Video: If ObamaCare was a restaurant

posted at 7:45 pm on July 20, 2009 by Allahpundit

Via Breitbart. Four minutes is a lot for an online video to ask but the metaphor carries it along smoothly and the guy playing the liberal is enjoyably greasy and effete. I like it better in any case than the new 30-second RNC spot, which necessarily only skims the surface of the topic. Inexplicably missing, though: The part where the richest diners are asked to pick up the tab for everyone until it turns out that they can’t afford it, whereupon it’s separate checks for everyone! Also missing: The numbers that show just what an egregious fraud Obama is committing when he tells people they’ll be allowed to keep their private insurance plans if they like them.


Related Posts:

Breaking on Hot Air

Blowback

Trackbacks/Pings

Trackback URL

Comments

Nice, “high quality healthcare”….

don’t think those words mean what you think chmp….

good clip

sven10077 on July 20, 2009 at 7:48 PM

“If Obamacare were a restaurant”!

Seriously, AP…

JohnJ on July 20, 2009 at 7:53 PM

Only problem there is that the lefty changes his mind when confronted by facts.

Totally never happens in real life.

Midas on July 20, 2009 at 7:53 PM

That was exaclt like posting back and forth with AnninCA, except that Lib Dude learns the lesson in the end.

myrenovations on July 20, 2009 at 7:54 PM

Midas,

Yep. The lefty would be screaming “racism” and how mean and unfeeling the other guy was.

Star20 on July 20, 2009 at 7:55 PM

It’s just like any other “good idea” promoted by liberals. Fantasy meets reality and it all falls apart..

Guardian on July 20, 2009 at 7:55 PM

Has anyone ever noticed that whenever the media/left push a new “good idea” the first thing they take away is our ‘right to choose?’

perroviejo on July 20, 2009 at 7:55 PM

Obama responds by holding conference call with bloggers, asking for grassroots effort to push Congress NOW.

Dude! the campaign is over! Last time I checked, bloggers aren’t Senators.

LastRick on July 20, 2009 at 7:58 PM

Won’t ObamaCare be more like eating out of dumpsters?

fogw on July 20, 2009 at 7:59 PM

But look at all the money Obama will make selling “Soylent Green”. This entire inept government has gone completely insane.

rplat on July 20, 2009 at 8:02 PM

Won’t ObamaCare be more like eating out of dumpsters?

fogw on July 20, 2009 at 7:59 PM

I thought that San Franciscans were not allowed to throw out food waste in the garbage. My money is on starvation, baby.

Dr.Cwac.Cwac on July 20, 2009 at 8:04 PM

But look at all the money Obama will make selling “Soylent Green”. This entire inept government has gone completely insane.

rplat on July 20, 2009 at 8:02 PM

It’s why Conservatives need their own version of Hollywood like the Hindus have Bollywood….

this crisis yells out for a remake of Coma and Soylent Green with healthcare in place of hunger…

sven10077 on July 20, 2009 at 8:05 PM

This entire inept government has gone completely insane.

rplat on July 20, 2009 at 8:02 PM

It has the feel now of a guy stuck in a lie, needing to cover with another lie and another, when all he needed to do was just tell up right up front,

Hi, I’m from the government, and I’m here to help.

LastRick on July 20, 2009 at 8:05 PM

Glenn Beck suggested a similar metaphor this morning, using a movie theater. Only one movie to choose from, and different ticket prices based on income. Some pay $45, some get in free.

I_C on July 20, 2009 at 8:07 PM

In a column in Politico about health care reform on 7/20 http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0709/25144_Page2.html Nancy Pelosi said:

“We want this to work for the country. So we have to listen to everybody.”

But when Nancy Pelosi says she has to listen to “everybody,” she means Democrats in Congress. Rep. Pelosi does not want to listen to her constituents. This morning Nancy Pelosi’s office said she did not have any Town Hall meetings scheduled during the August Congressional “Summer District Work Period.”

It is not surprising that Nancy Pelosi doesn’t want to hold a Town Hall meeting. The last Town Hall meeting that I am aware of Nancy Pelosi holding in San Francisco was on January 14, 2006, where she was heckled by anti-war protestors.

