The next Captain America movie is revving up, and it looks like it’s going to be a bit of a “political thriller.” Good. I’m glad. In fact, I’m ecstatic. However, as all conservatives know, any time there is a political thriller put together by Hollywood the probability that our worldview will suffer a few sucker punches by the writers and directors is high.

As I was reading up on the next Captain America installment, I ran across “Floyd’s” comment, who came out and said the obvious. As is often the case on online forums where conservatives are the minority, the drones were quick to pull out their stingers.

Superherohype Joss Whedon

And that is where I came in. Behold, a fascinating (but rare) exchange between yours truly and your run-of-the-mill liberal movie nerd. Long ago I basically stopped commenting on websites because all the time and energy going into arguing with tools online could have been spent blogging on a platform that would a.) actually allow me to organize my thoughts into a way that would reach a broader audience, b.) have much more lasting power as it pertains to SEO, and c.) not be subjected to the whims of liberal moderators. For example, I was banned for six months for tactfully destroying the editorial decisions made by the writers of  Spider-Man while on the Marvel boards. The moderator told others on the board I posted something inappropriate, which was interesting since I was at work at the time of the alleged infraction and had not posted anything all day. How convenient.

Regardless, the following exchange is telling. Please keep in mind that I’ve covered Joss Whedon’s liberalism once or twice … so I might know a thing or two about the guy.

Douglas: Actually, Whedon admits they filmed a strange health care/welfare scene in ‘The Avengers,’ but took it out of the final cut because it altered the pacing of the movie. Notice that he didn’t say because it was a weird health care speech in the middle of an Avengers flick …

T. Van: Incorrect. During a New York Times interview, Whedon referenced a scene in which Rogers was with Peggy Carter, and the character lamented how he essentially thought things in our culture were changing for the worse. Whedon then cited the losses of community and health care (something which has been documented over the last two decades) as examples he personally thought were consistent with the core idea behind the speech given by Rogers.

Whedon did not describe the speech as “strange” nor focused on health care… exposing a certain fallacy at the root of your last statement. He actually stated that it was “beautiful.” However, certain online bloggers with low levels of journalistic integrity took it upon themselves to manipulate the meaning of Whedon’s words. The type of bloggers that claim to be hit with “sucker punches” when they’re shadow boxing.

Douglas: Looks like I hit a nerve, “T Van.” Try and paper over the obvious all you want, everyone knows Whedon is a hard core liberal. I’m sure you saw his Romney/Zombie YouTube video… I’m also glad that because Whedon said his speech was “beautiful” then … it must be true.

Funny that since World War II the government’s involvement in health care has expanded exponentially. Maybe Whedon didn’t pay attention in history class. Oh well. He’s still got fans like you forking over bucks and making him a millionaire countless times over. Odd that he doesn’t consider himself “greedy” … but guys like Mitt Romney were. Typical Hollywood hypocrite.

T. Van: Seriously … if you had to make your living as a lawyer, you’d starve to death. After sequaciously presenting false evidence (e.g. your “Whedon admits they filmed a strange health care/welfare scene in The Avengers” comment) you’ve now gone off on unrelated tangents. These have ranged from the alleged greed of Governor Romney to the “exponentially” increased role of government in health care. I’m surprised that you haven’t yet tried to tie your health care obsession to the fate of Agent Coulson.

How about this; “my bad. Whedon didn’t say that. I was wrong.”

Douglas: I can’t help it if you’re incapable of extrapolating context from a simple point. If Whedon put the health care line in the script why would he then call it “strange” or “weird”? He wouldn’t. It was obviously an opinion I affixed to the decision because it IS strange and weird.

I’d also be willing to bet that Disney thought so too, and whispered in his ear to take it out.

Now go run along and play with your friend T. Money. Maybe you can start by going to YouTube and searching “Whedon on Romney.” And you’ll see you were totally right; my Romney comment was completely out of left field…

T. Van: You’re not extrapolating, you’re fabricating (e.g. simply making things up). As a helpful hint, do know that it’s pretty obvious.

I tell you what; go find proof that Joss Whedon “admitted” to having “filmed” a “health care scene” for the Avengers, and make your way back here. Believe it or not, that was actually the first claim you made in this discussion. Granted, anyone can see that you’re trying to change the subject because you know your initial statement was incorrect— so I suspect you won’t even try. After all, it’s much easier for you to criticize Hollywood celebrities, misdirect attention to political parody videos and continue to suck.

