Ruining Your Heroes: George Bernard Shaw

You’ve probably seen the play My Fair Lady or have at least heard of the film with Audrey Hepburn, right? Delightful musical.

If you haven’t seen it, I’m sure Glenn Beck has.

FS-GLENN-BECK-SMUG

He loves the theatre.

The famous playwright George Bernard Shaw won an Oscar for the screen play “Pygmalion” which “My Fair Lady” is based on.

Georgey is a really popular guy. Just look on social media and you’ll find countless people who have made a hero out of the playwright George Bernard Shaw. Why? Because he sure had a lot of cute sayings. Like this one:

FS-GBS-PIN-FAMILY

“A happy family is but an earlier heaven.” Adorable.

You can tell how much he loves people. I found some other quotes from George Bernard Shaw that aren’t as well know. Like this one:

FS TITLE CARD HEART TEXT

“A great many people would have to be put out of existence simply because it wastes other people’s time to look after them.”

I told you he loves people. Oddly enough, no one has bothered to pin that one on Pinterest. Hmm.

I mean sure, George Bernard Shaw was an avowed Fabian socialist who LOVED eugenics and yeah, he believed everyone should have to justify their existence. You probably remember this classic:

Sure not everything Georgey said was so flowery and beautiful but he did have such a magical way with words.

Who wouldn’t want to celebrate such a wonderful, wonderful man who also said this:

FS TITLE CARD PIGGY TEXT

“I appeal to the chemists to discover a human gas that will kill instantly and painlessly. Deadly by all means, but humane not cruel.”

See, he’s so nice he wants the mass murder to be done in a humane way.

In 1934 he also wrote:

FS CUTE TEAROUT DECENT HUMAN

"The moment we face it frankly we are driven to the conclusion that the community has a right to put a price on the right to live in it … If people are fit to live, let them live under decent human conditions. If they are not fit to live, kill them in a decent human way.”

Again… kill them in a decent, human way.

Sure this might be a little creepy, but let me lighten things up with this GBS classic:

FS TITLE CARD WATER GLOBE

“The Nazi movement is in many respects one which has my warmest sympathy.”

Yeah the same guy our education system says is a genius was pretty much a fanboy of Hitler.

The New York Times wrote about his admiration in 1933. In the article, George Bernard Shaw describes Hitler as “a very remarkable, very able man,” and was a genius to realize “Germany had been kicked long enough.”

In fact, he sang Hitler’s praises every chance he could.

FS TEAROUT PRAISE HITLER

And he really didn’t care for the people Hitler was treating harshly. He had some choice words for them.

FS CUTE TEAROUT JEWS

"Stop being Jews and start being human beings."

To be fair later on, he did start to question Hitler a little bit.

FS CUTE TEAROUT MARRIAGE

“Instead of exterminating the Jews, he (Hitler) should have said, I will tolerate Jews to any extent as long as no Jew marries a Jewess. That is how he could build up a strong, solid German people.”

And by the way, he wasn’t just a fan of Hitler, George Bernard Shaw had a solid man crush on Stalin. He visited Russia and wrote:

FS CUTE TEAROUT RUSSIA

“There is not a more interesting country in the world today to visit than Soviet Russia, and I find traveling there perfectly safe and pleasant…Tomorrow I leave this land of hope and return to our Western countries of despair.”

He even recounted how generously he was fed by his hosts saying, “Starvation? Why, I’ve never eaten so wonderfully!” Mind you, his visit was during Stalin’s great famine when millions were dying of hunger.

Let’s not forget George Bernard Shaw’s love for another great Dictator: Mussolini! Shaw was such a fan he could imitate the dictator on the spot. You gotta watch his Mussolini impersonation:

He loved these despicable dictators because he thought they had the right ideas.

FS TEAROUT DICTATORS

I would agree with George, that yes, they do, do things. They killed people. I’m pretty sure that’s what he liked about them.

George Bernard Shaw sure did hate people, but he loved animals! He was a staunch vegetarian.

He is often quoted by PETA as saying:

FS-GBS-PIN-KITTY

“The worst sin towards our fellow creatures is not to hate them, but to be indifferent to them. That is the essence of inhumanity.”