See these links for a description of the challenges of holding a Town Hall meeting in San Francisco.
http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2006/01/15/BAGSMGNJDL15.DTL&feed=rss.news

or

http://gatewaypundit.blogspot.com/2006/01/tender-code-pink-nancy-pelosi-fracas.html

Is anybody aware of Nancy Pelosi holding a Town Hall meeting since January 2006?

Regardless of her preferences, on an issue as important as our health care, Nancy Pelosi owes it to the residents of her congressional district to hold a Town Hall meeting this August where her constituents can ask her questions about her votes!

We need to remind Nancy Pelosi that she need to listen to her constituents too! But of course as we see in the video the Government has never been known for listening to its customers.

wren on July 20, 2009 at 8:09 PM

http://www.poopsoap.com/images/crap_sandwich_tst2.jpg

Obama’s Daily Special

fourdeucer on July 20, 2009 at 8:10 PM

Yes, it’s always amusing how the party that screams they are “Pro-Choice” wants to keep you from actually, you know, CHOOSING anything.

What they really mean by “pro-choice” is that they will be making the choices FOR you.

I hate all frikkin’ leftists. They are as bad as Illinois Nazis.

AW1 Tim on July 20, 2009 at 8:14 PM

Wow, that’s a pretty effective 4 minute clip. I’m looking forward to part 2, which will maybe include some of the things that AP notes are missing.

BadgerHawk on July 20, 2009 at 8:15 PM

Even the Marxists are getting disillusioned by Obama…..

USA: Lack of “Change” Leads to Discontent

There is a material reason why Obama is no longer wooing many of his previous allies. From his campaign promise to fundamentally revamp the health care system, to his promise to shut down the detention center in Guantanamo Bay, very little has actually been done. Take health care for example. Despite the majority of Americans wanting a universal, socialized system similar to those in other industrialized countries, Obama has ruled out any such proposal. Recently, while speaking to the American Medical Association, Obama made it clear that the “public option” in his unnecessarily complex health care plan is not a “Trojan horse” for a single-payer system. In other words, forget about it.

When you’ve lost your base………

Dr.Cwac.Cwac on July 20, 2009 at 8:15 PM

Bummed.

They didn’t show the kitchen help chopping up the old lady for burger meat.

Just joking. I’m joking…

ROCnPhilly on July 20, 2009 at 8:16 PM

ROCnPhilly on July 20, 2009 at 8:16 PM

Grandma: The other, other white meat

/sarc

Dr.Cwac.Cwac on July 20, 2009 at 8:19 PM

They didn’t really explain how the quality of food (care) in the government-run restaurant is going to suffer under Obamacare. Fox News had a story on its website today about some poor 20-something soldier who went to a military hospital last week for some routine laproscopic gallbladder surgery. The surgeons nicked an artery, then screwed around and delayed getting the guy to a vascular surgeon who could repair the damage. The soldier ended up losing both legs because of the government surgeons’ incompetence (and still hasn’t had the gallbladder surgery he went in for).

At the Obamacare restaurant, they won’t be serving you hamburgers. Instead, they’ll be serving up platefuls of botulism and e-coli, and watching customers squirm and die on the floor. “Oops, sorry, our chef didn’t know you have to cook the chicken thoroughly. He went to chef school in Mexico.”

AZCoyote on July 20, 2009 at 8:20 PM

What kind of treatment would a 77 year old drunk from MA with a brain tumor figure on getting in this new health plan?

burnitup on July 20, 2009 at 8:20 PM

What kind of treatment would a 77 year old drunk from MA with a brain tumor figure on getting in this new health plan?

burnitup on July 20, 2009 at 8:20 PM

Silly peasant, he’s going to get much better treatment, cause, y’know, he’s a Kennedy. And he deserves it.

/do I have to?

john1schn on July 20, 2009 at 8:24 PM

Why don’t you ask you pal, Tapper, to ask Obama and any and all politicians to pledge to sign up for the public plan for themselves and their families?

Blake on July 20, 2009 at 8:25 PM

“If Obamacare were a restaurant”!

