Tuesday, March 11, 2014

Oops, He Did It Again - Pete Poses Tough Obamacare Question to Jay Carney

PPPS (Washington, DC)—Once again, Citizen Pete, posing as Chief White House Correspondent Political-Beat Pete, asked a tough Obamacare question to White House Press Secretary Jay Carney at the end of yesterday's White House Press Briefing.

This was not Pete's first time at the press briefing rodeo, having visited almost one year ago to ask Secretary Carney about the president's lavish vacations at taxpayer expense.

But this time, Pete asked about something a little more personal, the Affordable Care Act. Pete's wife, Citizen Caryn, had her health insurance policy canceled because of the law, and in order to avoid the security risks associated with the Obamacare exchanges, and find a plan in which she could still keep he doctor of many years, she now pays about double her previous premium. If it were not for the extra $3,600 per year out of the family budget due to Obamacare, Pete might make more frequent trips to the White House press room.

Here is the transcript:
White House Press Briefing: March 10, 2014

PETE:    Jay, one more question from Colorado?
MR. CARNEY:  Colorado, what do you got?
PETE:   Okay.  I just wanted to follow up on that one about Obama -- well, the Affordable Care Act.  And you mentioned that the Republicans are giving this pitch to, I guess, repeal the bill.  And so my question --
MR. CARNEY:  Surely your reporting reflects that.
PETE:  What’s that?
MR. CARNEY:  I’m not misstating --
PETE:  No, no, no, it was the reasons you gave that I wanted to ask you about.  And the last time I was here, I asked you a question and you didn’t really answer it, so I hope I’ll have better luck this time.  (Laughter.) 
MR. CARNEY:  I think he’s waiting for his -- have you got the camera on him?  Go ahead.
PETE: And I saw you using notes, so I’m going to use mine as well.
MR. CARNEY:  Go for it.
PETE:   When the law was first debated and passed -- and we’re talking about the Affordable Care Act -- the polls showed a majority of the people were not in favor of that, and yet it was pushed through.  And so in terms of this pitch, the President continued to pitch to get it passed using statements like “you can keep your plan.”  And, by the way, I know that’s not true because my wife lost her insurance because of the Affordable Care Act -- that you can --
MR. CARNEY:  What’s your question, sir?
PETE:  Well, I’m getting to it. 
MR. CARNEY:  Okay.
PETE:  We don't get here very often from out in middle country, so when you get your chance, you got to ask.
MR. CARNEY:  You’re welcome.  Sure.
PETE:  Okay.  So anyway, the President’s pitch was that you can keep your plan, that your costs will go down, and I know that not to be true.  So my question is:  Will the President accede to the greater majority of Americans now who want it repealed?
MR. CARNEY:  Well, actually that's not --
PETE:  Why won’t he listen to the American people?
MR. CARNEY:  You obviously haven’t seen the data because the majority of Americans do not in any poll want it repealed.  The majority supports fixing it and improving it, not repealing it.  I would ask you to check your data.
Secondly, the President made that pitch.  Republicans in Congress fought it tooth and nail.  It went to the Supreme Court.  The Supreme Court upheld it.  It was the principal argument in a presidential election.  The President won reelection.
And again, Republicans are free to make the repeal argument. My point was simply that when you go to individuals and you ask them, do you want quality, affordable health insurance, or do you want the insurance company to tell you that you’re not going to get coverage for that condition you have because the fine print says you can't.  In fact, your sister, we’re going to charge her double even though you have identical medical histories because she’s a woman --
PETE:  Well, my wife is getting charged double now because she lost her insurance.
MR. CARNEY:  Well, again, I don't know the circumstances with your wife.  And what I can tell you is that the Affordable Care Act provides quality, affordable health insurance to millions of people.  They are -- million are --
PETE:  But that's not true.  More people have lost their insurance because of the act right now than have been -- didn't have insurance and have signed up.  That is a fact.
MR. CARNEY:  Okay, well, you’re entitled to your facts, sir. What I can tell you is that you and others who want to campaign on repeal are welcome to.
What I’m saying is that repeal for millions of Americans is not a good option and for all the reasons that I enumerated.
Thank you all very much.
And here is a link to the video posted at Breitbart TV:
(click on link, not the pic)
Colorado Reporter Confronts Carney, Demands Repeal of ObamaCare

Update: We found this photo circulating on Twitter, source unknown.


