Rush Limbaugh

For a better experience,
download and use our app!

The Rush Limbaugh Show Main Menu

RUSH: The latest big lie the from Obama’s Truth Team is Mitt Romney wants to raise taxes on Americans while Obama wants to cut taxes. That’s the latest big lie. And they’re basing this ludicrous claim on a study that was written by an Obama supporter who was a senior economist for public finance and tax policy for Obama’s Council of Economic Advisers. They’re trying to make this thing stick, folks, by calling Romney “Romney Hood.” They’ve got ads. They’ve got all their talk-meisters out spreading that word. Romney is Romney Hood. The only problem is everybody misunderstands the Robin Hood story.

I’ll bet you more than half the people of this country think that what Robin Hood did was steal from the rich and give it to Lady Marian so that she would put out. If you watched the TV show, that’s what you probably thought. When I was growing up, Robin Hood and his band of merry men, Lady Marian in there, and the sheriff of Nottingham Forest was an evil guy. But the sheriff of Nottingham Forest was trying to always capture Robin Hood. Everybody thinks that Robin Hood was out there stealing money from the rich and taking it back and giving it to the citizens of Sherwood Forest. Robin Hood was stealing from the government. Robin Hood was a Tea Party activist. Robin Hood was anti-taxes. And that’s another myth. So many people misunderstand what Robin Hood’s all about. And, of course, the Democrats don’t care about the truth. They care about the illusion that they can carry forward.

So Obama is now trying to call Romney “Romney Hood.” By the way, this is not new. This is Obama in Stamford, Connecticut. They had a fundraiser last night at the home of movie tycoon Harvey Weinstein. Now, Harvey Weinstein is one of these guys we were talking about yesterday. We were talking about Charles Murray’s piece on capitalism and why it’s such a dirty word now. Charles Murray is a philosopher and a sociologist, think tank guy. I’ve met him. And he says that the problem with capitalism is that there are a lot of liberal capitalists who are embarrassed and they don’t talk about it and they don’t admit it and they don’t ascribe capitalism to their success. But they are big time capitalists. They also are people who have separated virtue from capitalism. As such, they seek to inoculate themselves from any criticism of being rich by running around and supporting candidates who attack the rich all the time.

So here you’ve got a guy, Weinstein, and he’s been big with Clinton. This a $35,000-a-plate fundraiser at his Westport, Connecticut, waterside estate. And, you know, I guess I’m more and more comfortable expressing my naivete to you. There’s just some things I don’t understand. Well, that’s not true. I understand ’em. I’m conflicted. I understand it and then I don’t understand it at the same time. I don’t understand how any wealthy person can oppose the system that made them wealthy, but I know that they do. And many of them do it to foreclose others from getting rich. Many of them, once they’ve got theirs, they want the ladder taken away. They’ve climbed the ladder, then they take it away, and they do this so that competitors can’t climb the ladder. They get in bed with government, crony capitalism, government helps them up the ladder, they succeed, and then they pull the ladder away. This has been Weinstein’s trick.

Weinstein has been buddy-buddy with Democrat presidents for as long as there have been in his lifetime. And, at the same time, you know, I ask myself, “Does he know what this guy plans? Does the guy raising $35,000 a plate know what is in store for this country?” You know, sometimes I go nuts asking myself these questions. I’ll sit there in moments of solitude, and I’m pondering this stuff, and I ask, “Do these people really know, or are they dunces?” This is not your average Democrat, Barack Obama. This is not Bill Clinton yukking around, chasing babes after you go to a ball game, have a couple beers and a hot dog. This is different. Do these guys not know, or do they not care? They’ve got theirs, do they figure people are always gonna scrounge up whatever it is to go to the movies, so who cares?

Literally, folks, sometimes I go nuts trying to intellectually understand this. I live in Realville. I’m seldom overcome with the emotion of any of this, and that’s where most people happen to reside. So, anyway, Weinstein’s out there, $35,000-a-plate fundraiser, and I’m thinking he’s got to know that if this guy succeeds any more, that the whole notion of this being a wealth-generating economy and country, the days are over. What is there to support? For anybody who’s been successful, what is there to support in Barack Obama? I literally go nuts asking myself the question. And then, of course, I answer it, I know what the answers are that explain it, but they don’t make sense to me if I assume the people I’m thinking about have any self-respect.

I can give you all the reasons I gave you yesterday to explain liberal capitalists, and they make perfect sense. And it still doesn’t satisfy me. I guess what I’m getting at is, I still think there’s an opportunity to get through to these people. That may be stupid to think, too. Anyway, it could be nothing more than these people are just celebrity… what’s the word that I can’t say? They’re groupies. They’re in the movie business, but they’re groupies themselves. They’ll pay and raise money to hang around power. There’s all kinds of stuff in here that I wouldn’t do, don’t do, am not interested in, and so it gets frustrating. I see people who are theoretically smart doing absolutely stupid, destructive things. I would love to ask, “Do you understand what you’re doing raising money and supporting this guy? Do you understand what you’re doing to the future movie-buying public? Do you understand what’s gonna happen to this country if this guy wins?”

I’m left to conclude they don’t understand or they don’t care or they do understand and they support it, for whatever reason. It could be nothing more complicated than just a bunch of celebrity intercoursers. Anyway, so a 35 grand fundraiser, and after that Obama fled and went someplace that was 75 bucks to get in and 400 people or what have you. And that’s where they announced this Romney Hood business, that Romney is the problem. Romney is going to raise your taxes. Romney’s gonna take your money away from you? It’s mind-numbing to listen to all this. Here’s Obama speaking at Weinstein’s fundraiser last night.

OBAMA: He’d ask the middle class to pay more in taxes so that he could give another $250,000 tax cut to people making more than $3 million a year. It’s like Robin Hood in reverse. It’s Romney Hood.

RUSH: These people are idiots. They’re abject idiots. The Anna Wintours of the world, the Sarah Jessica Parkers. They’re absolute, blooming idiots. They are applauding their own demise. They are applauding the guy that’s going to end it for them, but they don’t think so, don’t understand it. See, when I can’t intellectually understand something, that’s when I get frustrated. When something doesn’t make common sense to me, that’s when I get frustrated. Anyway, I’m getting sidetracked with this. I’m sharing my stream of consciousness with you, and it’s not good form ’cause I’m just babbling here. I don’t know where I’m going. I’m just sharing frustration.

Anyway, Romney Hood. Turns out this is another page from the Democrat Party playbook. There’s nothing new about this. Let’s go back, we’ve got sound bites here ranging from 1995 to 2011. The montage includes representative Albert Wynn, Democrat, Maryland, Debbie “Blabbermouth” Schultz from Florida, Clarence Page of the Chicago Tribune, the Demos public policy foundation — David Callahan, Charles Blow from the New York Times, and Vice President Algore. This is just a montage of sound bites from 1995 through the present…

ALBERT WYNN: Once again, they’re playing Robin Hood in reverse: Taking from the poor to give to the rich.

DEBBIE “BLABBERMOUTH” SCHULTZ: Really, it’s like reverse (pause) Robin Hoodism. It’s really (pause) shocking.

CLARENCE PAGE: Reverse Robin Hood. This is Reaganomics on steroids.

DAVID CALLAHAN: Robin Hood in reverse!

CHARLES BLOW: You cannot play Robin Hood in reverse!

ALGORE: It’s Robin Hood in reverse: Take from the kids, take from education, take from protecting our water.

RUSH: Oh, yeah! Oh, how could I forget that?

Pin It on Pinterest

Share This