Liberal Democrat

Liberal Democrat
Individual Freedom For Everyone

Friday, August 29, 2014

Jim Heath: Video: CBS News: Election 1982 Highlights


This post was originally posted at The New Democrat on Blogger

The recession of 1981-82 was huge and cost Congressional Republicans especially in the House a lot of seats. House Republicans lost something like thirty-five seats. Going from the low 190s in the House to the upper 150s where they were going into the 1980 general election. So House Republicans especially lost everything that they picked up in 1980 in 1982. Similar to House Democrats that lost everything that they picked up in 2006 and 08 in 2010. Senate Republicans managed to retain control of the Senate after 1982, but they lost a couple of seats as well.


Merv Griffin Show: Video: Jane Fonda and Roger Vadim Interview From 1967


This post was originally posted at The New Democrat on Blogger

I would be lying if I said I had any idea who the hell Roger Vadim is other then what I got out of this video. And I only like to lie when I'm in trouble. You know being questioned by police, on the stand being cross-examined. And if you are wondering how I get away with that. I cross my fingers when I'm put under oath and say "I do". But Jane Fonda is very well-known and for good reasons. A beautiful baby-face adorable actress with a very quick wit and sense of humor. As well as intelligence that allows for her to play all sorts of characters that her career indicates that she has.

Thursday, August 28, 2014

Phil Donahue Show: Video: Jane Fonda Anti-War Speech and Interview on the Vietnam War


This post was originally posted at The New Democrat on Blogger

Jane Fonda at her highest peak as an anti-war New-Left political activist. Calling members of the American military criminals, murderers, including the President of the United States Richard Nixon and perhaps President Nixon's predecessor Lyndon Johnson as well. The wing of the American Left the New Left people who are called McGovernites for their support of U.S. Senator George McGovern's 1972 presidential campaign took over the Democratic Party in the late 1960s and early 1970s. And gave the Democratic Party a real bad name for over twenty-years.

New Left Political Activist

Tuesday, August 26, 2014

David Von Pein: Video: U.S. Senator Robert F. Kennedy Townhall, April 19, 1968


This post was originally posted at The New Democrat on Blogger

If you listen to Senator Robert F. Kennedy talk about the Vietnam War in 1968, it is not that different from how Barack Obama sounded about the Iraq War when he was running for president in 2007-08. And how President Obama now sounds about the Iraq War now. "We can help and we should help where we can, but at the end of the day this is their country and their war and they need to fight it and win it if they can". Just replace Vietnam with Iraq and you have two different men from two different generations talking about two different wars, but they sound very similar.

Sunday, August 24, 2014

Bach Feuer: Video: The Morton Downey Jr. Show: Jerry Falwell and the Christian Right


This post was originally posted at The New Democrat on Blogger

In the late 1980s starting in around 1987 I believe the TV evangelism was taking a big hit in America because of scandals that some of their TV reverends were under. Essentially preaching against what they were in favor of, but not in public, but in their own private lives. With Jim Swaggart it was about prostitutes, with Jim Baker it was financial issues. These reverends were saying they were the voice of God, the voice of Christ to be more precise and yet they were committing real vices that are immoral at least under the law that would've sent average Americans to jail for a long time.


Saturday, August 23, 2014

Joe Pyne: Video: Joe Pyne Sort of Interviews Jerry Rubin, From 1967


This post was originally posted at The New Democrat on Blogger

First of all this wasn't a real interview and at best more of an attempt of Joe Pyne to cross-examine or prosecute Jerry Rubin who was part of the New Left in America from the late 1960s and early 1970s. A movement that was anti-war and American capitalism and wanted to see America move to some type of socialist economic system or social democracy. What this was, was Joe Pyne telling Jerry Rubin that "you are an asshole and I'm asking you these questions and showing you these things to show Americans how big of a piece of garbage that you are. And that you are poisoning America's youth with your garbage". And that is probably putting it nicely.

As far as what they almost talked about which is what the New Left called disobedience of laws. They weren't so much talking about disobeying laws in general. (at least from what I know about them) But disobeying laws that they saw as unjust and even breaking the law to serve some cause that they saw as just. Like ending the Vietnam War, or ending what they saw as corporate greed. And very much inspired what we see from the Occupy Wall Street movement today. Who are the sons and daughters of the New Left from the 1960s and 70s.


