Originally published May 30, 1997, in Comics Buyer’s Guide #1228
Essayists and political analysts with far more political savvy than I (which, frankly, isn’t all that much of a trick) have been commenting that President Bill Clinton has his eye on the history books. That his current policies and actions are being taken, not only with a consideration towards how they will affect his constituency (namely everyone) but also how he will be perceived by future voters and generations.
It’s evocative, to a certain degree, of some of former-president Nixon’s actions, which were allegedly taken–not out self-preservation or an eagerness to cover up the potentially criminal activities of himself or others–but rather out of obligation to future generations of presidents (to say nothing of future burglars and cover-up artists) and how he himself would be portrayed by historians.
And it’s been interesting to see how both historians and politicians have viewed, or even manipulated, the track records of past presidents. During recent presidential campaigns, both GOP and Democrats endeavored to portray themselves as heir apparents to Harry Truman, the humble haberdasher who stepped into the massive shoes of FDR and authorized the ushering in of the atomic age. There are those who would focus on the monumental achievement of the former, while others who would condemn him for all time for the latter.
When Richard Nixon passed away, there seemed to be a battle between varied schools of thought as those who remembered Nixon the (I am not a) crook went toe to toe with those who wished only to focus on his achievements other than being the first sitting president to resign. Should Nixon have been canonized? Or should he have been shunned?
Well, interestingly, the world of Captain America has weighed in on the topic, and the results are–to say the least–surprising.
Apparently, according to Cap lore, Harry Truman was a villain who would destroy the life of one of America’s premiere heroes, while Richard Nixon heroically threw himself on his figurative sword–allowing the world to think that he was covering up personal misdeeds–rather than risk the history of Captain America becoming public.
Boy, and I thought historians could be severe.
In Captain America #3, we find ourselves in 1945, with Captain America in a face-to-face with Harry Truman. We watch, impressed, as two of the great figures of World War II discuss matters of great importance.
Admittedly, we’re even more impressed as we watch furniture in the Oval office rearrange itself over the four page sequence: A large easy chair disappears between page 2 and 3; an area of window sill which had been empty is suddenly filled with photographs; a manila folder and bookends presents on page 2 and 3 disappear on page 4, and a globe turns around by itself–which is something of a blessing, I guess, in that we don’t have to look at South America practically touching Europe anymore. If that’s what Truman was using as a guide, we’re dámņëd lucky he didn’t accidentally nuke Brisbane instead of Hiroshima.
Nor does Captain America seem to know what to do with his feet. Sometimes he’s standing there with his feet next to each other, at attention, as would be appropriate for a soldier facing his commander in chief. Then later his legs are spread wide, perhaps anticipating a gynecological exam. And for some bizarre reason, in one panel he’s standing only on his left leg, with his right leg cocked, as if a grand jete were imminent, or perhaps he’s scratching his left calf with his right foot like an uneasy four-year-old, or perhaps he’s symbolically trying to knee Truman in the crotch. And yes, in case you’re wondering, yes, his knee is pointy, although it should be noted that one-eyed Nick Fury is safely out of the room, having learned his lesson.
In any event, we witness President Truman giving Cap a severe ego stroking, telling Cap that “I’d like to think we couldn’t have won the war in Europe without you.” But then Truman informs Cap that, thirteen hours previously, an atomic bomb has been dropped on Hiroshima (interesting that it’s been half a day and that’s still not public knowledge.) Cap is outraged at the decision. Apparently deciding that it’s not the best time to let ol’ winghead know that real estate prices in Nagasaki are going to be taking a serious dip in a day or so, Truman instead tells Cap, “I want you to stand by my side when I tell the Congress and the American people on radio that you support this decision.”
Cap doesn’t bother to point out that, vis a vis the American people, it’s not going to matter whether he’s by Truman’s side or in Bumblefudge, Nebraska: No one’s gonna see him because, y’know, it’s radio. Truman could have stood there going, “Right, Cap?” and had a sock puppet saying, “Right, Mr. President,” and Aunt Louise and Uncle Mortimer will just nod and listen.
Never mind that, though. Cap respectfully declines. Turning the page, we see Cap standing with his legs wide again, hand outstretched, in a manner that suggests he’s stopping traffic so that kindergartners can cross the street and get to school. Cap informs Truman, “I cannot and will not, in good conscience, support this decision. One of the founding principles upon which this great country was based is the Freedom of Speech. You did what you thought was necessary to bring this horrible war to an end. I disagree with you. And we can stand here until tomorrow morning and I will still disagree with you. I won’t have any part of it. And if that means the people in this room are going to suffer the consequences for their actions, then it’s time you learned: If you can’t take the heat, get out of the kitchen!” And then Cap storms out.
