Chicago City Desk: Minister Malcolm X (1963)

Source: PASMA SOBUKWE BRANCH- Minister Malcolm X, on the Chicago City Desk in 1963

“Malcolm X Interview in Chicago City Desk March 17, 1963” 

From  PASMA SOBUKWE BRANCH 

“City Desk,” WMAQ-Ch. 5’s local newsmaker interview show launched 57 years ago and folded into the NBC-owned station’s Sunday-morning news program in 1996, goes away completely after this weekend.

The final edition of “City Desk” is set for the 9:30 a.m. half hour on Sunday. Hosted by Mary Ann Ahern and Carol Marin, it will be a retrospective of the program’s run, which featured such panelists as John Chancellor, Len O’Connor, Jim Ruddle, John Dreiske and Dick Kay.”  

From the Chicago Tribune

"March 1963, , Malcolm X on City Desk. Classic Malcolm at a time when he was a key Minister of the Nation of Islam. This is some time before he split with the Nation of Islam." 

Source:Floyd Webb- Nation of Islam Minister Malcolm X, on the Chicago City Desk in 1963.

From Floyd Webb

This was an interesting interview, because a group of Chicago and national journalists, who were interviewing Malcolm X, because Malcolm X a clear revolutionary leader for African-Americans, calling for their independence from public assistance and America as a whole. That Africans in America should no longer tolerate bigotry, poverty and anything else that’s holding down Africans in America. That they should no longer tolerate these conditions and that they should stand up and fight back against the establishment that they saw as the problem that was holding them down.

Minister Malcolm was also arguing that African-Americans need to grab their constitutional rights and no longer taken them for granted and expect other Americans to enforce them for them, because in the early 1960s, African-Americans, weren’t getting their constitutional rights enforced equally as Caucasian-Americans.

Here Malcolm X was being interviewed by clear establishment figures, people from the so-called mainstream media, from Chicago, as well as NBC News in this interview. So you had a rebel being interviewed by establishment figures in this interview.

I love Minister Malcolm’s point about the names and the turn Negro with African slaves being given European and in most cases Anglo-Saxon names. And not just being kidnapped and taken from their homes in Africa, but also getting their culture, history and even their names being stripped from them.

Africans still live in America as full-blooded Africans, but having to carry names like Joe Smith and Tom Johnson, even though their family originally had a Bantu, or Zulu first and last name. Depending on what part of Africa that they came from and their ethnic background. I just don’t think these men were prepared to question someone with the intelligence and knowledge of history that Malcolm X was. 

You can also see this post on WordPress.

You can also see this post at FRS FreeState, on WordPress. 

You can also see this post at FRS FreeState, on Blogger.

CBS News: Walter Conkrite- Interviewing President John F. Kennedy (1963)

Source:CBS News- President John F. Kennedy (Democrat, Massachusetts) being interviewed by CBS News anchor Walter Cronkite, in 1963.

“CBS-TV Interview With President John Fitzgerald Kennedy On Sept. 2, 1963” 

From President John F. Kennedy

In September, 1963, CBS News anchor Walter Cronkite sat down with President John F. Kennedy and interviewed him up in Massachusetts, to talk about the issues he was dealing with.

Jack Kennedy, knew the power of TV about as well, or better than anyone in the 1960s and even 1950s. So he probably wanted to do this type of interview and to layout for the country what he was working on and wanted to accomplish. This interview happened fourteen months before the 1964 presidential election. And just a little over two months before he was assassinated and in late 1963.

President Kennedy, had an economy that was weakening and was trying to get a jobs plan through Congress. That included a large tax cut that cut taxes across the board. Including bringing the top rate down from 90 to 70% and the bottom rate from 25 to 20%. And this economic plan contributed to creating the economic boom of the 1960s.

President Kennedy was also dealing with civil rights and making sure that Federal Court orders were being carried out. And that African-American students were able to go to once segregated schools and so-forth.

And this is the time that President Kennedy came out strongly in favor of civil rights and introduced a civil rights bill to Congress. And of course President Kennedy was also dealing with the United States early involvement in the Vietnam Civil War as well.

President Kennedy, had a lot on his plate to deal with in 1963 and it would’ve been nice to see him at least try accomplish all the things that he wanted to do to deal with these issues.

A lot of what President Lyndon Johnson got passed in Congress was finishing off the agenda that President Kennedy put forward and sent to Congress. But was unable to get through the House and Senate. 

You can also see this post on WordPress.

You can also see this post at The New Democrat, on WordPress. 

You can also see this post at FRS FreeState, on WordPress. 

You can also see this post at FRS FreeState, on Blogger.

US National Archives: 'Hollywood Roundtable on Civil Rights (1963)'

Source:US National Archives- the 1963 March on Washington on the Washington Mall.

"On August 28, 1963, 250,000 people gathered in Washington D.C. to “March for Jobs and Freedom.” Better known today as the March on Washington, the famous protest took place on the 100th anniversary of Lincoln’s Emancipation Proclamation. Though there were many prominent speakers that day, the march will always be synonymous with Martin Luther King’s “I Have a Dream” speech. Coverage of the event was broadcast to Britain and France, and relayed to other countries around the world.