Douglas: [Ask and ye shall receive.] Joss Whedon: “One of the best scenes that I wrote was the beautiful and poignant scene between Steve and Peggy [Carter] that takes place in the present. And I was the one who was like, ‘Guys, we need to lose this.’ It was killing the rhythm of the thing. And we did have a lot of Cap, because he really was the in for me. I really do feel a sense of loss about what’s happening in our culture, loss of the idea of community, loss of health care and welfare and all sorts of things. I was spending a lot of time having him say it, and then I cut that,” (emphasis added).

Note: “I was spending A LOT of time having HIM say it.” (IT being the loss of community, health care and welfare CAP was talking about.) Who is Whedon saying “Guys, we need to lose this” to? Himself? Or the cast, as they’re doing takes and filming and trying to edit it in and it’s just not working? I think we know the answer. Who “sucks” now, “T. Van”?

Case closed. Fitting, given your lawyer crack earlier. There is no need for Cap to spend “a lot of time” talking about “the loss … of health care and welfare” unless Whedon had a weird agenda. But since his agenda is “beautiful” (to he and you, apparently), you can’t see it.

Now I’ll leave you to go back and work on your reading comprehension skills, “T. Van.” Feel free to come back with yet another personal attack, since you mistake that tactic for actual wit. Next time you accuse someone of “manipulating” a story, you might take into consideration the possibility that the actual quote in question will show up during the exchange.

Thanks for the blogging material.



This is why I suggest conservatives who feel as though they have something to say simply start their own blogs and devote the bulk of their time to doing that. Google and other search engines will become your friend over time. Google generally doesn’t give a crap about the comments sections of websites. Is it really worth it to bicker with anonymous guys who puff out their chest and let the insults fly behind the safety and security an internet forum provides?

“T. Van” is so blind that he can’t even see that while he was accusing me of manipulating the facts, the actual text shows that it was he who was muddying the water.


  • Whedon is openly liberal and doesn’t shy away from injecting himself into the national discourse as it pertains to public policy.
  • He is concerned with the “loss” of “health care and welfare.”
  • He “was spending a lot of time” having CAP talk about those things.
  • He told the “guys” (i.e., cast, crew) that his “beautiful” speech was throwing off the pacing of ‘The Avengers’ (i.e., they were trying to make it work on set and it was like trying to put a square peg into a round hole), so he cut it. You would only know if the scene was throwing off the pacing if you had already filmed and were trying to splice it all together after the fact.

In the liberal mind, accurately pointing out the reality of what Whedon was attempting to do is “manipulating” and “sucking.” Somehow, a guy who makes anti-Romney YouTube videos that are seen by millions of people right before an election isn’t germane to a debate about whether or not movie directors inject their personal politics into finished projects. Pointing out that Joss Whedon’s conclusions are based on a false history is “misdirection.”

How is this for misdirection — or not, since it’s completely relevant to the debate:

Captain America was frozen after World War II, before Medicaid and Medicare even existed. Social Security morphed into something entirely new and different than the “Social Security” that FDR signed into existence (i.e, much more expansive).

To sum it all up, I suppose guys like me, who continuously harp on the nation’s $17 trillion debt problem (and growing), are “continuing to suck.” And if you go by House and Senate Democrats, pointing out the actual debt is “manipulating” reality, since they argue that we don’t have a spending problem — we have “a paying for problem.”

It seems like T. Van is setting himself up to be a Democrat Senator from Maryland. Bravo.


  1. I love how even though you provided the quotes and evidence, that this dude STILL accused you of making things up. That seems to be a common progressive tactic these days; when they can’t come up with a legitimate argument, they accuse you of making things up, even if you’re not. It’s ridiculous.

    And this is partially why I don’t comment on forums like that (Newsarama, CBR, etc)… I can’t stand the people who populate them. They put creators like Whedon onto some kind of pedestal and somehow people like Whedon become immune to criticism, which would explain why “T-Van” reacted the way he did.

    1. It reminds me of Kevin Smith fans years ago (and maybe today, I haven’t paid too much attention to him since his last movie came out). Years ago I was a huge fan of his, and he basically said he was above doing another ‘Clerks’ flick. Well, ‘Jersey Girl’ bombed, and suddenly he was going to come back with ‘Clerks 2’. It was a total reversal. I casually mentioned that it looked bad on his site and people freaked out.

      Then he had his run on Spider-Man, where Spidey was breaking a common thug’s nose (totally out of character) and essentially treating Peter as if he was one of his ‘Clerks’ characters. But God forbid someone point that out…

      I’m on record: I thought ‘The Avengers’ was a great flick. But having a random scene in the middle of the movie where Cap talked about losing health care — even a single line — would have been awkward. It would have been, by definition, a “sucker punch.” And if Whedon was going to pull a stunt like that, he should have at least made sure his history was right.

