Mingling with celebrities at a pair of fundraisers in Connecticut last night, President Obama characterized Mitt Romney’s tax plan as one that would steal from the poor and give to the rich.
“It’s like Robin Hood in reverse,” he said to the laughter of a reception crowd at the Stamford Marriott. “It’s Romney Hood.”
“And if this sounds like an idea that’s difficult to explain or sell to the American people, you’d be right,” Obama continued. “So there were all kinds of different gymnastics being performed by the Romney campaign last week. They have tried to sell us this trickle-down, tax cut fairy dust before.”
Tickets for the 500-person reception started at $500 a head; the pool reporter said that the small ballroom was about four-fifths full. The dinner afterward at Harvey Weinstein’s home in Westport, Conn., cost $35,800 a head.
The celebrities at the movie producer’s house included Anne Hathaway, Aaron Sorkin, Anna Wintour, Joanne Woodward, and Jerry Springer.
“Leading with your heart is the utmost for this president. Fighting for Planned Parenthood and protecting women’s rights, this president has fought the good fight,” Weinstein said while introducing the president. “You can make the case that he’s the Paul Newman of American presidents.”
Obama took the time to acknowledge his celeb well-wishers, calling Hathaway “the best thing” in the new Batman movie and praising Sorkin, “who writes the way every Democrat in Washington wished they spoke.”
“When Mitt Romney says he wants to eliminate funding for Planned Parenthood I think he means it. When he says that Arizona is a model for how we should deal with immigration, I think that fundamentally misunderstands that we’re a nation of laws but also a nation of immigrants,” Obama said.
“So on a whole host of issues, you’ve got very stark differences. And the good news is that you guys are the tie-breaker.”
So his picture will now appear on bottles of salad dressing?
Robin Hood stole from the crown and feudal lords, i.e. THE STATE. He fought against unfair taxation BY THE STATE returning those revenues to the people who were forced to pay them in the first place. Robin Hood is an enemy of big government and if the media would do its job and make the right comparisons this joke would backfire on the one the way it should.
IT’S FUNNY OBAMA SHOULD TALK ABOUT ‘HOOD’
His ops act like nothing but thugs.
[I'm not Mike above, but I certainly agree w/him]
That’s a great point — Robin Hood was against the “State.”
I had forgotten that.
But most will just take it as it’s usually expressed — “stealing” from the Rich to give to the Poor.
The Zero casts himself as Robin Hood. Stealing.
If Romney is Romney Hood –
the Zero is President Oba-Hood-lum. Or O’Hoodlum, for short.
– thief.
Romney’s campaign should take this meme and run with it.
Do ads with Obama as sheriff of nottingham, living large while his subjects become impoverished, with Romneyhood as the only hope for a better future.
I don’t agree with the roll play portion of your suggestion. It would probably confuse the audience. However, I fully agree about the Romney campaign using this pack of lies video. However, I’m beginning to think Romney is working for Obama. His campaign seems so inept and toothless. As Glenn Beck said, Romney needs to take his balls out of the drawer and get to work.
Obviously, Robin Hood is yet another cultural reference that Obama doesn’t get.
OBMAM IS NOTHING BUT A LITTLE BOY, TRYING TO PLAY A BIG MAN…….
Judging from the twitersphere, it looks like Obama’s audience has never heard of Robin Hood. Ah the curse of ‘low-information voters’.
the curse of low info voters- with lots of money
talk about a mark ripe for robbery
no wonder obama spends all his time with these fools
Since our exhalted emperor is into “word/name games”, I assume he wouldn’t take issue with the phrase, “his obama nation has become an abomination”. I’ll be glad when this campaign is over, I’m tired of switching channels when I see his face/hear his voice on the station I was attempting to watch. He’s ruined a lot of good shows.
First Obama was Lincoln, then FDR, then Reagan, now he’s Neuman. If only he had anything in common with any of them. Even a little sliver of intelligence not warped by socialism. Even a sliver of actual compassion for others. Even a sliver of honesty. But he has none of it or none of them in him. In fact he’s so totally devoid of empathy and compassion it’s sociopathic.
So is Obama portraying himself as wasteful absentee King Richard, or greedy incompetent King John?
Maybe I’m too young to be a Newman fan, but the only movies that I can think of that he was in were Butch Cassiday & the Sundance Kid (playing a thief) and The Sting (playing a con-man).