Since the world was already aware of the March on Washington, USIA directors had no choice but to embrace the event. In fact, the USIA produced multiple films about the march. All of these films focused on the advancement of minority rights through the inherently American principle of free speech. The most recognized of these films was a documentary titled The March, ( 306.765 ) , which focused on the planning and execution of the iconic rally.

I was particularly struck by another USIA film called the Hollywood Roundtable (306.1757). In addition to the popular masses, the March on Washington was attended and organized by many celebrities. Harry Belafonte, Bob Dylan, Joan Baez, Marlon Brando, Charlton Heston, Sidney Poitier, Sammy Davis Jr., Jackie Robinson, James Baldwin, Joseph Mankiewicz, Burt Lancaster, Paul Newman and many others were in attendance. After the march, some of these men gathered in front of USIA cameras to share their thoughts about the March on Washington and the Civil Rights movement in general. That footage can be seen below." 

From The Unwritten Record 

"Find out more about this film, featured in "The Unwritten Record," the National Archives blog of the Special Media Archives Services Division:The Unwritten Record. 

In this motion picture film, Harry Belafonte, Marlon Brando, Charlton Heston, Sidney Poitier, Joseph Mankiewicz, James Baldwin and David Schoenbrun discuss the Civil Rights March on Washington, August 28, 1963.

Title: Hollywood Round Table - Civil Rights, ca. 1963

ARC Identifier 48331 / Local Identifier 306-1757

Item from Record Group 306: Records of the U.S. Information Agency, 1900 - 2003 

Creator(s): U.S. Information Agency. (1982 - 10/01/1999)... 

Source:US National Archives- Frank Mankiewicz, Marlin Brando, and James Baldwin.

"Civil Rights Leader, Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. addresses the crowd during the March on Washington. It was during this address that he made his “I Have a Dream” speech. NAID"

From the US National Archives

Hollywood played a key role in the American civil rights movement because of the attention that these entertainers could bring to this movement because of their fans and the money and attention that came as a result. Not sure without Hollywood would the civil rights movement of the 1960s had been as successful as it was. National news, TV, radio and print, didn’t really start covering the movement strongly until the massacre in Selma in 1963. Which is when President Jack Kennedy got behind the movement as well. It shouldn’t take a tragedy like that to get people, even the politicians to support the right causes.

This is exactly what the civil rights, or human rights, or freedom movement for all needed, was national attention. To get it national exposure, so Americans can see what exactly this movement was about. Fighting for freedom for all Americans and that we would all be treated equally under law. Not be discriminated against based on race, but be judged as individuals, people. And not be treated as members of groups. The civil rights legislation of the 1960s, never comes about without the media reporting on what they were about and trying to accomplish. And what their opponents were doing to try to defeat them.

And had it not been for the violent disaster in Selma, Alabama in 1963 where protesters were rundown, maybe President Kennedy doesn’t get involved the way he did and make that famous civil rights speech on national TV. I believe the night of Selma, because before that he was a passive supporter of civil rights officially being in favor of it, but not doing a whole lot to bring it about and push it through Congress. 

There are times when celebrity exposure can be a positive thing and when it can be negative. Its negative when an entertainer gets behind some cause, because they think it’s a fad and they need to be behind it, so they look cool as well. But it's positive when they get behind something that isn’t popular, at least yet, but it's the right thing to do.

Equal rights for all Americans was not popular in the early 1960s. It wasn’t popular after it was passed in 1964, 65 and 68. Perhaps contributed to Richard Nixon winning the presidency in 1968, with all the Anglo-Saxon Southern Americans voting for him and not Hubert Humphrey. But again America is not a majoritarian social democracy where we settle everything by majority rule. We probably settle less than half of our issues based on what the majority says we should do. And things like civil rights and equal rights shouldn’t be left up to the majority even if the majority supports them. 

None of our constitutional rights should be left up to the rule of the majority. Because a lot of times the majority is wrong and constitutional rights are not an issue where we can afford to be wrong. These Hollywood entertainers went out on a limb in the 1960s for a great cause. 

You can also see this post on WordPress. 

John Aes Nihil: Charles Manson Interview

Source:Aes Nihil Productions- American Family Horror Movies, at least when they're about Charles Manson.

“MansonBlog.com had the distinct pleasure of spending a day with John Aes-Nihil. John directed (among others) a film called “Manson Family Movies (1984)”. If you haven’t seen it, you should.

Aes-Nihil is an archivist, collector and broker of all things Manson (among many other subjects). His Manson archives alone covers 3 buildings, so we only scratched the surface of this magnificent collection. Today we present you with a small taste of what we saw. If you are looking for a particular item you can contact him through his website.”

From The Manson Family Blog 

“Charles Manson John Allison rare San Quentin Interview taped from television in a (3) part series from 47 Eyewitness News 35 years ago.”

Source:Michaels Backporch- convicted serial murderer Charles Manson being interviewed in 1986.