Someone even published a George Bernard Shaw Vegetarian cookbook. Bizarre.

I’m wondering if you were to make a stew out of the people he wanted to humanely kill, would that be vegetarian? As long as you don’t use beef broth, you should be ok.

I think we can all agree, both on the Left and the Right, that children who have been caught up in illegal immigration is an awful situation. But apparently what no one can agree on is when it matters to them. This past weekend, it suddenly — and even a little magically — began to matter to the Left. Seemingly out of nowhere, they all collectively realized this was a problem and all rushed to blame the Trump administration.

RELATED: These 3 things need to happen before we can fix our border problem

Here's Rachel Maddow yesterday:

I seem to remember getting mocked by the Left for showing emotion on TV, but I'll give her a pass here. This is an emotional situation. But this is what I can't give her a pass on: where the heck was this outrage and emotion back in 2014? Because the same situation going on today — that stuff Maddow and the rest of the Left have only just now woken up to — was going on back in July 2014! And it was arguably worse back then.

I practically begged and pleaded for people to wake up to what was going on. We had to shed light on how our immigration system was being manipulated by people breaking our laws, and they were using kids as pawns to get it done. But unlike the gusto the Left is using now to report this story, let's take a look at what Rachel Maddow thought was more important back in 2014.

On July 1, 2014, Maddow opened her show with a riveting monologue on how President Obama was hosting a World Cup viewing party. That's hard-hitting stuff right there.

On July 2, 2014, Maddow actually acknowledged kids were at the border, but she referenced Health and Human Services only briefly and completely rushed through what was actually happening to these kids. She made a vague statement about a "policy" stating where kids were being taken after their arrival. She also blamed Congress for not acting.

See any difference in reporting there from today? That "policy" she referenced has suddenly become Trump's "new" policy, and it isn't Congress's fault… it's all on the President.

She goes on throughout the week.

On July 7, 2014, her top story was something on the Koch brothers. Immigration was only briefly mentioned at the end of the show. This trend continued all the way through the week. I went to the border on July 19. Did she cover it? Nope. In fact, she didn't mention kids at the border for the rest of the month. NOT AT ALL.

Do you care about immigrant kids who have been caught in the middle of a broken immigration system or not?

Make up your minds. Is this an important issue or not? Do you care about immigrant kids who have been caught in the middle of a broken immigration system or not? Do you even care to fix it, or is this what it looks like — just another phony, addicted-to-outrage political stunt?

UPDATE: Here's how this discussion went on radio. Watch the video below.

Glenn gives Rachel Maddow the benefit of the doubt

Rachel Maddow broke down in tears live on her MSNBC show over border crisis.

Progressives think the Obamas are a gift to the world. But their gift is apparently more of the metaphorical kind. It doesn't extend to helpful, tangible things like saving taxpayers money. Illinois has approved $224 million to pay for street and transportation upgrades around the planned site of the Obama Presidential Center. The catch is that Illinois taxpayers will have to cover $200 million of that cost. For a presidential museum.

Eight years of multiplying the national debt wasn't enough for Barack Obama. Old fleecing habits die hard. What's another $200 million here and there, especially for something as important as an Obama tribute center?

RELATED: Want to cure millennials' financial woes? Reform the payroll tax.

That's all well and good except Illinois can't even fund its pension system. The state has a $137 billion funding shortfall. That means every person in Illinois owes $11,000 for pensions, and there is no plan to fix the mess. Unless Illinois progressives have discovered a new kind of math, this doesn't really add up. You can't fund pensions, but you're going to figure out a way to milk the public for another $200 million to help cover the cost of a library?

It's hard to imagine who in their right mind would think this will be money well spent. Well, except for maybe Chicago Mayor and former Obama Chief of Staff Rahm Emanuel who said, "The state's… investment in infrastructure improvements near the Obama Center on the South Side of Chicago is money well spent."

Some presidential overreach lasts longer than others.