Friday, August 22, 2014

ABC News: Evening News- George McGovern 1972 VP Selection Drama



This post was originally posted at The New Democrat

Senator Tom Eagleton who by most accounts had a very good and productive year in public office as Governor of Missouri and then later in Congress as a Missouri Senator was a victim of the Richard Nixon dirty tricks operation. Senator Eagleton did see a shrink and I believe at one point on medication for some breakdown that he had. But he was completely sane by the time he was elected to the Senate in 1968 if not before that. But that of course was not good enough for the Nixon campaign that made Tom Eagleton looks like a loony tune or something.



Thursday, August 21, 2014

Metrazol Electricity: Video: The Woody Allen Show: William F. Buckley & Woody Allen Exchange Humor



This post was originally posted at The New Democrat on Blogger

As conservative, snobby and Anglo-Saxon waspy as Bill Buckley came off at least came off as, he had a damn quick and good sense of humor. He wasn't so preppy and full of himself and thought he knew it all about everything that he couldn't take a joke and fire one back right on target and get a reaction and even laugh out of the people he was talking to. And I think that comes off in this quick little interview between two of the best wisecrack artists who ever lived in Woody Allen and Bill Buckley.


Wednesday, August 20, 2014

Liberty Pen: Firing Line With William F. Buckley- Saul Alinsky: Mobilizing the Poor


Source: Liberty Pen-
Source: This piece was originally posted at The New Democrat

What I got in from this discussion from the few moments that Saul Alinsky got to talk about his own personal philosophy even though this is about a fifteen-minute video, is that Mr. Alinsky was saying that "democracy that of course it is not perfect, is the best political system on the planet. But that democracy needs to work for everyone and not just be there for people who have money, or a lot of money. That everyone should have power and the ability to live in freedom. And that freedom shouldn't just be for people born to wealth and even just for people who create their own wealth."

Which sounds very mainstream to me and values that I believe Liberals, Progressives, Socialists and perhaps even Conservatives can all agree on. But the only question being what is the best way to make that happen so we don't have a country with very few wealthy people and a lot of poor people. But where where a lot of people are at least successful with money in the bank and not living paycheck to paycheck and struggling just to pay their bills. Whether they are rich or not.
Liberty Pen: Firing Line With William F. Buckley- Saul Alinsky- Mobilizing The Poor

Tuesday, August 19, 2014

TIME: Opinion: Kareem Abdul-Jabbar: "The Coming Race War Won't Be About Race": Why Ferguson is a Wakeup Call For America



TIME: Opinion: Kareem Abdul-Jabbar: The Coming Race War Won't Be About Race

This post was originally posted at The New Democrat on Blogger

If there's any good that comes out of Ferguson besides the Brown family getting justice for what happened to their relative Michael, is that it will hopefully be a wakeup call for America about the problems that we still have with race-relations. Especially as they relate to poverty and crime that when you have so much concentrated poverty in one area of a city, or state and you leave it as is that people can become desperate that they feel they need to turn to crime just to support themselves. Crime goes up as a result and you have cops doing things that they probably wouldn't normally do like using excessive force and as a result people get hurt and even dying.

Ferguson should not be just a wakeup call about poverty in America, but a wakeup call for law enforcement in how they protect us from predators. And that they need to be involved and work with their communities they are supposed to serve and protect so incidents like this don't happen in the future. Especially in areas with highly concentrated poverty where the residents tend to be of one race and where the law enforcement tends to be from another race. And when an incident like this happens it just explodes and looks like one race of people is abusing and murdering people of another race.

Don't expect any major reforms to come from Ferguson. Remember America is not only a country that can apparently tolerate 1-5 Americans living in poverty, (I'm not one of them) can tolerate the War on Drugs, (but less and less everyday)  two-million Americans in jail or prison. Or a sitting U.S. Representative being shot down at a campaign event and all of other gun-related deaths of innocent Americans before any serious reforms are made.

Saturday, August 16, 2014

CBS News: Video: CBS New Special Report: Walter Cronkite Announces the Death of LBJ in 1973


This post was originally posted at The New Democrat on Blogger

Walter Cronkite announcing the death of one of our strongest and most effective presidents as far as what he was able to get passed in Congress and the amount of people who the legislation benefited. Especially as it dealt with civil rights, but Medicare as well and a President who was always fighting to improve the lives of people who were struggling. Now of course you can argue about a lot of that legislation and what it actually did for people. But he was always trying to do the right thing for people who struggle. Which is a lot more than a lot of other presidents have done.