From Michaels Backporch 

This is from a different Charles Manson interview, but the video is not currently available, but I still have the cover photo of it.

Source:Bernard Gibson- convicted serial murderer Charles Manson, being interviewed at San Quentin Prison.

As evil as Charlie Manson might have been or still is and he was clearly and evil man, whose responsible for the murders of a lot of innocent people and even seem to draw pleasure from them, that’s not the whole story about Charlie.

You don’t put together a crime family like the Manson Crime Family if you don’t have some leadership ability that not only draws people to you, but you can make them do things they normally wouldn’t do. Like good middle class teenagers, people who should be in college, going out and murdering innocent people, people who are complete strangers to you. Because you see them as part of some establishment that’s holding down the rest of the country.

Charlie Manson blamed his situation in life, on society and to a certain extent he was correct. Coming from a broken home, never knowing his father, barely knowing his mother, being shipped around as a kid. Doesn’t excuse the fact of all the people he had murdered, but he got off to a real bad start in life.

Once Manson became an adult and got out of prison for the last time in life, he decided that he was going to takeout his frustrations on society, as much as he can for as long as he can. Charlie Manson and his young Baby Boomer soldiers, against the rest of the world.

What we saw from Charlie Manson’s power was not only the ability for him to make people do things they wouldn’t normally do, like things as evil as murdering people, but people who basically fell in love with him. And saw him as a God or Jesus Crisis, people who idealize a murderer. Which is what we saw in this interview. Even though people who are doing life sentences in prison, partially for hooking up with Charlie Manson. Who see him for exactly what he is a cold-blooded murderer that would manipulate people to do what he wouldn’t do himself.  

You can also see this post on WordPress. 

You can also see this post at FRS FreeState, on WordPress. 

You can also see this post at FRS FreeState, on Blogger.

David Von Pein: ‘ABC News: JFK Assassination As it Happened- 11/22/1963’

Source:David Von Pein- from ABC News.

“Assassination of John F. Kennedy, mortal shooting of John F. Kennedy, the 35th president of the United States, as he rode in a motorcade in Dallas, Texas, on November 22, 1963. His accused killer was Lee Harvey Oswald, a former U.S. Marine who had embraced Marxism and defected for a time to the Soviet Union. Oswald never stood trial for murder, because, while being transferred after having been taken into custody, he was shot and killed by Jack Ruby, a distraught Dallas nightclub owner.”

Source:Britannica- the last ride that John F. Kennedy would ever take.

From Britannica 

“Two hours of live, as-it’s-happening ABC-TV coverage of the news surrounding the assassination of U.S. President John F. Kennedy on Friday, November 22, 1963.

This video begins at approximately 1:50 PM EST (12:50 PM CST in Dallas, Texas, which is where President Kennedy was shot at 12:30 PM Central Time).

The very first ABC-TV bulletin concerning the shooting in Dallas is, unfortunately, not included in this YouTube series, but some of the early bulletins are here (before all regular programming was cancelled).

A rerun of “Father Knows Best” was airing on many ABC-TV affiliates when the assassination occurred, and portions of that television show are included in Part 1 of this series.

This ABC news coverage seems quite primitive and antiquated by today’s 21st-century standards, and at times it almost appears as if the newsmen are reporting from somebody’s shabby-looking basement.

But it must also be noted that ABC, in 1963, was definitely the “number three” television network among the trio of TV networks that existed at that time (CBS, NBC, and ABC).

As a footnote to this ABC coverage, I received the following message from Ed Silverman in June 2013… 

From David Von Pein

ABC News, was such a small operation in the early 1960s. Sort of like the baby sister or baby brother of NBC and CBS News. They didn’t become a major operation at least until the late 1960s or early 70s, when Howard Smith took over as the anchor of the ABC Evening News. And probably not even a major competitor as far as first being in news when it came to the TV networks until the late 70s and early 80s. When Nightline with Ted Koppel came on the air and covered the Iranian Hostage Crisis.

ABC News, won a lot of rewards for their depth coverage of the Iranian Hostage Crisis. It made Ted Koppel a star and household name and if you look at this coverage of the JFK assassination, you don’t see a clear anchor of this coverage. It looks more like a news update or something.

When CBS News went on the air, with this story, Walter Cronkite was their number one anchor, broke in right away to report this story. And the same thing with NBC News with Chet Huntley and David Brinkley, they went their main people their stars. You don’t see that with ABC News.

With what ABC News had to work with back then and again being in third place out of the three networks and being so far back it looked like fifth place, I think they actually did pretty well and we’re on top of the story. They were the so-called CW or My-TV, whatever that is, or even FOX. Being so small that they didn’t even have a news division, or weren’t interested in news at all. FOX, of course now has a news obviously. ABC, was a national TV network back then, but didn’t have the affiliates and ratings that CBS and NBC did. 

You can also see this post on WordPress. 

You can also see this post at FRS FreeState, on WordPress.

You can also see this post at FRS FreeState, on Blogger.

CBS Sports: FBS 1982- Pennsylvania Nittany Lions @ Alabama Crimson Tide: Full Game

Source:CBS Sports- one of players for the Alabama Crimson Tide.