The spending has already been signed into law, even though the Obama library has not received construction approval yet. Part of the holdup is that the proposed site is on public land in historic Jackson Park. That doesn't seem very progressive of the Obamas, but, you know, for certain presidents, you go above and beyond. It's just what you do. Some presidential overreach lasts longer than others.

Here's the thing about taxing the peasants so the king can build a fancy monument to himself – it's wrong. And completely unnecessary. The Obamas have the richest friends on the planet who could fund this project in their sleep. If the world simply must have a tricked-out Obama museum, then let private citizens take out their wallets voluntarily.

As the Mercury Museum proved this weekend, it is possible to build an exhibit with amazing artifacts that attracts a ton of visitors – and it cost taxpayers approximately zero dollars.

'The fool builds walls': China blasts Trump over tariffs

NICOLAS ASFOURI/AFP/Getty Images

I can picture it now: Thousands of years ago, Qin Shi Huang, the first emperor of China, standing before hordes of his followers, in the Qin Dynasty, with a bright red bamboo hat on, and chanting, "Build that wall!"

It took a couple centuries to build the thing, but it got built. And it has been carefully maintained over the last 2,000 years, but, today, the Great Wall of China is so massive that astronauts can see it during good weather conditions from the lower part of low Earth orbit. The wall boasts over 3,000 miles of towers and brick embankments, with over 1,200 miles of natural defensive barriers. It's worth mentioning that the Chinese government is also exceptionally good at imposing digital walls, so much so that China ranks worst in the world for internet freedom.

RELATED: Trump is following through on his campaign promises. Here are the top 10.

So it's a little strange to hear an editorial run by a major news network in China criticized President Trump for his proposal to build a large wall along the southern border of America.

"Following the path of expanding and opening up is China's best response to the trade dispute between China and the United States, and is also the responsibility that major countries should have to the world," the author wrote. "The wise man builds bridges, the fool builds walls."

Similarly, the Pope told reporters in 2016, "A person who thinks only about building walls, wherever they may be, and not building bridges, is not Christian. This is not the gospel."

Don't throw stones at people who want to build walls when you live in place surrounded by walls.

If you've been to the Vatican, you know that it is surrounded by enormous walls. The same goes for all the celebrities who live in heavily walled compounds—a safety measure—but who have also vehemently criticized President Trump's plans to build a wall.

You know the adage: "People who live in glass houses shouldn't throw stones at other people's glass houses." Perhaps the phrase needs an update: Don't throw stones at people who want to build walls when you live in place surrounded by walls.

An immaculate Nazi doctor hovers over newborn. He probes and sneers at it. "Take it away," he says. This is the very real process that Nazi doctors undertook during the era of Nazi Germany: Nazi eugenics, the studious, sterile search to find children who would define a pure breed for the German lineage. The Übermensch.

RELATED: Glenn responds to advocates of aborting Down syndrome babies: 'No better than Nazi Germans'

During a speech to a delegation of Italy's Family Association in Rome on Saturday, Pope Francis referred to this cruel Nazi practice, which he used as a comparison to the increasingly popular process throughout Europe of "ending" birth defects, by offering abortions to women who have babies with chromosomal defects.

Here are two passages from the Pope's remarks:

I have heard that it's fashionable, or at least usual, that when in the first months of pregnancy they do studies to see if the child is healthy or has something, the first offer is: let's send it away.

And:

I say this with pain. In the last century the whole world was scandalized about what the Nazis did to purify the race. Today we do the same, but now with white gloves.

When CNN got the quote, and it shocked them so much that they had to verify the quote with the Vatican—in other words, it didn't fit the usual narrative.

It didn't fit the usual narrative.

The Pope also addressed claims that he has dedicated himself to LGBTQ causes:

Today, it is hard to say this, we speak of "diversified" families: different types of families. It is true that the word "family" is an analogical word, because we speak of the "family" of stars, family" of trees, "family" of animals ... it is an analogical word. But the human family in the image of God, man and woman, is the only one. It is the only one. A man and woman can be non-believers: but if they love each other and unite in marriage, they are in the image of God even if they don't believe.

The media have largely seen Pope Francis as the cool Pope, as the Obama of Catholicism. It'll be interesting to see how abruptly and severely that perspective changes.