This leaves Truman somewhat teed off. He proclaims, “We can’t have someone as popular as Captain American raising Cain with our policies.”
And then Nick Fury, looking a lot like Cable with an eyepatch, informs the President that they can basically take Captain America, wipe his memory, and put him out of commission until they feel like bringing him back.
And Truman okays it.
That’s pretty amazing.
Let’s get this straight: We are asked to believe that “Give ’em Hëll Harry” Truman stands there and lets Captain America disobey his commander in chief. Last I checked, Cap–at least as Steve Rogers–was a soldier. Last I checked, that’s called–to put it mildly–insubordination. Last I checked, they can slap you in jail for that, for a real long time.
Truman doesn’t shout back. Doesn’t order Cap to get his red, white and blue butt back in there. Doesn’t pull rank. Doesn’t say, “Okay, fine. You’re fired. Turn in your costume and shield immediately, and by the way, you’re going to military prison. See ya, Steve.”
For that matter, he doesn’t even say, “I’m the President. You’re not. Take your best shot.” It’s not as if Presidents haven’t had high-profile and popular figures engage in major and very public disagreements. They’ve survived it.
But no. Truman, the man who wasn’t afraid to make the tough decisions and never backed down–the man who had the buck stopping at his desk–crumbles beneath the mere thought that Captain America was going to voice his sentiments publicly.
“Ya didn’t give me or the blasted president of the United States any kinda choice on the matter,” Nick Fury tells him. That’s right, kids. Harry Truman was so intimidated by Cap that he rode roughshod over Cap’s rights, authorizing his being mindwiped and being made a perpetual toy of the government, rather than risk a public face off. And Fury goes on to say, “You taking a stand against the president would’ve broken this country inta pieces.”
So: According to Cap’s revised lore, Truman was gutless, duplicitous, something of a frightened sheep, and willing to destroy the life of a man who disagreed with him, rather than try to seek a legal (albeit tacky) way of shutting Steve Rogers up, or else just live with Cap’s disapproval and say to the American people, “If Captain America was willing to put American lives at risk, that is naturally his call to make. I, however, was not. So if you care about your son’s lives, listen to me, and if you don’t care about their lives, listen to Cap. Thank you and good night.”
Broken the country into pieces? Highly doubtful. Steve Rogers archly informs Fury, “I happen to have a little more faith in the American people than you do, Fury,” and in this instance, he’s right. What’s unbelievable is that Truman didn’t. It’s as if the 1990s need to see cover-ups and clayfeet in every aspect of government has been layered onto one of the truly dynamic personalities of the 20th century, diminishing him just to serve the needs of a comic book.
But a mere four issues later, we’re back in the Oval Office, and Nick Fury is still there, but this time it’s Bill Clinton who’s being brought up to speed. The office has maintained its metamorphic powers: The objects on his desk change from one page to the next; a chair next to his desk disappears; his swivel chair suddenly grows legs, and then curved legs; a chest of drawers is replaced by a potted plant and then reappears; wall paintings disappear and return;, the number and nature of flags keeps changing; and the famed seal of the President of the United States on the carpet is nowhere to be seen… except on one page where the star border is plainly there; the number and arrangement of books on a wall shelf keep changing. To say nothing of the fact that the stripes on Clinton’s necktie go from diagonal slanting up to the right, to horizontal, to diagonal slanting down to the right, all in the course of two pages.
But at least the office remains oval. Maybe we should send in Scully and Mulder to investigate.
So there’s Clinton on the splash page, standing behind his desk, with his necktie tucked into his pants And Clinton says, “I think it’s time I knew everything,” thankfully clarifying in the next balloon, “Everything about Captain America.” As opposed to, say, everything about Dutch cabinet making. Or everything about walking down a couple of steps. Or even everything about everything.
And Nick Fury warns him–in a voice sounding more like an Oxford graduate than the street-scrapper word choice we usually associate with Nick (substituting the word “you” for the more colorful “ya,” for example)–“I’m not sure you want to know all the details, sir. Your predecessors chose to allow the government its secrets. You know? I mean, the last president who knew everything resigned. Those that followed him learned from his mistake.” (Or, if you’d prefer classic Nick speak: “I’m not sure ya want all the details, sir. Yer predecessors let the government keep its secrets, y’know? I mean, the last president who knew everythin’ resigned. So the guys after him knew better.”)
An astonished Clinton, with an oddly posed hand gesture that looks as if he’s offering Fury a chair, says, “Nixon? Nixon knew?”