"October 9, 1982 - #3 Penn State @ #4 Alabama" 

From Football Fury

This game was played at Birmingham Legion Field, in Birmingham, Alabama (naturally) but this was essentially home game for the Alabama Crimson Tide. Birmingham is only about a hour north of Tuscaloosa where the Crimson Tide play most of their home games every year. The Pennsylvania Nittany Lions (as I call them) coming down from State College, which is just outside of Philadelphia, about 1500 miles from Birmingham. 

I give you this geographical information because I want to bore you into a coma. Actually, there's another reason. This was a road game (essentially) for the Nittany Lions and yet they go down to Alabama and beat an excellent Crimson Tide team on the road. 

Associated Press: Raw Video- 'Judge Denies Request to Stop Anti-Muslim Trailer'

Source:Associated Press- actress Cindy Lee Garcia filed this lawsuit and loss.

Source:FRS FreeState 

“A judge has denied a request seeking to force YouTube to remove an anti-Muslim film trailer that has been blamed for causing deadly violence in the Muslim World. The actress who filed the lawsuit calls the film ‘degrading’.”

From the Associated Press

If this actress in this movie was misled about this movie that she was in, then she probably has a good case, that she should take to court and sue the makers of this movie over that and be rewarded compensation for that. Assuming she didn’t know that she was going to be part of an Islamaphobic film and I don’t know if she was misled or not. But as far as getting the movie shut down, over that, that simply won’t happen.

We have a First Amendment in this country that protects Freedom of Speech, which movies would clearly come under, because they clearly have speech in them. And when they are in documentary form, they are delivering a message and perhaps intended to inform people about the subject matter that the film is covering.

Seeing speech that you love or hate, is part of sharing and living in a liberal democracy of three-hundred and fifteen million people. We can control what we see and hear, but can’t shut people up on our own.

Suing people might be part of the American Way in America, but free speech is clearly the American Way and has to be protected. Whether its peaceful speech, hate speech, accurate speech or inaccurate speech. It’s not the job of government to protect us from what they may see as dangerous speech. We have the freedom to make these decisions for ourselves.

Associated Press: Warren Levinson- 'Occupy Wall Street: One Year Later

Source:Associated Press- Pete Dietro used to be one of the activists for Occupy Wall Street.

Source:FRS FreeState

“To mark the one-year-anniversary of the Occupy movement on September 17th , current and former members talk to the Associated Press about the changes they see in the organization.”

From the Associated Press 

Occupy Wall Street started off as a I guess left-wing social democratic (even though there are Communists who part of OWS) movement a year ago, that was pissed off at Wall Street and corporate America as a whole. And seeing them get bail outs while they saw the rest of the country as they put it got austerity and decided that they were: “Mad as Hell and weren’t going to take it anymore.” Or perhaps even stronger language than that)

OWS was a very focused and fairly disciplined movement, especially for Socialists who aren’t known for discipline or even believing in it. And that’s how they were successful in its first few months: “This is what’s bad, we have the people with us and we need to stop this.”

And then OWS could go about fixing the problems, instead of making them worst and were successful in not only getting attention from the national media, but getting people behind them as well. Even Democrats not so much the leadership, but some Congressional Democrats in both the House and Senate who are so far to the Left as they are and also have a hard time seeing the center and perhaps center-left with a telescope, such as OWS. And they even managed to not only communicate what they believe is wrong with the country, as far as the economy, but we’re able to start to put together their own social democratic agenda.

OWS moves from talking about what they don’t like about capitalism and corporate America, to preserving social insurance programs, especially Social Security, Medicare and Medicaid. But what they would do about the “too big to fail banks”, breaking them up or nationalizing them. As well as things like universal higher education, protecting organize labor and debt forgiveness for students and other things.

But now OWS seems to be about complaining about ever society ill that the country seems to be going through. Jump from one problem to another without any real focus or discipline and living up to one of the negative stereotypes that Socialists have. They’ve become like kids who when they get a new toy, they see something else that they want and now have lost all interest in their first toy. They’ve become like children.

That’s how Occupy Wall Street started out, but by the late spring and summer they had already lost whatever momentum they were able to build up from the fall and winter of 2011-12 and started looking more like rioters or anarchists and with all the arrests they started piling up. They were like fireworks that are lighted on July Fourth, that burn out with in minutes. And started piling up arrests at their rallies and events. And once a movement gets to that point, its hard for Americans who unless they are die-hard supporters of you, to take you seriously: “Why should I pay attention to them. They are just some whacked-out fringe: why should I take them seriously.”

And because of this, the Democratic Leadership, has never really gotten behind them. Because unlike Republicans, Democrats understand that there’s a certain responsibility to being part of a major political party. That you can’t afford to look like you are part of a fringe movement, because you are supposed to be the adults in the room.

Right now in America again unless you are a big supporter of Occupy Wall Street, they look like some whacked-out Far-Left socialist party, that are champions of big government and high taxes, which hasn’t played well in this country for a long time.