Seriously, AP…

Maybe Allah is being informal tonight. ;-)

SouthernGent on July 20, 2009 at 8:28 PM

What kind of treatment would a 77 year old drunk from MA with a brain tumor figure on getting in this new health plan?

None. Which is why Congress has specifically exempted its members (along with all other federal employees, and union members) from coverage under that great “public option” they’re trying to foist off on the rest of us.

AZCoyote on July 20, 2009 at 8:28 PM

From dkos:

Because to propose eliminating them [private insurance] entirely (would be the kiss of death for any real reform.

A strong public option will kill the industry eventually, which is why they’re fighting so hard against it right now.

At least they’re not hiding the final goal.

BadgerHawk on July 20, 2009 at 8:29 PM

It has the feel now of a guy stuck in a lie, needing to cover with another lie and another, when all he needed to do was just tell up right up front,

LastRick on July 20, 2009 at 8:05 PM

To me it’s like a compulsive spender who has bled the accounts dry and is busily spending the kids’ college fund. Cringing every time they hear, “Honey, can you come here a minute?”

ROCnPhilly on July 20, 2009 at 8:30 PM

HERE’S A BETTER DONNER PARABLE ILLUSTRATING SOCIALISM:

Every night ten men from distinctly different walks of life get together for dinner. The bill comes to $100. They decide to pay the bill the way we pay income taxes.

The first four men (the poorest) would pay nothing
The fifth would pay $1
The sixth would pay $3
The seventh would pay $7
The eighth would pay $12
The ninth would pay $18
The tenth one (the richest) would pay $59

So, that’s what they decided.

The ten men ate dinner in the restaurant every evening for several weeks, and they seemed quite happy with the arrangement, until one day, the owner threw them a curve.

“Since you are such good customers,” he said. “I’m going to reduce the cost of your daily meal by $20. Dinner for 10 now costs just $80.

The group still wanted to pay their bill the way we pay our taxes so the first four men were unaffected. They would still eat for free. But what about the other six men – the paying customers? How could they divide the $20 windfall so that everyone would get his ‘fair share?’

They realized that $20 divided by six is $3.33. But if they subtracted that from everybody’s share, then the fifth man and the sixth man would each end up being paid to eat their meal.

So, the restaurant owner suggested that it would be fair to reduce each man’s bill by roughly the same percentage, and he proceeded to work out the amounts each should pay.

and so:

The fifth man, like the first four, now paid nothing (100% savings).

The sixth now paid $2 instead of $3 (33% savings).

The seventh now paid $5 instead of $7 (28% savings).

The eighth now paid $9 instead of $12 (25% savings).

The ninth now paid $15 instead of $18 (17% savings).

The tenth now paid $49 instead of $59 (16% savings).

Each of the six was better off than before. And now the first five would eat for free. But once outside the restaurant, the men began to compare their savings.

“I only got a dollar out of the $20,” declared the sixth man. He pointed to the tenth man, “but he got $10!”

“Yeah, that’s right,” exclaimed the fifth man. “I only saved a dollar, too. It’s unfair that he got ten times more than me!”

“That’s true!!” shouted the seventh man. “Why should he get $10 back when I got only two? The wealthy get all the breaks!”

“Wait a minute,” yelled the first four men in unison. “We didn’t get anything at all. The system once again exploits the poor!”

The nine men surrounded the tenth and beat him up.

The next night the tenth man didn’t show up for dinner, so the nine sat down and ate without him. But when it came time to pay the bill, they discovered something important. They didn’t have enough money between all of them for even half of the bill!

And that, ladies and gentlemen, journalists and college professors, is how our tax system works. The people who pay the highest taxes get the most benefit from a tax reduction. Tax them too much, attack them for being wealthy, and they just may not show up anymore. In fact, they might start eating overseas where the atmosphere is somewhat friendlier.

reliapundit on July 20, 2009 at 8:35 PM

I liked it……..

……. hit the main points, and 4 minutes goes by in a flash.

+7%…….