“You think those missing minutes of the Watergate tapes were about something as mundane as a break in?” (“Ya didn’t think those missin’ minutes from the Watergate tapes were about something as dull as a break in, did’ja?”) And Val de la Fontaine confirms, “Nixon knew about Captain America, sir. And he chose to vacate his seat of office, rather than reveal what he knew to the world.”
Pretty dámņëd noble.
It’s not that revelations of his misdeeds, from cover-ups to secret bombings to obstruction of justice, were sending him heading straight for impeachment, putting him into a position wherein he had to resign in disgrace. No, no. Richard M. Nixon took one in the chest to avoid tarnishing the legend of Captain America.
Geez louise. Even Oliver Stone would have turned up his nose at that.
I know that those who would censor comics express the same sentiments as I am about to express, but I’m gonna say it anyway: C’mon, guys. Kids read this stuff.
Did Truman really have to be portrayed as a weak-kneed coward who ruined a man’s life rather than face off against him in a public tussle? Did Nixon’s resignation in disgrace really have to be attributed to some noble act of patriotism rather than a realization that he’d dug himself a hole he could never escape from?
Sure, these are just comics. Sure, it’s all just made-up. Sure, it’s just in fun.
But Truman the sinner? Nixon the Saint?
Just doesn’t seem right somehow.
I don’t think even Captain America would approve.
(Peter David, writer of stuff, can be written to at Second Age, Inc., PO Box 239, Bayport, NY 11705. He wishes to thank Pat O’Neill for pointing out this odd revisionist history, and eagerly awaits an upcoming Cap storyline wherein it’s revealed that Marilyn Monroe had a baby with Thomas Jefferson.)
• 
With apologies to the Rolling Stones, the closing made the following go through my head:
When every Cap is a criminal
And all the sinners saints
My friends just call me Liefeld
I’m in need of some restraint…
Was there a changing Oval Office in another comic? I have to wonder where he swiped that from.
That’s not as out of character for Nixon as it might seem. Remember, Nixon didn’t contest the rigged election of 1960 (despite Eisenhower’s urging to the contrary) because he didn’t want the faith of the people in the Presidency to be shaken. When it came to the way the public viewed American institutions, Nixon showed himself willing fall on his sword. I know that saying “Nixon” to those who call themselves liberals is like waving the proverbial red flag in front of a bull, but he did have some virtues.
I’m afraid you are repeating a bit of hardened conservative mythology regarding the 1960 election. The fact is that a recount was initiated in Illinois, one of the two states where it was alleged that massive vote fraud (Mayor Daley, Cook County) had stolen the election from Nixon. What happened was that the vote theft in Republican southern Illinois was even worse, and so the margin of victory actually increased during the recount.
Right now, there’s a part of me that would love to see Obama lose the popular vote, but win the electoral votes, just to see the Olympian-level flip-flopping that would occur in both parties from their 2000 positions.
I remember reading an article on Slate arguing a similar thing. It didn’t convince me. In the aftermath of the election, at least three officials went to jail for voter fraud in Cook County.
Texas, the other state, had counties where more people voted for Kennedy than they had registered voters. The Texas election board (all Democrats) certified the election for JFK before any challenges could be mounted. In both cases, Nixon distanced himself from any challenges posed, essentially undercutting the efforts.
Also, if this is a hardened myth on the right, it’s one perpetuated, by the left as well. I’ve heard more than one Democrat gleefully recount it as fact, stating that keeping Nixon out of the White House, especially in favor of JFK, was worth any electoral fraud. I remember in the aftermath of the 2000 election, one actor complained that Bush stole the election. When asked about the 1960 contest, his reply was, “Yes, but at least JFK stole that election with style!”
It’s worth noting that I’m not a fan of Nixon, either personally or politically. While I’ve always thought Watergate to be overblown, there’s no denying the man was creepy. His only redeeming feature to me was his anti-Soviet stance, and even that was overblown.
Yeah, having a personal goon squad go around breaking into places, stealing private documents relating to people you don’t like, all for the purposes of intimidation and harassment: no big deal. Totally an overblown scandal.
And how was that worse than Johnson having the FBI tap Goldwater’s phones? At least Nixon had the decency to outsource his thuggery.
Watergate was business-as-usual for both parties, and is only remarkable in that it did blow up. In fact, it was Watergate that gave birth to the phrase, “It’s not the crime, it’s the cover-up.”
I’m not saying it was a good thing, I just don’t see it as the threat to the Republic that it was portrayed as.