And even worst, OWS looks like anarchists people who are so out of their minds they aren’t capable of having an adult conversation, which is why they are struggling to be taken seriously.Even fringe movements need ties and have a base with reality and how the world works, so they can be as successful as possible. Even if it comes off as stale or old school to their supporters. 

Public Resource: President John F. Kennedy After Two Years (1963)

Source:Public Resource- President John F. Kennedy (Democrat, Massachusetts) talking to the network news White House correspondents, in 1963.

“ARC Identifier 52813 / Local Identifier 306.6613. U.S. Information Agency. (1982 – 10/01/1999) Made possible by a donation from John and Paige Curran.” 

From Public Resource

Jack Kennedy came to the White House in 1961 with a broad agenda that included civil rights for African-Americans, Federal aid to public education, health insurance for seniors and an economic plan to deal with an economy that was slowly coming out of recession from the late 1950s, that included a deep tax cut. And yet most of his domestic agenda stalled in Congress despite having large Democratic majorities in both the House and Senate. And spent most of the first two years dealing with foreign policy. With Cuba twice both involving Russia, the Bay of Pigs fiasco and of course the Cuban Missile Crisis.

President Kennedy, did have a foreign policy agenda as well and was a tough Liberal Cold Warrior that wanted to open discussions with Russia. But wasn’t prepared to be soft with them, but take them on. And spoke out for liberal democracy not only in America, but in Europe as well, but wasn’t looking for a war with the Soviet Union either.

And in the middle of 1963, finally took a tough stand when it came to civil rights for African-Americans and liberal democracy for them. Who were being discriminated and beaten in the South with the violent beatings that were happening in Alabama and Mississippi.

We’ll never know how successful of a President that Jack Kennedy would’ve made, one of the tragedies of his assassination. But he had all the tools of becoming not just one of the best Liberal Democratic president’s we’ve ever had, but one of the best president’s we’ve ever had as well. Just by what he believed in, but also how he handled the issues that came his way. The Cuban Missile Crisis and finally taking on Civil Rights as well in 1963.

The question is how effective President Kennedy would’ve been how he been able to complete his first term. And he been reelected, he effective he would’ve been at getting his agenda through Congress. Something he wasn’t very successful at in his first two years.

President Kennedy, was very popular when he died I believed, because of his handling of the Cuban Missile Crisis and because he was very likable personally. Which are the advantages that President Obama has today. But wasn’t very good at making Congress go along with his agenda based on his personal appeal.

Had President Kennedy completed his first term, he would’ve continued to work on the issues, that he ran on as President. Across the board tax cuts, the health insurance program that later became known as Medicare, Federal Aid to public education, and civil rights. And then the question would’ve been how successful he would’ve been at pushing that agenda through Congress. 

You can also see this post on WordPress.

You can also see this post at FRS FreeState, on WordPress. 

You can also see this post at FRS FreeState, on Blogger.

Artist Jennette Brown: Whose Line Is It Anyway? Christopher Walken

Source:Artist Jennette Brown- Jeff Davis and Colin Monarchy on Whose Line is it Anyway? Not mine.

"This is Jeff, a guest on Whose Line, he does a great impression of Christopher Walken. It's hilarious! All ownership and copyright of this video belongs to 'Whose Line Is It Anyway?' and ABC Family. No copyright infringement intended."

From Artist Jennette Brown

ABC use to have a show called Whose Line Is It Anyway, the American version of the BBC Whose Line show. And what it was five comedians including the host Drew Carey who would be given scenes and characters to play, but the comedians would have to act out the scenes with no script or lines. The comedians would have to act out the scenes off the top of their heads, almost completely spontaneously.

And they would do scenes like Hoe Down where they would have to do a song off the top of their heads, or Super Hero’s where each person would have this made up Super Hero with a name that no Super Hero, who is sane and sober at least, would have.

And one comedian would start out with a name and as each comedian would enter the game, the comedian who came before would give the next comedian a name. So let’s say Alcoholic Man would introduce let’s say Mr. Clutz who would topple to the floor as soon as he’s introduced. And Mr. Clutz would do is act and then introduce the next person and say: “Thank God you are here Scared Shitless!” or something like that.

My favorite skit that they did is probably Weird Newscasters. Especially the two anchors and these two people would makeup the news literally on the spot. And would say something like: “Our lead story tonight, 200 people reported missing or dead as a result of an attack by Killer Tomatoes.”

And the second anchor with a weird character to play like a news anchor being played by race car driver whose had too much to drink or something. And he or she would say something like: “This just in: alcoholism linked to drunk driving. Shocking I know.” And they would introduce the weatherman who farts every time he speaks or something like that. As well as a sportscaster who falls in love with every women he sees in the audience or something.

My favorite character on this show even though I don’t believe Chris Walken has ever actually physically been on this show before is Chris Walken. Because he’s a great comedian on the spot, who never needs a script to be funny, movies like American Sweethearts, True Romance and his appearances on Saturday Night Live are excellent examples of that.

And Jeff Davis from Whose Line, does a great impression of him and that’s what makes this show great and how you tell great comedians from good or average comedians. How funny are they when they have to be and when they don’t have a script.