Those do seem to fit with obama’s actions.
Oh, and Silent Movie. But at least Newman didn’t need a teleprompter in that one
I’m guessing that you meant Newman as in the salad dressing.
If you didn’t and really meant Alfred E Neuman (what me worry?) from Mad Magazine, then I’d say you were hitting the sweet spot.
Robin Hood stole from the government (i.e. Prince John) and gave back to the taxpayers (i.e. the poor). Robin Hood is the ultimate libertarian.
“The celebrities at the movie producer’s house included Anne Hathaway, Aaron Sorkin, Anna Wintour, Joanne Woodward, and Jerry Springer.”
These people are entirely welcome to limit their salaries to $100k/annum, thereby making entertainment products vastly more affordable for the average family during these straightened economic times.
In fact, I invite these standout citizens to lead the way and to limit their salaries to at least no more than what the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff makes. This should then help movie ticket prices come down tremendously.
And while we are talking about modern-day robber barons–would anybody at that party care to explain to me the cost markup on movie stand concessions?
From what I have read on the AlGoreNets….
Most of the movies coming out nowadays have rules for the movie-theater owners. They take 80% or more of the ticket sales. Steven Spielberg has demanded 100% of ticket sales for his Star Wars prequels, 3D reruns, etc.
So, how does a movie-theater owner make money? He/she has to increase the prices of concession fare. Trickle-up poverty….
So, the movie producers have become Robber Barons(akin to the gubment) and need Romney Hood to return the money to the average joe the plumber.
Yes, these were things I knew about the industry, though I do think the concession prices might have risen faster than costs. That I do not know.
I do know the fundamental reason for the current ticket and concession pricing structure is Hollywood greed–studios, producers, directors, actors, actresses. Forget being a cat burglar–Anne Hathaway has *directly* taken more money from middle class pockets than 99.99% of those who will ever cast a ballot for Mitt Romney this fall. I have no doubts Ms. Hathaway will argue it was a fair price charged and people did not have to pay.
Of course she would argue that. It suits her interests. And it may even be the right answer. Or it may not. But above all else, it suits her interests. Whether it suits society’s interests is something I am not as sure about.
These folks are part of the “authorized” 1%. When obama said, “At some point I think you’ve earned enough”, he was talking about Republicans and business CEOs who don’t support him. Not his donor base. Hypocrisy at it’s most glaring.
All I can say is I hope Mr. Newman was more of a mensch and not the putz Weinstein appears to be.
Obama is utilizing he who shall not be named‘s tactic of the big lie.
He’s so breathtakingly dishonest that normal people are at a (hopefully only temporary) loss for how to respond.
Boiling Robin Hood down to simple rich v. poor shows a really simplistic understanding of the story, but that doesn’t surprise me from liberal “intellectuals.”
Indeed it does. As I understand the common story, the people had no problem paying money to obtain good King Richard’s release from the captivity he found himself in upon trying to return from the Crusades. It was the usurpation of governmental authority and funds for the sole benefit of an elite connected to Prince John that was the issue–an elite who did not acknowledge the true sovereign of the land, nor an elite who understood why governments existed, but only how they existed.
The parallels to today will be left for the reader’s examination.
Obama is just pretending to be president? That explains a lot.
Chris Muir must be having a blast with this one. I can’t reach his web page for some reason:
http://www.daybydaycartoon.com/
I have not stepped into a movie theater since December 2008 to see Slumdog Millionaire ( and based on Danny Boyles Olympic opening ceremonies— praising a socialized health system that denies 135,000 people a year life-saving treatment—- I wished I hadn’t gone).
If Conservatives and Libertarians stopped going to Weinstein movies, he would shrivel up. Stop going to movies!!!!
if obama would care to look up some laws he would see that womans right are already protected by law and if they are trampled all they have to do is sue.
o and if romney is stealing in reverse than obama is just plain stealing??
Obama’s current meme of “Romney-Hood” is based a blatantly dishonest “analysis” of Romney’s tax proposal to reduce taxes on all Americans. Osama’s charge is that middle-income Americans will have to pay much more in taxes to make up for tax reductions to the so-called rich.
Thus you have “Robin-Hood in reverse,” or as Mr. Hope-n-Change quipped: “Romney-Hood.”