      Regardless, the dude makes an anti-Romney viral video weeks before a presidential election, and then liberal fans like “T. Van” act as if editorial concerns conservatives have are pulled out of their butts. Then we have Samuel L. Jackson, who admitted he voted for President Obama in 2008 solely for the color of his skin; Mark Ruffalo essentially wants to stop oil companies from providing gas and heat to our homes (i.e., Ruffalo is an activist who contributes to fracking hysteria); and Scarlett Johansson hawked Barack Obama clothing and accessories for his re-election campaign.

      Nope. Nothing to see here. Move along. Move along.


  2. I, like Carl, usually don’t comment at places like CBR, and if I do, I will comment only in a “hit and run” fashion — I won’t keep coming back to endure emotional personal attacks.

    The current controversy regarding Orson Scott Card is another one. I’m currently engaged in a back-and-forth with one who despises Card, and most recently said “he doesn’t want to see Card fired b/c DC has a right to hire him,” but “I have the right to want him fired.” WTF? As I said in the conversation, I disagree with Card’s views, but if it is OK to ax him for his views, then why not Gail Simone for her views on the NRA and guns? The good thing is, many comic creator liberals who disagree with Card do not think he should lose his job merely for his opinions.

    Oh, and beautiful take-down of that “T-Van,” Doug. 🙂

    1. Thanks, Hube!

      I’ve glanced at Simone’s Twitter feed a few times since the Card stuff started, and she just comes across as an angry petulant person.

      As you astutely point out in the other thread, the 2nd Amendment is a right that is actually codified into law, and somehow women like her — who “hate” the NRA — don’t see the irony of going after Card and trying to get him fired.

      I don’t think Gail Simone should be able to determine when, how and if I defend myself and my family. The 2nd Amendment wasn’t meant for shooting squirrels … it was meant as a bulwark against tyranny. I suppose Joss Whedon will pen a “beautiful” speech on gun control into the next Avengers flick when all is said and done. I can’t wait.

    2. LOL. Probably. I mean, I wouldn’t put it past Whedon. This whole putting celebrities and comics creators on a pedestal as if they’re some kind of deity thing is something I’ve always been critical of. I remember in twelfth grade, I criticized Joaquin Phoenix and his loony animal rights “activism,” and pissed quite a few people. I criticized all those celebrities who would protest the Iraq and Afghanistan Wars and that would piss of quite a few people at school, too. I was always told that I should be glad “that these people are using their stature to highlight these important issues” or some such nonsense. Either that, or I was told to “get a life” or “stop making things up,” just what T-Van told you.

  3. It’s not just about someone having views that may differ from DC, Card outright supports hate groups with his money, something that goes against Superman’s ideals (as well as showing he doesn’t know the character); if it was that he was using money to actively fund the Neo-Nazi Party, or KKK, DC would (and should) distance themselves from such a man, and there would be much more outrage than there is. Card preaches hatred and spews lies and to not want this man employed on Suoerman should be a given.

  4. By the way, I do agree that people on sites such as CBR, Comic Book Movies, or whatever, often put someone on a pedestal and rarely can that person be brought down (realistically) while others are vilified just the same.
    As for Kevin Smith, I lost any respect for him when he decided that Black Cat’s origin needed rape, and as for Whedon, despite having some great writing skills, still had so many continuity issues with Buffy, I don’t understand where the “genius” comes into play. However, no one is perfect, but sometimes it seems that both sides need to remember that about these writers/ artists/ creators/ film makers.

    As for the politics in the next Cap movie, although noble in that Whedon wanted a topical issue addressed, I’m happy that the speech may just be a Blu-Ray extra, only because it seems that it might slow the movie down. However, having Cap speak about something of concern to him wouldn’t be out of character, just as the misogyny from Tony Stark is not out of place over in his franchise. 😉

  5. Erm…sir, I’d like to respectfully say that this other person seemed to be in the right. The quote you provided verified HIS point, that the scene wasn’t about healthcare, but rather about cultural change, including but not limited to the alteration of healthcare. There was really no emphasis put on that particular element. Joss Whedon’s statement seemed to imply as much.

    1. Well R.C., if after reading everything I wrote and all the comments below … if you still respectfully disagree, then I salute you. We will respectfully disagree with one another.

    2. Sometimes you can just tell someone’s politics by their response. If they have to reach to validate someone else, odds are they are defending that person and those views rather than responding with a valid argument.

      “R.C.” is reaching like Reed Richards.

    3. Thanks for the read and comment, Chuckie. I like the Reed Richards analogy!

      The funny (yet sad) thing is, there’s a part of me that thinks R.C. really was capable of creating a false reality for himself. The facts are cut-and-dry, and yet faced with them he chose to completely ignore the truth in favor of something that would make him feel better about the situation.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s