You can also see this post on WordPress.

You can also see this post at FRS FreeState, on WordPress.

You can also see this post on FRS FreeState.

Raymond Fisher: 'Martin Luther King and Malcolm X Debate'

Source:Raymond Fisher-  Minister Malcolm X, I believe being interviewed at Berkeley, California in the 1960s.

“American history as it’s usually taught likes to focus on rivalries, and there are many involving big personalities and major historical stakes. Abraham Lincoln and Stephen Douglas, Thomas Jefferson and Alexander Hamilton, W.E.B. DuBois and Booker T. Washington. These figures are set up to represent the “both sides” we expect of every political question. While the issues are oversimplified (there are always more than two sides and politics isn’t a sport) the figures in question genuinely represented very different perspectives on power and progress.

When it comes to the history of the Civil Rights movement, we are given another such rivalry, between Martin Luther King, Jr. and Malcolm X. Their ideas and influence are pitted against each other as though they had shared a debate stage. In fact, the two leaders met only once, during Senate debates on the Civil Rights Act of 1964. “King was stepping out of a news conference,” writes DeNeen L. Brown at The Washington Post, when Malcolm X, dressed in an elegant black overcoat and wearing his signature horn-rimmed glasses, greeted him.”

From Open Culture 

“Martin Luther King and Malcolm X Debate”  

Source:Raymond Fisher- Nation of Islam Minister Malcolm X, at California Berkeley, in 1963.

From Raymond Fisher

This was the ultimate debate (that never happened in person between Reverend King and Minister Malcolm X) as it related to the civil rights movement and perhaps generally as well, because it involved the two most effective and intelligent spokespeople when it came to civil rights and equal rights. And two of the most effective spokespeople when it came to individual freedom in general.

Before the civil rights legislation of the 1960s and to a certain extent after that, African-Americans didn’t have the same freedom as Caucasian-Americans. Even though they had the same constitutional rights under law as every other American in the country.

African-Americans simply weren’t getting their constitutional rights enforced. Which is exactly what Dr. Martin King and Minister Malcolm X were trying to accomplish. They wanted African-Americans to have the same freedom as any other American in the country, they just had two different approaches.

The MLK approach was to show the country that they were freedom fighters fighting for freedom, but they weren’t trying to destroy the country. Just the system that held them down and we’re going to accomplish it by exercising their constitutional rights of Freedom of Speech and Assembly.

Malcolm X’s approach was different, that the way to destroy the system, was by any means necessary, even if that means violence. That what they were fighting for which was their own freedom just as the Caucasian community had, should already be there’s. And that the racists should just get-out-of-the-way, or they’ll be run over. That there wasn’t any negotiation, because African-Americans already had the freedom under law and under the Constitution that every other community had in America. Which meant that racist Southern Anglo-Saxon bigots and other racist Caucasians, should either step aside, or they’ll be forcefully removed by the African-American community.  

You can also see this post on WordPress. 

You can also see this post at FRS FreeState, on WordPress. 

You can also see this post at FRS FreeState, on Blogger.

NFL Films: NFL 1956- NFL Championship- Chicago Bears vs New York Giants: Highlights

Source:NFL Films- the Chicago Bears and New York Giants for the 1956 NFL Championship.

"The Big One 1956 NFL Championship game" 

From Newton Minnowowski

The Cleveland Browns were the NFL franchise of the 1960s with their 5 NFL championships. But the 1950s was also a great decade for the New York Giants winning 6 Eastern Conference championships and winning the the NFL Championship in 1956. The 1950s was really the last good decade that the Giants had till the 1980s when they finally became consistent winners again after having a bad 1970s and a 1960s where they were no longer contenders after losing the 1963 NFL Championship to the Chicago Bears. 

Historically there have been a few great inter-divisional and inter-conference rivalries in the NFL. The Dallas Cowboys-San Francisco 49ers is perhaps the best one. But the 49ers also had a great inter-conference rivalry with the Giants and to a certain extent with the Redskins. 

But the rivalry that the Giants have had with the Bears goes back to the 1940s and is still alive today, at least to some extent, because they've played so many great regular season games against each other, as well as championship games like in 56, but in 63 as well. So historically it's always been a big game when the Bears play the Giants.

NFL Films: NFL 1967- The Story of The New Orleans Saints

Source:Crescent City Sports- the 1967 New Orleans Saints didn't lack talent.

“As a kid, I never saw my father happier.

In the fall of 1966, newspapers came in the morning and in the afternoon. Ed Daniels came home with an afternoon paper trumpeting New Orleans as the newest NFL city.

Back then, a season ticket was 15 dollars. Yep, a youth ticket in the end zone, purchased with an adult ticket, was 15 bucks.

A lot of kids got to see a lot of Saints football. Like me, they were hooked for a lifetime.

For the initial wave of Saints fans, the 1967 team will always have a special place.”

From Crescent City Sports 

“1967 Saints in the beginning”

Source:Shark Throwback- literally one of the first field goals in New Orleans Saints history.