  1. Oh Jay, how to you lie so easily? They couldn't pay me enough to tell lies for my boss, day in, day out, like he does.

  2. Anonymous -

    We appreciate your comment, but I think that your characterization of my friend Jay as a liar is perhaps just a smidgeon over into the harsh side of the spectrum.

    He just uses different facts than the rest of us.
    God bless, and come back again.

  3. You are a courteous, kind-hearted man to say that Jay Carney is your friend.
    How do you feel about Sen Schumer?
    He took a 7-page bill giving returning Veterans tax credits and ripped its guts out, substituting the 2800 pages of PPACA language and changing the name to PPACA, which the Senate passed. The Vets didn't get their tax credit.
    Do you think Schumer's actions were fair and Constitutional, or do you believe that the phrase "All bills for raising Revenue shall originate in the House of Representatives; but the Senate may propose or concur with Amendments as on other Bills" makes Schumer's amendment creating Obamacare deceitful and un-Constitutional?

    1. T.E. March - can I call you T.E.?

      Thank you for your question, although is some ways it seemed more like a comment, or perhaps an attempt to educate our readers.

      Well, just to let you know, our readers are mostly what they call "Low Information Voters" and they can't possibly understand the sophisticated analysis you put into your comment. Leave the educat'n to us professionals at PPPS.

      Now as for your question.

      I've never met Senator Schumer, but, really, how could I dislike a guy named Chuck? I'm sure he is well meaning (most Democrats are you know). As for the process you described, it's all very confusing. I'm pretty sure we can trust a guy named Chuck to have done the right thing.

      I am, however, a little concerned about you T.E.

      We have elected officials like Chuck who are there to sort out these difficult constitutional questions on our behalf. Is it really appropriate for a an average citizen like yourself (I'm sure you are well meaning) to concern yourself with complex legislation or documents like the Constitution?

      You should focus on working harder so you can pay more taxes.

      Keep commenting & God bless.
      —Pundit Pete

      (and thanks for educating our readers)

  4. Since you were rude enough to introduce financial facts into your microphone time, I presume I am addressing Polynomial Pete.

    You should have a chat with my husband , Binomial Bob. Binomial Bob has a wife (me) whose (now) ACA compliant policy shot up to $14,000 a year cash outlay before any BC/BS reimbursement kicks in. The year before, this outlay was $9,000. Using the abacus in the barn, Binomial Bob calculated an adverse consequence to the family fortune of $5,000, per annum. Lucky for me, he married his girlfriend 40 years ago and we plan to keep it that way.

    “No one believes more firmly than Comrade Napoleon that all animals are equal. He would be only too happy to let you make your decisions for yourselves. But sometimes you might make the wrong decisions, comrades, and then where should we be?”

    George Orwell, "Animal Farm"

    1. Anonymous - Thank you for that most excellent and informative comment.

      We are constantly in search of talent here at the Pundit Pete Press Service (Pink-Slip Pete is currently evaluating some staffing changes) and should you be in need of employment, if for instance Binomial Bob fails to bring home the bacon or miscalculates the family budget on his abacus, we would be interested in discussing some options.

      Of course, you would have to hide your gender and adopt a Pete persona...... or, perhaps in your case, we might be willing to entertain a change in protocol, but only if your name were, say, Penny, or Polly or Pearl.

      As for Bob. Forget about it.

      Keep commenting and writing. You should probably have your own blog. God bless.

  5. Thanks Chris! I'm so glad you enjoyed the post. It was your idea to share the topic on-medical staffing ! It will be interesting to see if Indiana passes a law about having a meteorologist on staff at outdoor venues. I hope someone tries to bring the idea to local politicians! Then other states could follow suit.


Feel free to comment, but keep it clean. Pious Pete will be monitoring.