The Four Color Media Monitor: How can Superman still be going strong with all the ultra-leftist agendas now being forced upon him?

The AFP brought up Superman's 80th anniversary, which isn't being celebrated as well as it could if Brian Bendis was assigned as the main writer. The article includes superficial details such as:

Eighty years on, the formula has not changed: Superman has more or less always appeared in his red, blue and yellow suit with the "S" symbol on the chest.

Not always. There was that tedious matter in 1997 where Supes was turned into an electrical entity, with a suit to match the effects, and in 2011, DC mandated that his red tights had to be dropped, possibly to coincide with the Man of Steel movie, which doesn't hold up so well in retrospect when you consider its humorless approach, and the fact it was supposed to lead into a whole DC-based franchise that's never really taken off, as the Justice League movie demonstrated. The red tights have been returned lately for the 1000th issue, but I can't help but wonder if it was just so an aforementioned writer could take credit.

This summer, on the heels of a "Man of Steel" mini-series, DC Comics will reboot the standalone "Superman" series. For the challenge, they tapped Brian Michael Bendis, a legend in the genre who worked for two decades at rival publisher Marvel.

And I'm not sure why they think they'll market it so well with such an overrated writer on board, one whose main achievements were marginalizing the Scarlet Witch, degrading Tigra, and his take on Jean Grey and Iceman wasn't impressive either. Nor for that matter is his work on Iron Man, as previously noted. Interestingly, the Man of Steel miniseries he wrote, if this info is correct, received a lot less orders than DC expected. Does that suggest the one time fascination with Bendis has worn thin? We can only hope.

"People would come from all over the world just to live in Metropolis, to be watched over by the most famous immigrant," Bendis told The Washington Post.

"It's not going to be this huge message, it's just going to be there -- just flavor, the way we see the world."

Coming from him, that's awfully rich. This was one of the architects of the original Civil War from 2006, and he shouldn't be trusted even now.

From time to time in the past, Superman's popularity waned -- his chiseled perfection was sometimes too much for an imperfect audience, who turned to Spider-Man and the X-Men, whose flaws they could identify with more readily.

No kidding! Some of the recent SJW-pandering characters from Marvel have been described similarly, and as such, they're even more dreary than Supes supposedly was under that approach. So what's their point?

More recently, Superman wanted to surrender his American nationality in protest at the government, which he felt had betrayed him.

In another storyline, he saved migrant workers from a white supremacist, a nod to far-right violence seen in some corners of the country.

Smith even recalls that the Man of Steel had something of a "socialist start," fighting capitalists "who were taking too much money or not treating their workers well" in the 1930s and 1940s.

Wow, sounds like somebody's trying to hijack the Man of Steel just to suit his own world view. I've read some of the Golden Age beginning tales, and they were anything but what the quoted store manager's trying to lecture us were. The 2011 story where Supes gave up the citizenship he didn't actually have as a guy in costume was degrading too, as was the more recent story written by Dan Jurgens, a supposed conservative (what if it turns out he's a Never Trumper?). Last time I looked, he still hadn't shown any remorse for such a denigrating tale.

The sad reality is that Supes has lost the clout he once had because today's SJW gatekeepers decided to shut out all politics they don't like, or see to it only theirs are allowed to be applied, and worst of all, they disregard fans no matter their politics, or the fact that at this point, they'd rather the superhero comics be apolitical. As a result, it's not much of a wonder the Man of Steel hasn't retained as great a reception as the comics once had before the PC advocates ruined everything this century.

Labels: dc comics, moonbat writers, msm propaganda, politics, Superman

According to Jerry Siegel, who should know, "the ideals which made Superman one of the top comics properties of all time, and caused its creation [were] compassion and a desire to help the oppressed". See:

https://ohdannyboy.blogspot.com/2012/07/curse-on-superman-movie-look-back-at.html

In one early story Superman, for example, helped mine workers who were being exploited by mine owners. There are others in a similar vein.

According to Siegel:
"What led me into conceiving Superman in the early thirties?