Seven Percent Solution on July 20, 2009 at 8:37 PM

Another gem:

They should just raise taxes on these people (2+ / 0-)
because it’s the right thing to do. They should NOT call it a surtax or even mention health care. Why can’t we just raise taxes on people who take more out of the pie than the rest of us?

BadgerHawk on July 20, 2009 at 8:38 PM

A little off topic but pertains in that, if you lump the burden on to few…..

Ten men go out for beer. The bill for all ten comes to $100. If they paid their bill the way we pay our taxes, it would go something like this:

The first four men (the poorest) would pay nothing. The fifth would pay $1. The sixth would pay $3. The seventh would pay $7. The eighth would pay $12. The ninth would pay $18. The tenth man (the richest) would pay $59.

So, that’s what they decided to do. The ten men drank in the bar every day and seemed quite happy with the arrangement, until one day, the owner threw them a curve. He said, “Since you are all such good customers, I’m going to reduce the cost of your daily beer by $20. Drinks for the ten now cost just $80.”

The group still wanted to pay their bill the way we pay our taxes, so the first four men were unaffected. They would still drink for free. But what about the other six men — the paying customers?

How could they divide the $20 windfall so that everyone would get his “fair share”? They realized that $20 divided by six is $3.33. But if they subtracted that from everybody’s share, then the fifth man and the sixth man would each end up being paid to drink his beer. So the bar owner suggested that it would be fair to reduce each man’s bill by roughly the same amount, and he proceeded to work out the amounts each should pay!

And so:

The fifth man, like the first four, now paid nothing (100% savings). The sixth now paid $2 instead of $3 (33%savings). The seventh now pay $5 instead of $7 (28%savings). The eighth now paid $9 instead of $12 (25% savings). The ninth now paid $14 instead of $18 (22% savings). The tenth now paid $49 instead of $59 (16% savings).

Each of the six was better off than before. And the first four

continued to drink for free. But once outside the restaurant, the men began to compare their savings.

“I only got a dollar out of the $20,” declared the sixth man. He

pointed to the tenth man, “but he got $10!”

“Yeah, that’s right,’ exclaimed the fifth man. “I only saved a dollar, too. It’s unfair that he got ten times more than I!”

“That’s true!!”shouted the seventh man. “Why should he get $10 back when I got only $2 ? The wealthy get all the breaks!”

“Wait a minute,” yelled the first four men in unison. “We didn’t get anything at all. The system exploits the poor!” The nine men surrounded the tenth and beat him up.

The next night the tenth man didn’t show up for drinks, so the nine sat down and had beers without him. But when it came time to pay the bill, they discovered something important.

They didn’t have enough money between all of them for even half of the bill!

And that, boys and girls, journalists and college professors, is how our tax system works. The people who pay the highest taxes get the most benefit from a tax reduction. Tax them too much, attack them for being wealthy, and they just may not show up any more. In fact, they might start drinking overseas where the atmosphere is somewhat friendlier.

David R. Kamerschen, Ph.D. Professor of Economics, University of Georgia

Archimedes on July 20, 2009 at 8:40 PM

Damn! Should’ve read the thread 1st! It appears EVERYONE KNOWS THIS STORY!

Archimedes on July 20, 2009 at 8:41 PM

Grandma: The other, other white meat

/sarc

Posted by Dr.Cwac.Cwac

Thats right it would be white meat, because I’m damn sure that liberals wouldn’t dare upset their voting block by denying care to elderly blacks.

Cheesecakecrush on July 20, 2009 at 8:43 PM

Is it just me or is the smug, effete lib twit wearing the same shirt Larry David and Ted Danson fought over in an episode of Curb Your Enthusiasm?

JammieWearingFool on July 20, 2009 at 8:44 PM

If ObamaCare was a restaurant

Hey AP,
How would it stack up against Waffle House?

burnitup on July 20, 2009 at 8:48 PM

Only problem there is that the lefty changes his mind when confronted by facts.

Totally never happens in real life.

Midas on July 20, 2009 at 7:53 PM

Actually, when the left is confronted by an argument they cannot fight, they begin to simply make stuff up or talk about Bush…

JIMV on July 20, 2009 at 8:49 PM

The British healthcare disaster was mentioned on a Learning Channel documentary I saw a couple of days ago. “The Tiniest Toddlers” was about youngsters who have a rare form of dwarfism. The featured families live in Britain.