His allegation that under the Romney Plan the middle-class would see “huge tax increases” is the product of a “study” conducted by the far-left Washington D.C. “think-tank” called the Tax Policy Center.
In order to conclde that tax cuts for everyone would actually mean tax hikes for everyone but the “rich”, the Center had to rely on several faulty assumptions.
First,the Center had to conclude that the history of across-the-board tax rate reductions leading to actual revenue INCREASES to the Federal Government, never actually happened. That significant federal revenue increases following tax reductions to all segments of the economy under Presidents Coolage, Kennedy, Reagan and Bush-the-Younger, are figments of the imagination. They never occurred.
Second, their finding is based on “static” analysis, i.e., Americans would NOT change their economic behavior if they suddenly found themselves with more money following tax day. American capitalists would NOT invest this new-found wealth in new businesses and new ventures. American business-people would NOT use their new-found riches to open new branches, build larger plant, offer new products and services; and hire new employees. Middle ranked Americans would NOT use the increase in their income level to pay down debt, buy new homes, new cars, and new appliances or go on vacation.
No, for the first time in history none of these activities would happen and the taxable size of the American pie would Not grow. Under the Center’s so-called “analysis”, a capitalist would apparently stash the tax “wind-fall” into his safe and forget it was there. The businessman would stuff it into a strong-box, bury it in the ground and walk away. The middle-class American would sew it up into his mattress and simply sleep on it.
I suspect that my analysis of their conclusion is more on the mark. My analysis is that this think-tank is in the tank for Obama. That it is willing to tarnish what-ever reputation it might have in order to see The One re-elected. That in return for taking a dive for Obama, it has been promised something really attractive in an Obama second term.
And finally, it is my analysis that despite the glaring dishonesty of this study, its’ authors can still look at themselves in the mirror and have no trouble sleeping at night in full knowledge that Obama is using it to lie to the American people.
I was wondering where that meme of taxes raised on the middle class came from.
But we’re not even talking about any “cuts” — there are no “cuts.” “Cuts” were made about 10 years ago. They are tax rates now that Oba-Hoodlum wants to RAISE …
To steal from the “rich” who earn $200,000.
If the majority of American voters is now stupid enough to accept anything, anything at all this incompetent Chicago thug says, then we deserve our fate.
Isn’t Obama a cool dude? What a tool. And he is our President. ABO2012
Paul Newman?
More like Alfred E. Newman.
“What, me worry about the deficit?”
Harvey Weinstein is a snobbish, disdainful and patronizing bully, he is notorious for his grandiose sense of self importance. He believes that he is a modern day Robin Hood. He will call his markers in, it is his devious nature. Someone must inform the President that Weinstein is a ganef and meshugener. Hope he enjoyed the meal.
Chaim, dear. I hate to disillusion you. The “President” doesn’t care. The “President” is not only the same — but much worse. (Or, maybe you were joking.)
Economic Strategist Charles Payne had an EXCELLENT op-ed regarding Uhbama’s BS..
“When President Obama tossed out the one-liner about Romney-hood it got a lot of chuckles and laughs, but it was an incendiary statement designed to go beyond painting Mitt Romney as a crook; it was intended to depict all so-called rich people as thieves. This backward thinking is an insult to the country, the free market, and capitalism; it is the mantra of losers. It’s designed to get Americans angry enough to grab torches and burn the homes and businesses of successful people. It’s designed to promote theft, not warn against theft. This kind of language is designed to destroy dreams and dreaming”.
Mr. Payne continues with the ian infinite-like Pelosi-isms; TRYING-to-portray-herself-as-intelligent-though-is-obviously-too-stupid-to-convince-those-with-an-I.Q.-above-room-temp sound byte.
Whereas the geriatric bread-bowl hairdo insults the poor; essentially her base saying, ‘Its the biggest bang for the buck..’ (government’s buck) regarding poor people are too stupid, irresponsible to save and/or use the money in a more efficient manner. Rather the poor spend spend spend the meager dollars they get via food stamps and unemployment insurance on unnecessary items.
Seriously, why else would the poor be living hand-to-mouth for years, decades, multi-generations?
Pelosi and other Illiberals LOOOVE the government teet suckers.. i.e. those who stay on the plantation.. stagnant, unaccomplished types.