Fred Thompson does a better job of stating what is essentially my position on the matter than I can.
http://www.nationalreview.com/articles/302906/lessons-watergate-fred-thompson
I get Thompson’s point. Watergate wasn’t only about the evil of a specific group, but the dangers of unrestricted government power.
Agreed.
But I return to the grievance I have against libertarians and conservatives that love to pretend that the only dangerous power is that of government.
Organized religion has a lot of power that can be dangerous. Hegemonic social groups (like, say, white males) have a lot of power that can be dangerous. The wealthy have a lot of power that can be dangerous.
George Orwell himself said that there is no greater, no crueller tyranny than the tyranny of public oppinion, of tradition.
And that is why I have a hard time taking seriousy any right-wing guy claiming to be concerned about liberty.
remember an early Lee-Kirby issue f Captain America, in which, over a three-panel sequence, a Nazi was blasting away with a revolver … which was spewing ejected shells … and then when Cap knocked it out of his hand with a thrown stool, it was a Luger.
Well, if Stan Lee was to be believed, all German soldiers were Nazis and they all talked to each other in English with comically exaggerated accents.
Most of the Silver Age makes that ’90s Cap issue read like non-fiction.
So, when Cap’s shield isn’t available, he throws stool? Gross.
Craptain America?
Meanwhile, in the real world, when Gen. MacArthur was insubordinate, Truman forced him to resign for it. No kidnappings, no coverups, no hypothetical “mind-wiping” (which some folks then probably believed you could do with hypnotism), just following the policy that if a member of the Armed Forces, no matter the rank, disagrees with his Commander-in-Chief, said member keeps his disagreement within the chain of command, and doesn’t go public with it. Truman might not have ordered Cap to turn in his uniform in the scenario here – he might have just ordered Steve to keep his red-white-and-blue mouth shut – but he certainly wouldn’t have reacted as described here.
I do hope this whole sequence has been retconned right the frak out of continuity. It runs counter to reality, solely to boost one person’s view that the bombings of Hiroshima and Nagasaki were evil. (They were bad, certainly, but not as bad as the most optimistic scenarios for actual invasion of the Japanese home islands, which was the only other way the war was ever going to end. Sometimes, especially in war, you have to take the “less bad” solution, because there isn’t a “good” one.)
This sequence was part of the “Heroes Reborn” storyline, which turned out to have happened in an alternate Marvel universe. (Created by Franklin Richards? I can’t recall for sure, as I never read any of the “Heroes Reborn” series.) So, no, the whole sequence described here is not, and never was, part of regular Marvel continuity. (Except for attempts to deal with the whole thing in such comics as Exiles.)
As if we needed another reason to appreciate the good Capt America comics that Gruenwald and Stern and Waid and Brubaker have written, here is a reminder that it’s pretty easy to get everything wrong.
Whose run on the title was this? Was this Mark Waid and Ron Garney on the “Heroes Return” title?
Nope, Luigi. The sequence Peter described was from Rob Liefeld’s “Heroes Reborn” version of Cap. And as Kim suggested, the Heroes Reborn universe was, indeed, created by Franklin Richards to save the lives of the FF, Avengers and others who sacrificed themselves (or at least thought they were doing so) to defeat the menace called Onslaught. I think if Reed and Sue had ever found out what a skewed version of American history li’l Franklin had created, they’d seriously question the value of their home schooling.
Onslaught Fun Fact: In the final, uh, onslaught, on Onslaught, the Avengers, FF and X-Men were all present. Since the X-books were selling well at the time, it was explained (handwaving! handwaving! smoke and mirrors! smoke and mirrors!) that if mutants hurled themselves into the seething mass of energy that it had become, Onslaught grew stronger, whereas non-mutants weakened him. Therefore, the X-Men got to stand back and watch while the rest of the heroes took the supposed suicide dive. Except…among the heroes who took a flying leap into the baddie and helped defeat him were the Scarlet Witch, Namor and the Falcon (yep, his ability to communicate with birds was then considered to be a mutant power). Oops! Guess you needed an ID card from the Xavier School to strengthen Onslaught.
Is it any wonder I consider the mid-late ’90’s as the Black Hole Age of comics?
…mid-to-late ’90’s books by the author of this blog excepted, of course!
I wouldn’t except my work at that time, Chuck. The stories I produced at that time were substandard. The situation of having the Hulk “split” between the two comic universes…the stories were just a pain to write. What I should have done was quit. But remember, they had initially canceled “Hulk,” and book was saved through a massive groundswell of fan support and protest. So I felt obligated to do the best I could with a lousy situation. Ultimately I don’t feel I did very well; I should have followed my first instincts rather than obligation.
