Movie Stars of Yesteryear

[Dave Schwartz]

I captured this off a newsgroup's political section. I think it is a good read.
+++++++++++++++

Stars of the 1940's

The Entertainers of 2003 have been in all of the news media lately. It seems that Newspapers, Television and Radio has been more than ready to put them and their message before the public.

I would like to remind you of what the entertainers of 1943 were doing, (60 years ago). Most of these brave men have since passed on.

Alec Guinness (Star Wars) operated a British Royal Navy landing craft on D-Day.

James Doohan ("Scotty" on Star Trek) landed in Normandy with the U.S. Army on D-Day.

Donald Pleasance (The Great Escape) really was a R.A.F. pilot who was shot down, held prisoner and tortured by the Germans.

David Niven was a Sandhurst graduate and Lt. Colonel of the British Commandos in Normandy.

James Stewart flew 20 missions as a B-24 pilot in Europe.

Clark Gable (Mega-Movie Star when war broke out) was a waist gunner flying missions on a B-17 in Europe.

Charlton Heston was an Army Air Corps Sergeant in Kodiak.

Earnest Borgnine was a U.S. Navy Gunners Mate 1935-1945.

Charles Durning was a U.S. Army Ranger at Normandy.

Charles Bronson was a tail gunner in the Army Air Corps.

George C. Scott was a U.S. Marine.

Eddie Albert (Green Acres TV) was awarded a Bronze Star for his heroic action as a U.S. Naval officer aiding Marines at the horrific battle on the island of Tarawa in the Pacific Nov.1943.

Brian Keith served as a Marine rear gunner in several actions against the Japanese on Rabal in the Pacific.

Lee Marvin was a marine on Saipan when he was wounded.

John Russell was a Marine on Guadalcanal.

Robert Ryan was a U.S. Marine who served with the O.S.S. in Yugoslavia.

Tyrone Power (an established movie star when Pearl Harbor was bombed) joined the Marines, was a pilot flying supplies into, and wounded Marines out of Iwo Jima and Okinawa.

Audie Murphy, little guy from Texas, most decorated serviceman of WWII.

I wish I had room to tell you more about Actor Sterling Hayden and an actor by the name of Peter J. Ortiz (Twelve O'clock High, Rio Grande and The Wings of Eagles), but this would turn into a book.

There is a huge gap between the heroics and patriotism of the actors in 1943 and the cowardly despicable posturing of the Hollywood crowd of today. Most of them have no education with substance, never held a real job, attended some back street acting school, and now they are self proclaimed experts on everything. And the media cannot wait to interview them on world affairs.

[andicap]

Not to defend anyone from Hollywood but just one comment to defend the media;

The media would not interview anybody if the public didn't want to read it.
Blame the public, not the media. Don't blame the messenger. The public eats up celebritiy news like my dog eats up scraps. Some people read about it because they admire these people; some people read about them to laugh at them; some people can't help themselves, it's a guilty pleasure, a form of escape or relaxation; some people read about them because they are envious of their lifestyles and life vicariously through their (mis) adventures.

But the bottom line is -- and this has been going on for years and years -- the public LOVES to read about what stars are saying and doing, if only sometimes to sneer at them (like Sean Penn for instance).

Myself, I believe these stars have as much right as you and to speak out. The only difference is no one gives a rat's ass what I say, that is my opinion on the war won't be published anywhere.

Question: If you had a forum to millions of people and a strong opinion on a subject, wouldn't you express it? Of course you would. You post here, don't you. OK, so you have maybe 500-600 readers here (maybe). Wouldn't it be great if you multiplied that by 10,000?

Well, that's what the stars do. The stars don't DEMAND that people read what they say. They don't scream and stomp their feet if the press IGNORES their opinion on the war. SOMEONE asks them and they answer. It so happens that the media believes -- and they are right -- that millions of readers and TV viewers around the world are interested, if only to sneer and make fun of them.

And of course, the stars don't mind the publicity.

I agree with you about the heroism of the stars in the 40s -- I am a big fan of the old time stars and love Turner Classic Movies. Remember they are part of The Greatest Generation, my dad's generation, so they were not unlike the millions of other selfless men and women who defended us in WW II.

You also have to remember that WW II was a different war than Iraq. It was not controversial. Many people were and remain against the war, but you couldn't argue with fighting Hitler.
(No, I don't want to get into a debate about the war).

Also remember, that the stars you hear about are a great minority of the people in Hollywood.

[Dave Schwartz]

Andicap,

>>>You also have to remember that WW II was a different war than Iraq. It was not controversial.<<<

I would disagree with this statement. I read recently (not neccessarily a reliable source) that roughly 40% of America was against entering war with Germany.

The difference between the wars is that the entire nation got behind the war effort in WWII. (Okay, a very great majority; I am sure there were SOME dissenters.)

I believe that in pre-1960s generations it was socially unacceptable to sopeak up against a war effort; that while others were risking their lives "for us" it was a cowardly thing to do. And, those previous generations could make the connection between Hitler and "us." This generation cannot see a connection between today and yesterday, beyond being consecutive days on the calendar.

Dave

[Lefty]

News Media these days are not content to be just the "messenger" too many times they want to "make" the news and not just report it. What do think all those countless polls are about?

[andicap]

Dave,
Yes, people were against the war -- until the Japanese bombed Pearl Harbor. There was a very strong isolationist element in the U.S. in the 1930s (I was a history major in college) made up mainly BTW of the right-wing (like Buchanan is an isolationist now).
"America Firsters" they were called. FDR desperately wanted to get us into the war against Hitler but public opinion was split -- even the Lend-Lease Act -- now seen as saving Britain's ass -- was controversial in 1940.

The Vietnam War was the not the first war that people openly questioned the country's role -- but it showed a lot of people that the military often lied (read "A Bright and Shining Lie" by Neil Sheehan) and it could not be trusted. Many people IMHO (yes, I'm the house liberal) have forgotten those lessons about the Pentagon.

Actually back in 1848, many Americans were against the Mexican War after it began and people started getting killed.

In 1916 Woodrow Wilson won reelection on the slogan "He Kept Us Out of War." Once the war began tho, anti-war protesters were persona non grata and even jailed.

Lefty, you and I don't agree on much, but I absolutely agree with you about polls.
In fact, I can gladen your heart by telling you one reason polls are no longer very accurate is that a lot of people refuse to take part and the polling organizations have trouble finding enough people to respond. Often the samples are skewed because of this.
I hate polls and am very happy the public is becoming to subvert them.

But again: IF THE PUBLIC DID NOT LOVE TO READ ABOUT POLLS, THE MEDIA WOULD NOT PUBLISH THEM.
So don't always blame the media. The fault, dear Brutus, is often in ourselves.
I would agree with you however, that the media does need to take some blame for the incessent polling. I mean, they're already polling for next year's election and 80% of the people have no idea who's even running for the Democrats.

[Lefty]

They'll know real soon who's running for the Dems. I understand ABC is running a special about the Dems candidates, I think, next week. Can you imagine that?