George Carlin is arguing that Americans don’t have freedom of choice as far as things that matter. Yet we as Americans make both personal and economic choices everyday. And so did George Carlin when he was alive and I wish he was alive today. But he made real consequential choices about his life everyday. Like what he would talk about in his monologues, or should he go on the Tavis Smiley Show. (To use as examples)

Americans make real consequential choices everyday about what we eat, what do we wear, when do we wake up, what to do in our free time, who we want to befriend and get involved with romantically. And as we are becoming more liberal and libertarian as a society, we are getting more power to decide what we should do with our money. Like should we gamble or not purchase and use marijuana or not. Gays are being able to decide should they get married or not.

Perhaps what George Carlin (and excuse me for trying to get into his great head and great brain) was saying what Americans really have now are fewer choices with what we can do with our own money. Since we now have such large multi-national corporations. That we have less competition now with so much financial power in the hands of a very few. And we have less choice economic choice from that perspective than we use to. And that would be a very fair point.