PAD
PAD,
How much of the aforementioned black hole of was due to editorial dictate, and how much was the mass delusion of writers? I always felt it was mostly the former, but I’d be interested in what percentage of blame you feel the writers shared.
I can appreciate that writers were put into an almost impossible situation after the initial success of Image made people who could string a sentence together seem unnecessary.
I’ll take my share of lumps for that bad situation, PAD, as I was part of that groundswell of support. In fact, the week the first “Heroes Reborn” book hit the stands, I dropped every single Marvel book I was reading at the time…except Hulk and Untold Tales of Spider-Man. (Owner of the store pointed out that I didn’t *quite* send the message I probably wanted to…he’d already ordered that month’s books and the next two months’ books, going by numbers based, in part, on in-store subscribers like myself. Waiting til the first day of release diluted my visible impact.) Looking back, I don’t think I ever quite got back into Marvel as heavily after that. As it stands, I think I’m currently reading two or three Marvel titles regularly.
And, yes…one of them is X-Factor.
–Daryl
I was already only reading “Incredible Hulk” at the time, because someone very high up at Marvel had gone out of his way to humiliate a friend of mine at a con. It wasn’t long before that high-up wasn’t so high-up anymore, but i still don’t read anything that he does.
PAD, any time someone says that the 90s were bad for comics, my first thought is, “No, we had Spider-Man 2099.” I absolutely loved that comic. I’m rereading it right now.
As opposed to, say, everything about Dutch cabinet making.
For the record, we get them from IKEA. And there is ALWAYS one part MISSING ! And you’ll see that it is always that one bit you have to have to put it together properly. (But that is international misery, and not just Dutch.)
As for the other kind of cabinet making, the elections are not until September…
I think the ’90s get waaaaaaaaay too much of a bum rap. I mean, seriously…the same people who look back nostalgically at Silver Age stories (or cose to them in spirit at least) where Batman realizes he has a long-lost brother who is killed “again” at the end of the story and never brought up again..or where Superman has to save the world by – ahem – eating cheeseburgers…or when even (the Shazam!)Captain Marvel’s super-speed and endurance – and appetite! – couldn’t get him to stop a jell-o type blob that was threatening the city by eating it fast enough…
.
I mean, really, were that many ’90s stories worse than that.
.
I think part of the problem is that the ’80s, having produced seminal works like “Batman: The Killing Joke”; “Batman: The Dark Knight Returns” and “Batman: Year One” and of course, “Watchmen”, Miller’s “Daredevil” and even Byrne’s “Superman” – well, to put it bluntly, I think readers got spoiled and put more of an importance on the writer than ever before.
.
So when that pendulum swung a bit, readers were mortified. But you know what? As much as people want to belittle the “Imaqe Era”..it did bring hordes of new readers into stores…that is not really a bad thing…I mean, there was a reason Rob Liefeld was doing Jeans commercials…and those who were attracted by artists like McFarlane and – to a lesser degree – Keown, got introduced to PAD’s writing when they otherwise may not have.
Well, I don’t believe in Golden Ages. I think Sturgeon’s Law is very consistent. If you coldly consider the entertainment and the arts from a given period, only 10% of the stuff is actually good.
It’s only that for certain periods we’re more fond of, particularly the older ones, we tend to overlook the 90% of mediocre/awful stuff and consider only the classics.
I mean, anyone remembers the hundreds of bad movies produced in the 1940s? We only remember CITIZEN KANE, THE MALTESE FALCON, THE LOST WEEKEND, stuff like that.
I think what happened in the 1990s is that the good stuff mostly stopped happened at Marvel. But you had Sandman, Preacher, Astro City, Starman, Transmetropolitan, lots of awesome comics.
And I think you mat be a bit too harsh on yourself as well, PAD…To be honest, I feel the year or two after the wrap-up of the Pantheon in issue #425 were more than a little confusing…even the kick-ášš “final” battle with Thor in #440.
.
But I actually thought your “split-Hulk” stories gave the book new energy (maybe because you were frustrated and angry and that reflected in your work on the character but in a good way?) and includes some of my favorite stories of your run – the “Keys” story line; the battles with Juggernaut and – perhaps my fondest moment – when the Hulk cries that he “just wants to be left alone!” and the female soldier – I forget her name – told him to Oh, cut the crap!”..how the world was full iof places he could go if he REALLY wanted to be left alone…and about how he continually came back to people because he had a warped view of love dating back to when he was a child.”
.
I thought that was powerful stuff, so I’m glad you didn’t quit:)