Thursday, August 14, 2014

Watch Mojo: Video: Top 10 Walter Cronkite Moments: JFK, Vietnam, Watergate


This post was originally posted at The New Democrat on Blogger

Walter Cronkite was and still is the standard for broadcast news because of his knowledge of the news and what it meant, but also how he carried himself. He was always the man in charge at his CBS News desk, the man you turn to when there is some type of crisis. The man you know won't fold under pressure and always know what to do whatever the situation is. Sort of like a great general in battle or a great head coach in sports who is not replaceable and still missed today.

The Network News Standard

Bedford TV: Video: CBS News Evening News: Iranian Hostage Crisis, December 26, 1980


This post was originally posted at The New Democrat on Blogger

Looks like at least from this short film that the American hostages in Iran were taken care of. That they weren't being starved, or forced to wear awful looking prison uniforms and held under brutal conditions. That they were being held like white-collar inmates would be held in America in a minimum security prison. Just based on this little film the hostages looked like they were in good shape and given the opportunity to tell their families that.

Early Days of the Iranian Hostage Crisis

Wednesday, August 13, 2014

TruthOut: Opinion- Gar Alperovitz: Is Worker Ownerships a Way Forward For Market Basket?

Source: TruthOut-
Source: This piece was originally posted at The New Democrat

Employee cooperatives which is really what this article is about is a good socialist alternative to private corporations that are run by a CEO and have a Board of Directors that represents the stockholders. But where the employees below management and even lower management like people who run factories and offices do not have much of a say in how the company is run. And do not in a lot of cases collect the benefits of the company's success other than pay, benefits and promotions. Because they don't own any part of the company themselves. Unlike management and the Board.

What employee cooperatives are, are business's where the employees have a financial stake in a private company other than their pay and benefits. Because they own stock in the company and as stockholders they have representation in management and on the Board and have a say in who runs the company including the CEO, Chairman and the management heads behind them. And allows for workers to move up financially and do well not only in the company, but make real good money for them self as well. And gives them a lot of incentive to do as well as possible for the company.
Evergreen Cooperatives: Evergreen Cooperatives 2012




Tuesday, August 12, 2014

Moyers & Company: Video: Bill Moyers Interviewing Ta-Nehisi Coates: Facing the Truth: "The Case for Reparations"

This post was originally posted at The New Democrat on Blogger

One of the problems and not the only problem, but one of the main problems with reparations for African-Americans, or any other group of Americans is that we would be requiring not asking, but requiring Americans of all races to pay for the evils and horrors that English-Americans for the most part did to African-Americans. Requiring Americans of all races including African-Americans and even successful middle-class and wealthy African-Americans to pay for the evils of English-Americans and what they did to African-Americans for what three-hundred years now.

Friday, August 8, 2014

The New York Times: Opinion: Paul Krugman: Inequality is a Drag: How to Expand Economic Freedom For Everyone


The New York Times: Opinion: Paul Krugman: Inequality is a Drag 

This post was originally posted at The New Democrat on Blogger 

If you are familiar with my blogging you know that I'm not a redistributionist in the sense that I believe the way to close the wealth and income gaps in America is to take from the rich to give to government to take care of the poor. What I want to is to expand economic opportunity to the poor and low-end middle class so they can be successful as well. And not need public assistance at all and not become dependent on public assistance as part of their income.

So that is just one issue where I disagree with Paul Krugman on. I believe in economic growth that everyone feels and benefits from with a middle-out approach. Not trickle down which obviously doesn't work, or wealth redistribution. But empowering people in need to get the tools that they need to live in freedom and not have to be government dependent. And you accomplish those things by empowering at the bottom and near bottom through education and job training so they can get themselves the skills that they need to get a good job.

We saw the benefits of the middle-out approach during the Clinton Administration where we had low unemployment during most of the 1990s. High economic growth from 1994 for the rest of the decade. And with Welfare to Work educating and training low-skilled adults on Welfare so they could get the skills that they need to get themselves a good job and get off of public assistance all together. You expand the pot so more people can take out of it and you'll encourage more people to be successful. You redistribute from the current pot and you encourage fewer people to be successful on their own.

Campaign For America's Future: Opinion: Robert Borsage: Should Populists Declare Victory?: Some of the Differences Between McGovernite Democrats & New Democrats

U.S. Senator George McGovern & The McGovernites 

Campaign For America's Future: Opinion: Robert Borosage: Should Populists Declare Victory?