Listening to President Roosevelt's "fireside chats"...being unemployed and worried during the depression and knowing hopelessness and fear. Hearing and reading of the oppression and slaughter of helpless, oppressed Jews in Nazi Germany ...seeing movies depicting the horrors of privation suffered by the downtrodden...reading of gallant, crusading heroes in the pulps, and seeing equally crusading heroes on the screen in feature films and movie serials (often pitted against malevolent, grasping, ruthless madmen) I had the great urge to help...help the despairing masses, somehow.

Now could I help them, when I could barely help myself?

Superman was the answer. And Superman, aiding the downtrodden and oppressed, has caught the imagination of a world.

But for most of 37 years the incredible wonder of Superman, his ideals, his accomplishments, have been turned around, like in a ghoulish farce, not only against me, but Joe, too, who had conceived the physical, mystical form of Superman in his artwork.

Superman's publishers have mercilessly gouged Joe and I for their selfish enrichment, stealing our incomes and careers from us derived from Superman, because of their greedy desire to monopolize the fruits of the Superman creation. I can't flex super-human muscles and rip apart the massive buildings in which these greedy people count the immense profits from the misery they have inflicted on Joe and me and our families. I wish I could. But I can write this press release and ask my fellow Americans to please help us by refusing to buy Superman comic books, refusing to patronize the new Superman movie, or watch Superman on TV until this great injustice against Joe and me is remedied by the callous men who pocket the profits from OUR creation. Everyone who has enjoyed our creation Superman and what he stood for, those of you who believe that truth and justice should be the American Way, can help us."

According to The Joe Shuster Story, The Artist Behind Superman, by Julian Voloj and Thomas Campi, associate editor Mort Weisinger forced Siegel to stop using social justice themes in his scripts.

Posted by Anonymous | 7:51 AM

Superman began in the 1930s as a wish-fulfillment fantasy hero, and I don't doubt that his creators were New Deal Democrats. But that is a far cry from today's SJWs.

Siegel and Shuster's hero helped mine workers get safer working conditions. Hillary Clinton promised to put mine workers out of a job.

The New Deal was about helping laid-off workers get back on their feet. Today's welfare system is about taxing workers and then giving the money to welfare recipients (including able-bodied young adults) in exchange for votes.

In the 1930s, Democrats were pro-labor. Today, they call working class people "deplorable." The Democrats are the party of rich limousine liberals who have never worked a day in their lives. They live in gated communities, surrounded by walls and armed guards, and accuse you of being racist and xenophobic if you want to secure the border. They live in mansions, but want you to feel guilty about being able to afford your one-bedroom apartment. They drive SUVs, or have chauffeur-driver limos, and want you to feel over-privileged if you can afford the bus fare to get to your job every day.

And Superman was an "immigrant," but he was an orphan baby. Not an able-bodied young adult who came to the US just to get on the dole. Not an MS-13 gang member. Not an ISIS Trojan Horse.

Posted by Anonymous | 1:00 PM

"Far right violence seen in some corners of the country."

Like the riots by Antifa and BLM?

Or the mass murders, including shooting sprees? Where the killers always turn out to be registered Democrats, or radical Muslims, or both?

Or the hate crimes against Muslims and/or "people of color," that almost always turn out to be hoaxes perpetrated by leftists?

Posted by Anonymous | 1:56 PM

Nicholas Cruz was neither a registered Democrat or a Muslim. The guys shot at the Quebec City mosque last year were no hoax. the FBI says hate crimes against Muslims are on the increase.

Can anyone actually name one of these limousine liberals who never worked a day in their lives and preach to everyone else? There are not enough of them to hold a tea party, let alone a political party. But I guess if you look at the Bernie Sanders supporters, they all lived in gated communities. Unlike Sheldon Adelson or the Koch bros, who are true men of the people.