From Shark Throwback 

The New Orleans Saints early on in its history looked like a division 2 minor league club of an NFL Franchise. They looked like a not ready for prime time operation, with an owner who had nothing to do with pro football before New Orleans. With a general manager who had just as little or as much pro football experience as his boss. With a head coach that literally came from the minor leagues, from a franchise in Richmond or Norfolk, Virginia. Because they were so cheap and so minor league, they were awful for their first ten years or so.

The Saints weren’t even in playoff contention until 1978, when they were 7-9 and 8-8 in 78 and 79. The Saints are remembered for not even having a winning season in their first twenty seasons. (1967-86) When general manager Jim Finks and head coach Jim Mora came in 1986, owner Tom Benson a few years before that, things started changing in New Orleans in the mid 1980s. Bum Phillips made them somewhat competitive in the early 1980s, after another 2-14 season in 1980. But they were finally putting something together in the late 70s and since these are the New Orleans Saints, they weren’t able to build on that. Going from 8-8 in 1979 to 2-14 in 1980.

Archie Manning of course the father of two Super Bowl champion quarterbacks in Peyton and Eli Manning, is probably the best quarterback in Saints history, at least before Drew Brees arrived in 2006. Played eleven seasons in New Orleans 1971-81 and was a Pro Bowler there. Never played on a winning team in New Orleans, got close a couple of times in the 1970s, but never played for a winner. And this franchise back then had their share of Pro Bowlers, like WR Danny Abramowicz, RB Chuck Muncie, Jim Taylor, Paul Hornung, and Munice would move on and have a good career with the San Diego Chargers.

The Saints also had WR Roy Jefferson who again would move on and have a good career with the Washington Redskins. As well as WR John Gilliam who would move on and have a good career with the Minnesota Vikings. Notice where I’m going with this: the Saints would draft good players and then trade them away. Except for Archie Manning because they didn’t want to pay their other talent. One thing I don’t understand about the Saints of this era, is their fans their management is pretty easy to understand.

The Saints were simply cheap and not willing to invest the resources to build a long-term winner that could compete in the National Football Conference. Even though they always had the fan base that would allow them to win in Southern Louisiana and Southwestern Mississippi and perhaps the State of Louisiana as a whole. But their fans have been very loyal to the Saints for this whole time and really love football. 

You can also see this post on WordPress. 

You can also see this post at FRS FreeState, on WordPress. 

You can also see this post at FRS FreeState, on Blogger.

NFL Network: America's Game- The 1989 San Francisco 49ers

Source:Niner Nation- 49ers WR Jerry Rice and QB Joe Montana.

"NFL Network has been running a series of programming in March called Dynasty Week. Each week, they have taken a look at the five great NFL dynasties. Thus far, they've aired weeks dedicated to the Packers, Patriots and Steelers. The month wraps up in a week with the Cowboys. But starting March 24, we get 49ers week.

The "Dynasty Week" will feature team-related segments on NFL AM and NFL Total Access, as well as interviews with guests associated with each team. Additionally, throughout the week NFL Network will show team-related editions of such shows as A Football Life, America's Game, NFL's Top 10 and Sound FX, as well as classic games and Super Bowl re-airs.

Here is a rundown of the 49ers schedule this coming week. This does not include the NFL AM and NFL Total Access shows. I'll update the schedule as more information comes out about some of the potential guests." 

From Niner Nation 

"America's Game #4 - 1989 49ers" 

Source:80's Football Cards- NFL Films has the 89 49ers as the 4th best NFL team of all-time.

From 80's Football Cards

If you judge the greatest NFL teams ever by how good their personal, their coaching, who they played, who they beat, the amount of games that they won, what they did in the playoffs, and then later in the Super Bowl, and not by how popular they are socially and in pop culture, I don't think you are going to find a better football team than the 1989 San Francisco 49ers.  

Statistics of course can be overused and overrated, but the 89 49ers were 14-2, with the number one ranked offense and 3rd rank defense. The 1980s 49ers are stereotyped as a team that was soft because they were a pass first team and had light, mobile offensive lineman. But during that decade after they won their first Super Bowl in 1981, they were always in the top 10 in defense and always had one of the better running games in the NFL. The 89 49ers scored almost 200 more points than they gave up: 442-253. 

I think when judging the greatest NFL teams ever, who have to look at the era that they played in as well. In the 1980s, you had to be able to run the ball well and have great or at least good defense to even get to the Super Bowl. You don't need that today with the NFL game being so centralized around spread formations, throwing the ball quickly and throwing the ball a lot, scoring a lot of points. And you only run the ball to keep the defense off-balanced and perhaps give your QB and offensive line a break. And you only need in many cases to get stops on defense when you have to have them. In the 1970s and 80s, 90s, even, you had to have great, balanced, all around team, to win the Super Bowl and perhaps even get to the Super Bowl.

The San Francisco 49ers are the NFL franchise of the 1980s. 1989 was the last NFL season in the 1980s, and the 89 49ers was the best 49er team of the 80s, and was also their best Super Bowl championship. It's the old cliche you save your best for last. Well, the 49ers did that in 1989 and perhaps have the great NFL team ever, when you look at their personal, and what they accomplished on the NFL football field.