One of the likely complications of “primordial dwarfism” (MOPD) is brain aneurisms (I’m probably misspelling that). One pair of parents said that their child is “not eligible” for MRI brain scans until after a diagnosis of MOPD has been made — but they can’t get in to see the right doctors to get a diagnosis. So they have to wait, even though their child could have a blood vessel about to explode.

Another mom and dad obtained the MOPD diagnosis for their little girl, who is having bad headaches, so she was eligible for an MRI. But it would take two weeks to get the MRI report — even though their daughter’s pain could signal an imminent stroke.

It was interesting to see that the parents’ mention of these delays wasn’t accompanied by anger — just a glum acceptance that that’s the way things are.

KyMouse on July 20, 2009 at 9:04 PM

Will we be expected to tip the nurse?

Dollayo on July 20, 2009 at 9:10 PM

Now I’m hungry….man.

Rightwingguy on July 20, 2009 at 9:15 PM

Thats right it would be white meat, because I’m damn sure that liberals wouldn’t dare upset their voting block by denying care to elderly blacks.

Cheesecakecrush on July 20, 2009 at 8:43 PM

In the age of Obama, the phrase “dark meat” is hate speech. I think Revered Wright mentioned that was mentioned in the Bible or at the KKKentucky Fried Chicken.

/sarc

Dr.Cwac.Cwac on July 20, 2009 at 9:16 PM

In fact, they might start drinking overseas where the atmosphere is somewhat friendlier.

Archimedes on July 20, 2009 at 8:40 PM

I vote Germany.

Rightwingguy on July 20, 2009 at 9:17 PM

Dr.Cwac.Cwac on July 20, 2009 at 9:16 PM

The KKKentucky Fried Chicken in the state of KKKentucky located in the United States of KKKA.

I never thought that a loony fringe group of only several thousand people (in a country of millions) could affect the good reverend so much.

Rightwingguy on July 20, 2009 at 9:19 PM

Sorry, but this is lame. Too long, too complicated for the dumb, who, last time I checked, were about 53% of the population.

RNC needs to pony up for broadcast ads that simply say something like:

Congress is about to vote on socialized medicine that controls access to care for everybody but them.

That’s right, Congress gets to keep their plan. You don’t.

Doesn’t that piss you off? It should.

Then they need to tell people how to contact their Senators and Representatives.

guntotinglibertarian on July 20, 2009 at 9:49 PM

Since health care is all about ‘prevention’, who gets to monitor us? Will daily calisthenics by required? Will we be required to take a physical agility test each year like those in the military? If we score low on the test, we smoke, drink, do drugs, are overweight, have a family history for particular infirmities; will we be “punished”? If so, how? Re-education camps? Lose the right to vote? Lose the right to own property? Have to wear a ‘fat ass’ logo on our outer garment?

GarandFan on July 20, 2009 at 9:50 PM

All restaurants are Taco Bell.

NeoKong on July 20, 2009 at 9:59 PM

Awesome ad! Awesome ad! Loved it.

4shoes on July 20, 2009 at 10:13 PM

Damn! Should’ve read the thread 1st! It appears EVERYONE KNOWS THIS STORY!

Archimedes on July 20, 2009 at 8:41 PM

It’s alright, I’d forgotten it actually.

4shoes on July 20, 2009 at 10:16 PM

guntotinglibertarian on July 20, 2009 at 9:49 PM

Especially Kennedy-he’s the ‘brain’ beind much of this including the rationing hidden behind devious wording. Yet here he is with his gov. health care busy fighting what is essentially a losing battle —- an option we’ll never be allowed under this plan. Screaming hypocrisy–but no one seems to notice.

jeanie on July 20, 2009 at 10:29 PM

A W E S O M E !

Where do I donate to buy a prime time TV spot for this to air? We need to show this to as many sheeple as possible.