Posted by Anonymous | 9:32 PM

The Democrats, as a group, do not call working class people deplorable. Hillary Clinton used the word deplorables to describe the various extremist groups on the far right - KKK, Nazis and neo-Nazis, alt-rightniks and alt-whites, survivalists and white nationalists - who used to say a pox on both your parties to the Democrats and the Republicans, but who came out in support of Trump this past election. Steve Bannon uses the term too, perhaps sarcastically, dividing Trump supporters into the 'hobbits' and the 'deplorables'.

Posted by Anonymous | 7:02 AM

Some accounts claim Nikolas Cruz was photographed wearing a MAGA hat, but some say his social media included leftist sites: BLM, Antifa, and an anti-Israel group called Freedom for Gaza.

Syed Farook and Tashfeen Malik (San Bernardino)were a Muslim anchor baby and a Muslim immigrant. The Tsarnaev brothers were also Muslim immigrants.

Jered Loughner, Aaron Alexis (the Navy ship yard shooter), and Seung-Hui Cho (VA Tech) were extreme leftists. James Hodgkinson (who shot the Republican congressmen at a baseball game) was a volunteer for the Bernie Sanders campaign.

Nidal Hisan (the Fort Hood hospital rampage), Omar Mateen (the gay nightclub in Orlando), and Mohammed Youssef Abdulazeez (the Navy/Marine recruiting station in Chattanooga) were Muslims and Democrats.

Posted by Anonymous | 8:45 AM

For every actual hate crime against Muslims or POC, there are at least four hoaxes.

Fires at mosques in Houston and Des Moines turned out to have been set by the mosques' own members.

In New York City, a Pakistani claimed to have been assaulted by Islamophobes, but he recanted when the investigation disproved his claim.

Terroristic threats against Muslim students at Concordia turned out to have been falsely reported.

At Michigan State U., a "noose" turned out to be a lost shoelace.

Racist graffiti on a black cadet's dorm room at the USAF Academy prep school turned out to have been planted by the student himself.

Threats against a Muslim professor at Indiana State U. were revealed to have been made by the prof himself.

A student at the University of Louisiana admitted to falsely claiming that assailants had ripped off her hijab.

A Muslim woman was murdered in New York, allegedly by intruders who broke into her home and accused her of being a terrorist. It turned out that her husband killed her, and tried to cover it up with the hate crime story.

If there were no hate crimes, SJWs would have to invent them. And they do.

Posted by Anonymous | 9:02 AM

Jared Loughner appears to have been a tea party style right winger, although there is room for disagreement; he seems to have evolved towards right wing conspiracy theories as he became more unbalanced. See
https://www.theguardian.com/world/2011/jan/09/jared-lee-loughner-rightwing-rants

Aaron Alexis was just crazy; his crime had no political motivation.

There is a lot of misinformation about Hasan's politics; see
http://www.jacksonville.com/news/premium-news/2013-03-14/story/fact-check-email-was-wrong-about-recent-mass-killers-being
And
http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/statements/2009/nov/13/chain-email/chain-e-mail-links-supected-fort-hood-shooter-obam

Posted by Anonymous | 9:44 PM

So, the Guardian and Politifact, huh? Excuse me while I laugh. Those are two of the most biased sites in the world. Loughner was not right wing, and neither was Hasan.

Run along, troll.

Posted by CP | 8:15 AM

That commentary about the Guardian shows why this site is so valuable. For its mainstream readers, they get exposed to some far right currents of thought. For its far right readers, they get exposure to excerpts from the mainstream media that they might ordinarily not read because they are dismissed as the "most biased sites in the world", critical comments appended but the articles generally quoted straight. Avi helps people get out of that far right echo chamber that leads at the extreme to people storming the local pizza parlour to save the chained kids they think are in the basement. He is a bridge between two cultures that generally talk past each other.

Posted by Anonymous | 2:32 PM

Trust me, I'm not "far right." That's just another weasel phrase designed to denigrate conservatives. It's just like "neocon." If anything, I'm a small government libertarian who wants the government to stay out of peoples' lives.

Your attempt to play Professor X has failed once again, because you don't know anything about me.

Posted by CP | 5:30 AM