This post was originally posted at The New Democrat on Blogger 

Just to start this post off I need to give a brief history lesson and then you'll see why I'm doing this at the end of the post. But Democrats who are called McGovernites for backing Senator George McGovern for President in 1972 who were the Occupy Wall Street pre-social media in the late 1960s, 1970s and 1980s and even 1990s when they were finally out of power in the Democratic Leadership, ran the Democratic Party at least as far as the amount of influence that they had over it in the 1970s and 80s.

What is a McGovernite? The same thing that an Occupier would be today. Ideologically a Social Democrat or Democratic Socialist depending on which term you use. Senator Bernie Sanders someone as far to the left as him or the Progressive Caucus in the U.S. House. A welfare stater redistributionist economically who believes in a large centralized welfare state economically that is financed through high taxes. "That if you really limit economic freedom and have government decide the amount of money the people need, then you won't have rich people or poor people because everybody will be equal. Equality of outcomes in other words.

McGovernites believe that people shouldn't have to work to take care of themselves economically if they choose not to. They believe in a soft isolationist foreign and national security policy and tend to be pacifist at least when it comes to government use of force. And believe in a soft law enforcement policy as well that society and one's environment should be taken into factor and even blamed instead of individuals when they commit crimes. And today a McGovernite believes that private media power can't be trusted and that government should step in to make sure that people get the news and information that they need. And that Freedom of Speech doesn't give people the right to offend.

McGovernites would be very mainstream in Europe and perhaps even center-left. But in America they look like the Green Party or Democratic Socialist Party and no offense, perhaps even the Communist Party. That they don't look like center-left Democrats. But they are a fairly sizable faction in the Democratic Party. Not as large as the Christian Right in the Republican Party, but large enough to be heard and even to a certain extent taken seriously by the Democratic Leadership which does tend to be center-left. And when they are organized and united can be a real force in American politics.

Pre-1990-91 and perhaps even 1988 when the Democratic Party nominated Governor Mike Dukakis for President who was a New Democrat the McGovernites ran the Democratic Party in a lot of ways. When it came to the party platform and how Democrats were seen on the issues. That started changing with Governor Dukakis who wasn't the radical that Vice President George Bush wanted Americans to think he was. And by the time then Governor Bill Clinton runs for President in 1991-92 the New Democrats took over the party especially the leadership.

What is a New Democrat? I'm a New Democrat and this blog is New Democrat as the name says. But we are center-left Liberal Democrats which is what center-left is which is not socialist. We believe in freedom and opportunity as well as responsibility over dependence. A strong but limited national security and foreign policy based on defending our own interests working with our allies which is what Soft Power is about. Fiscal responsibility and limited government. That government can't do everything for everybody which is why opportunity and freedom are so critical. And what government does do it has to do well and those things need to be paid for and affordable.

As you may of guessed New Democrats are Liberals so we are very liberal on social and personal issues. And believe in a great deal of personal choice. Which may make us look like Libertarians, but people who are socially liberal are Liberals as socially liberal may indicate. And now we are in charge of the party because that is where the country is. Not anti-government, but believing that government can't do everything for everybody. Which is why people need to be educated so they have the freedom to make their own decisions.

These are the two competing factions in the Democratic Party right now and will decide where the country and party goes. And the McGovernites are back energized in the Democratic Party, but are now energized and united somewhat behind Senator Bernie Sanders the only self-described Socialist in Congress, but not the only Socialist in Congress which is different. And Senator Elizabeth Warren  a self-described Progressive who similar to Senator George McGovern is not as radical as her supporters would like to claim. And the New Democrats will need a solid showing in 2014 and put up a great presidential candidate in 2016 who makes their positions clear and articulates them well who can get elected. Or the McGovernites may takeover the Democratic Party again.

Thursday, August 7, 2014

AlterNet: Opinion: Michelle Goldberg: Should The Selling of Sex be Legal?

The Selling of Sex

AlterNet: Opinion: Michelle Goldberg: Should Buying Sex Be Illegal?

This post was originally posted at The New Democrat on Blogger 

Here's an example where radical-feminists to use Michelle Goldberg's label as well as Christian Conservatives as well as nanny statists on the Left and Right disagree with me as a Liberal. I'm in favor of legalizing prostitution and let me make that clear. I'm not in favor of prostitution, but I'm in favor of allowing for people to make these decisions for themselves. I have decided that prostitution is not for me as a job or as a customer. Millions of other Americans in and outside of Nevada have decided that prostitution is for them as a worker or customer and have never spent a day in jail for it. And that is really my point. Who should decide, the individual or government?