Woody on July 20, 2009 at 10:37 PM

How about rank and file gov. employees, do they get to keep their health care intact too? and no matter what?

jeanie on July 20, 2009 at 10:43 PM

Pretty good soft sell.

ronsfi on July 20, 2009 at 10:57 PM

You know that if this health care turkey passes that Obama, his millionaire Wall Street buddies and members of Congress will have their own private doctors thus avoiding ten hour lines. mis-diagnosis and having some medical school dropout from the Cayman Islands taking out the wrong kidney.

MaiDee on July 20, 2009 at 11:25 PM

Should have taken away the Dijon mustard.

WashJeff on July 20, 2009 at 11:30 PM

This one is great. Someone needs to get this or another clip like it on TV for the drones to see.

bigskinny on July 21, 2009 at 10:07 AM

I went to The AARP website and they are still railing against Bush’s reforms. They don’t have a problem with cutting Medicare and reducing services to the elderly?

Talk about in the tank.

barnone on July 21, 2009 at 10:31 AM

When do we get the video of Obama pushing Grandma over a cliff in a wheelchair because her surgery is too expensive?

Steve Z on July 21, 2009 at 10:57 AM

Nothing goes into effect in any case until 2013–except the tax provisions, which would begin in 2011. Yet President Obama wants everyone to stop debating and deliberating, and act now–because he and he alone has decided “now is the time to go ahead and act.”

Per Bill Kristol, in article labeled “King Obama Declareth”.

So we get taxed for two years starting in 2011 (after the next House elections) but don’t get any health care until 2013 (after the next Presidential election)? Pay now, buy later? Whiskey Tango Foxtrot?

King Hussein the First of AmeriKKKa has this all planned out. He claims credit for his wonderful health-care reform now, although everybody maintains the status quo through 2010, and Democrats don’t have to defend tax hikes, which voters won’t see until 2011. If a Republican wins the Presidency in 2012, the new President gets blamed for crappy nationalized health care and deficits from the Obama plan, and has to struggle to repeal it.

Meanwhile, Obama makes speeches for $100K a pop (a la Clinton) about the “wonderful” change he brought to America, succeeding where Clinton failed.

If the taxes don’t take effect until 2011, and the socialized medicine doesn’t take effect until 2013–what’s the hurry? Can’t we vote on this in 2011?

Steve Z on July 21, 2009 at 11:15 AM

Oooo..strawman Democract,well played RNC.

RufusW on July 21, 2009 at 12:32 PM

“If Obamacare were a restaurant”!

Seriously, AP…

JohnJ on July 20, 2009 at 7:53 PM

Sorry dude… “was” is correct. It’s the singular verb of a singular noun. Obamacare is singular, not plural.

CynicalOptimist on July 21, 2009 at 1:35 PM

The nine men surrounded the tenth and beat him up.

The next night the tenth man didn’t show up for dinner, so the nine sat down and ate without him. But when it came time to pay the bill, they discovered something important. They didn’t have enough money between all of them for even half of the bill!

reliapundit on July 20, 2009 at 8:35 PM

Then they should have taken all of the tenth man’s money after beating him. Then they could have afforded the meal. Of course having a meal after that would be impossible but at least they are all equally hungry.

AaronGuzman on July 21, 2009 at 1:48 PM

All restaurants are Taco Bell.

NeoKong on July 20, 2009 at 9:59 PM

Yeah, and no one tells you what the shells in the bathroom do.

44Magnum on July 21, 2009 at 3:38 PM

“Be well” NeoKong

44Magnum on July 21, 2009 at 3:38 PM

Liberals are too g’damned smart, to let a little thing like rationing get in the way.

Rationing doesn’t hurt, as long as it’s happening to someone else.

Rationing will be unimportant, until it happens to them – when some paper-pushing m*therf*cking bureaucrat checks the “disallowed” box on his request, and he’s in a fight for his life.

Don’t believe it?

Try making a request for Disability.

franksalterego on July 21, 2009 at 3:44 PM

Kitchen’s closed, grandma.

Heh, as a take on a scene from Happy Gilmore, “how ’bout a nice warm plate of shut the hell up, see the gubment name tag, you’re in my world now grandma!”

Liberty or Death on July 21, 2009 at 4:47 PM