Dave Volsky: 'The Young, The Old & The Bold'

Source:Dave Volsky- Detroit Lions QB Bill Munson. And that's all I know about this photo.

"Opening track to 'The Young, The Old, And The Bold'.  Thanks to Bob Scott for the confirmation assist on this track."

From Dave Volsky

The NFL of the 1960s was a great decade for the NFL for several reasons and just because of the Super Bowl that started in January, 1967 but the National Football League had the American Football League to compete with, which meant a lot of great players, people who would end up in the Hall of Fame. Like Len Dawson QB with the Kansas City Chiefs, LB Willy Lanier also with the Chiefs and many others who were overlooked by the NFL, because they went to small schools. Or we're drafted in the NFL but were cut there because they were behind several other players or perhaps not used in the right way, got their opportunity in the AFL and made the most of it.

It also meant that several cities that were overlooked by the NFL would get their opportunity at pro football to have their own franchise. Like Kansas City but also Buffalo, Houston, Denver, San Diego, Oakland, Cincinnati, Boston and Miami. Which meant the NFL had serious competition from a league, that was producing players that were good enough to play in the NFL. The 1960s was so important, because it was the decade that the NFL passed Major League Baseball as the number one pro sports league in the United States.

The 1960s was the last decade for the NFL that it was the league that it was always suppose to be. The last decade that every NFL franchise played their games on grass, instead of artificial turf, the last decade that every franchise played their games outdoors, not in indoor stadiums. The last decade where the NFL Championship was played every year in football weather, where the games were played in cold frigid weather. Championship games played in Green Bay and Cleveland in December, having to deal with frigid weather, snow and arctic wind.

The NFL wasn't perfect in this decade, it was probably too brutal in some cases like defenders being able to trip and close line offenders. Being able to hit players after they are already on the ground and have been tackled and could do that until the whistle was blown, but generally speaking the game was played the way it was designed to be played.

The 1960s was the last decade before the NFL-AFL merger where the two best pro football leagues were brought together and combined into the best pro football league in the world. The modern NFL which officially happened in 1970 even though they really already had that starting in 1967 with the Super Bowl. And it was the last decade where the game was played the way it was suppose to be played, before the game became more artificial like the fields.

NFL Films: Missing Rings- 1969 Minnesota Vikings

Source:NFL Films- the 1969 Minnesota Vikings yearbook photo.

"I know that this video has already been posted on YouTube, but for those of you that have never seen it, here's a great documentary by NFL Films on the 1969 Minnesota Vikings season. I was only seven at the time, and professional football wasn't quite yet on my radar, but for hardcore Vikings fans, the finale of this season must have been a pretty hard pill to swallow. Anyway, I hope YouTube/NFL Films allows me to keep this video posted, so until then...

From Randy Fast 

NFL Network has a series called America's Game which originally was about the top 20 Super Bowl Champions of all-time and then became about the latest Super Bowl champion. And then they created a spinoff about the greatest teams to never win the Super Bowl or should've won the Super Bowl. Well, the 1969 Minnesota Vikings was part of their Missing Rings series, meaning they should've won the Super Bowl in 69 and beaten the Kansas City Chiefs at Tulane Stadium in January, 1970. 

My point about Bud Grant's Vikings is that he had very good, if not excellent teams. They always had one of the best defenses in the NFL and generally had very good offenses as well. But I think to be part of a Missing Ring series when it comes to the NFL Super Bowl, you had to have a team that should've won the Super Bowl that year. 

To be part of a Missing Rings series, you have to of had the best team in the NFL all year and you even lost the Super Bowl, or you didn't even get to the Super Bowl. Like the 1998 Vikings that probably had the best team in the NFL that year and I think were probably better than the Denver Broncos that year, but the Vikings got upset in the NFC Championship to the Atlanta Falcons who hadn't even been in the playoffs for 3 years, before beating the Vikings in the NFC Championship. 

But, the Vikings lost 4 Super Bowls from 1969-76 and lost to 4 better teams. You could argue that they could've beaten the Pittsburgh Steelers in Super Bowl 9, but their offense was overwhelmed by the Steelers defense and the Steelers moved the ball well enough and just scored enough points to beat the Vikings 16-6. And the Vikings were overwhelmed by the Chiefs in Super Bowl 4 and were never in the game. They were overwhelmed by the Miami Dolphins in Super Bowl 8 and were never in that game. The Oakland Raiders took the Vikings apart in Super Bowl 11 and beat them 33-14. 

I don't know how a team makes a Missing Rings series when they lost 4 Super Bowls in 8 years and had the 2nd best team in each of those games. The Vikings were very good in the 1970s and had one of the best defenses in the NFL during that decade and had good offensive teams as well, but they never had the best team in the NFL at any point during that decade. To me the 1970s Vikings are a better version of the 1980s Denver Broncos that lost 3 Super Bowls in 4 years and never came close to winning any of those games.