Are You Helping Obama Rob the Armored Vehicle?

Prior to my going to lunch today, I heard a bit of Rush's radio program in which he played a clip of Obama playing the class warfare card against the rich. Of course this is nothing new. Obama regularly displays his hatred of Capitalism and free markets. Here is the transcript of the clip Rush played:

OBAMA: If we choose to keep those tax breaks for millionaires and billionaires -- if we choose to keep a corporate tax break for corporate jet owners, if we choose to keep tax breaks for oil companies that are makin' hundreds of billions of dollars -- then that means we've gotta to cut some kids off from getting a college scholarship. That means we've gotta stop ... funding ... certain grants for medical research. I think it's only fair to ask an oil company or a corporate jet owner that has done so well to give up that tax break that no other business enjoys.

First, I love how Obama states it. We just need to "ask" these evil corporations. Sounds comparatively nice to the reality of "if you don't cough up more money, we'll be coming after you with the IRS" doesn't it? Also, this isn't about raising revenue. As Libertarian economists have demonstrated, income stays about the same no matter what the rate it. You may either rape a few for all they are worth, or tax everyone at a lower rate. Since we know this is true, this proves Obama couldn't care less about revenue. It has everything to do with power.

So I went about my business of fine dining at my dinner table with my wife and kids. After I was done I sat down at the TV to see if there might be any interesting movies to record. For about five minutes I watched Armored. Here's the movies description.

A newbie guard for an armored truck company is coerced by his veteran coworkers to steal a truck containing $42 million. But a wrinkle in their supposedly foolproof plan divides the group, leading to a potentially deadly resolution.

Terribly wrong is where sin always takes you. But coerced is not exactly how Matt Dillon's character, Mike Cochrane, started on Columbus Short's character, Ty Hackett, (I think) in order to recruit him to help rob the money. Mike started with a conversation that was clearly designed to tempt and create hatred within Ty. Mike clearly wants to get rich quick, and in order to get others to go along with him, he has to create the idea that Ty has been dealt a bad hand in this life. Since I didn't record the movie I'll have to go by memory on what was stated.

"Your parents were good people, who worked hard all their lives, who worked two jobs, who slaved away for nothing. In the end they died and left you nothing but debt. There is no way to get ahead in this life because someone is going to rip you off."

Now though this was said subtly, it was clear he had alternative intentions. Mike is the Devil's representative or as in literature class, the Antagonist.

Now after I was driving back to work something clicked in my mind. So I now have to ask. What is the difference between Obama's speech attacking the rich and Matt Dillon's character? One convinces a couple of other guys to rob an armored vehicle, the other seeks votes to rob evil corporations, businesses, etc via taxes, lawsuits etc. by convincing the voter to hate the rich.

Have you been "coerced" to follow Obama to rob the armored vehicle?