There are plenty of things that I would never do because of potential dangerous risks that come from them. And most of them are legal like owning and using firearms. Smoking tobacco, drinking alcohol, bungee jumping, gambling, homosexual sex, hardcore porn. And hardcore porn not so much because of any danger factor, but I don't have much of a taste for it. Perhaps you need to be more lonely or lonely period to appreciate solid hardcore porn. But being that as it may there are plenty of dangerous activities that are actually legal in this country.

They are legal because we've decided that there there's a limit to what government can do to protect a country of three-hundred fifteen-million people. And that we need to limit those resources except for a few exceptions to doing the things that we need government to do. Like protecting us from predators foreign and domestic to use as an example. Not saying prostitution is a good thing, but like a lot of these other activities it would be safer if it is legal than illegal. Because government can regulate it to protect people from predators and the workers, employers and customers can pay taxes on it.

What happens when you legalize prostitution? Now government can step in to regulate it to make it as safe as possible. Because legal or illegal prostitution is not the oldest profession in  the world for nothing. And it is only going to get older  so you might as well legalize it. So only adults are involved and customers and workers are tested on a regular basis to prevent the spread of disease. And so taxes are paid on it which and people don't have to pay other people's taxes that they are not paying because they are involved in a illegal profession.

Wednesday, August 6, 2014

The Nation: Opinion- Mike Konczal & Bryce Covert: "The Real Solution to Wealth Inequality": How About a Better Approach Instead

Source: The Nation-
Source: This piece was originally posted at The New Democrat

Before I explain why I disagree with the wealth redistribution argument when it comes to the income and wealth gaps in America. I'm first going to be (excuse my American English) an asshole about socialism and the authors of this piece from The Nation. Granted The Nation is nothing if not provocative and for that is always worth reading. And thank God (well actually our Founding Fathers) for our First Amendment Freedom of Speech and that the state doesn't control our media. Even though some on the far-left have advocated for nationalizing the media this country.

But about this latest piece from The Nation from Mike Konczal and Bruce Covert. For you Seinfeld fans and people familiar with this show I'm going to take you back to season four of that series. The Gay Episode (for lack of a better term) when a college reporter overhears Jerry and George pretending to be gay (no offense) and pretending to be boyfriends. And Jerry and George finding out about this and confronting the reporter and strongly telling her " we are not gay! Not that there's anything wrong with that if that's who you are". Well that is how I feel about Socialists in this country and I'm going to explain that.

Even as late as 1993 when that Seinfeld episode went on the air there were plenty of Gay-Americans who were still in the closet for obvious reasons. Most of them having to do with bigotry and ignorance about homosexuality. Well then and now we probably have millions of Americans who are stuck in the Socialist closet because they are afraid to let Americans know they are Socialists. Because of all the negative stereotypes that still remain in this country about socialism. With it constantly being linked to communism and other authoritarian philosophies.

What too many Americans still do not understand even with the end of the Cold War and the collapse of the Soviet Union is that Socialists tend to be democratic. And if you look at Europe as well as America Socialists tend to believe in a certain level of capitalism and private enterprise to go along with a robust welfare state that they believe should provide the basic human necessities. The reason why Socialists get called Liberals or use the liberal label for themselves (which is an insult to me as a Liberal) or Progressives is because of how unpopular the word Socialist is still in America. So they constantly advocate for socialist policies and programs, but go with the liberal or progressive label instead.

Now as far as the piece on The Nation. Mike Konczal and Bryce Covert are essentially arguing for a social democratic or socialist economic system. Not state controls the means of production, which is different. Just most of the money that is produced by the private sector to finance their robust welfare state. That would be in charge of the pensions, health care, college financing and perhaps education in general. And taking those services out of the private sector completely to be controlled by the U.S. Government.

As I've argued many times before the problem with the American economy is not that we have too many rich people. But that we have too many poor people and lower middle class people that if they were out of work would qualify for public assistance because of their lack of savings. Where government can make a real contribution here is to empower the people at the bottom and near bottom to get themselves the skills that they need to get a better job and make more money and obtain economic security. You empower people to be able to take care of themselves and live in freedom, they generally will if they have strong character and strong core of values. Government doesn't need to do that for them.
Jan Helfeld: Chris Matthews- Redistribution of Wealth


Tuesday, August 5, 2014

The American Prospect: Opinion: Paul Waldman: Can Liberalism Survive the Obama Presidency? Yes it Can


The American Prospect: Opinion: Paul Waldman: Can Liberalism Survive the Obama Presidency? Yes it Can

This post was originally posted at The New Democrat on Blogger 

First of all Barack Obama when he ran for President in 2008 didn't run as a McGovernite Social Democrat which is what the Occupy Wall Street and the broader New Left in America are. He ran as a mainstream moderate Liberal or Progressive. Who combined both New Democrat liberal policies with FDR New Deal progressive polices as it related to both economic and foreign policy. He didn't run to end the War on Terror or War on Drugs. At best he ran to fight those wars better. He didn't even officially come out for same-sex-marriage until he ran for reelection in 2012. And expanded the War on Drugs and War on Terror in his first-term.

I knew all of these things before I voted for him in 2008 and 2012. The New Left in America saw him as Dennis Kucinich or Ralph Nader, but someone who could actually get elected President. They obviously didn't do their homework and have nothing to be disappointed with other than themselves. As far as liberalism itself and how President Obama relates to it. The economic agenda is there as far as expanding economic opportunity for people in poverty through education, job training, infrastructure and trade. But the social issues including civil liberties other than civil rights is where he comes up short as a Liberal.

All you need to know about how Millennial's feel about liberalism is where they are on the issues. They believe in a lot of personal freedom, believe in civil liberties. Do not want government managing their own personal or economic affairs. This is the most tolerant and color-blind as well as race-blind generation this country has ever seen. Which is why affirmative action has lost so much support in this country. So liberalism is in good shape, but what it needs are real Liberals to step up, run for office, get elected and show them why personal and economic freedom are good things as well as tolerance. And we'll see more liberal policies get passed in this country.

Saturday, August 2, 2014

CBS News: Video: Face The Nation: 2014 Midterms: Where Does the Battle For the Senate Stand?

This post was originally posted at The New Democrat on Blogger

Look I'm a loyal Democrat at least when it comes to my voting and anyone familiar with my blogging knows that. But what the Face The Nation panel didn't really cover at all was the fact that the Democratic incumbents in a lot of cases are strong as far as being able to raise money. Not being very unpopular and are mainstream Democrats representing red states. Who could very well be facing far-right candidates running in center-right red states that are blue collar where mainstream Democrats still do very well. Like Arkansas, North Carolina, Michigan, and Virginia.

The other thing the panel didn't mention was that Democrats have solid pickup opportunities now in Georgia, Kentucky and even Mississippi. Is there a more unpopular member of Congress than Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell who is up for reelection in Kentucky? Who is up against a young popular very well funded Democrat Kentucky Secretary of State Allison Lundgran Grimes. They are dead even right now. Go to Georgia with Democrat Michelle Nunn another popular Democrat and young who is a complete outsider when it comes to Washington up against David Perdue. Who has had Mitt Romney style campaign mistakes and has a similar record in business. They are even as well.

What the panel did was go based on the facts that Senate Democrats have more incumbents and past history when the party in power that is the party that holds the executive loses a lot of seats in Congress and generally in both chambers. Instead of focusing on the facts on the ground in all of these campaigns today. Which is typical from mainstream news shows and organizations. I'm not saying that Democrats are definitely going to hold the Senate. But just looking at the evidence today I could definitely see them limiting their losses in the Senate to 2-3 because of potential pickups in three states and the strong incumbents that they have running.
U.S. Senate Democrats

Friday, August 1, 2014

CBS: Ed Sullivan Show- Jim Morrison and The Doors Light My Fire From 1967



The Lizard King-
This piece was originally posted at The New Democrat

Before I make Jim Morrison look real bad here I’ll say that this was one of The Doors best performances ever even as short as it was. The Lizard King (and I say that for a reason) was at the top of his game with the vocals and everyone played very well. But if you watch the video (and you are not blind) you see something real obvious and may get to thinking “what the hell”. (or something stronger than that) Because you see Morrison in his classic black leather suit. Nothing strange there from him, but with a big fact erection sticking out of his leather jeans.

I don’t know how you go out on stage with that sticking out and that is assuming you are sober. And perhaps The Lizard King wasn’t and this was one of the reasons why he was The Lizard King. Because he was so out there and not just wore the black leather jeans at most of his performances. But his leathers were so skin-tight and revealing that anything that got him excited sexually was going to be seen by a lot of people and this case being on Sullivan by millions of people. And it happened to him in one of the most public places possible on Ed Sullivan on national TV on Sunday night in 1967.