CNN's Yellin to Dem debate moderator Blitzer: "It looks like you're going to have to be the grownup"
During the January 31 edition of CNN's The Situation Room, discussing former Sen. John Edwards' (D-NC) announcement that he is suspending his Democratic presidential campaign and the then-upcoming debate between the remaining candidates, Sens. Hillary Rodham Clinton (NY) and Barack Obama (IL), CNN Capitol Hill correspondent Jessica Yellin remarked to host Wolf Blitzer, the debate's moderator: "[W]ith John Edwards out, it's a brand new dynamic. That means that the so-called 'grownup' in the race is gone. It looks like you're going to have to be the grownup that'll keep these two from going at each other all night." Blitzer replied: "I don't know if I'll be ... necessarily the grownup -- but we want this to be a debate."
Later on the program, Yellin similarly stated: "And the dynamic is all different now, Wolf, because John Edwards is out. He called himself the 'adult wing of the Democratic Party.' So, I guess with him gone, you'll have to represent the adults." Blitzer replied: "Well, I'll do the best I can."
From the January 31 edition of CNN's The Situation Room:
YELLIN: And, Wolf, with the -- with John Edwards out, it's a brand new dynamic. That means that the so-called "grownup" in the race is gone. It looks like you're going to have to be the grownup that'll keep these two from going at each other all night.
BLITZER: I don't know if I'll be the -- necessarily the grownup -- but we want this to be a debate. That's what it is. This will be the first time these two candidates are meeting one-on-one, head-to-head. So, we'll let them debate. And obviously, we're hoping it's going to be civil -- I'm sure it will. They've been practicing. I guess they've been going through potential questions. They normally do this with their top advisers.
YELLIN: Absolutely. These two people know that this is as high stakes as it gets, and they are prepared to take on all sorts of questions.
[...]
YELLIN: Now, someone inside the Obama camp says it is very different prepping the candidate for a one-on-one debate. And the dynamic is all different now, Wolf, because John Edwards is out. He called himself the "adult wing of the Democratic Party." So, I guess with him gone, you'll have to represent the adults.
BLITZER: Well, I'll do the best I can. Thanks very much, Jessica, for that.
SAVE DEMOCRACY, VOTE FOR A DEMOCRAT!!
This is little else than a slight to the Democratic Candidates as being "childish."
It's as though she either never saw the Republican Debate, or is so partisan that the point is only to slight Democrats!
Happy Thoughts;
Dan Grady
Touchy, touchy. Yellin was referring to the ad Edwards took out highlighting the bickering between Obama and Clinton at the recent debate, she was actually slightly mocking Edwards as opposed to saying the two remaining candidates needed a "grownup".
As for the debate last night, I was very impressed with both Clinton and Obama, they stuck to the issues, they were both respectful and did not go after each other personally. Well done, both of them.
The two Republicans could learn a thing or two from them last night, I hope they were watching.
The two Republicans could learn a thing or two from them last night, I hope they were watching.
The two Republicans consists of one of the nastyness political figures around in McCain. So I doubt he will change.
What I don't understand is that the Republican race is far more nasty and vitriolic than the Dem.
Just listen to Romney-- and didn't they actually call each other liars at their debate?
But it's the DEMS who are considered to be the jerks. The repubs get a free pass. Why is that? (I know, it's called media BIAS...)
It's the NARRATIVE.
Demorats are childish, peevish, and undiciplined.
Republicans are "grown ups", sober, and rational.
NO AMOUNT OF REALITY can dissuade the biased media from promoting these false narratives.
Here's some other NARRATIVES that the Media pimps constantly, but which are patently, provably, and empirically UNTRUE:
* The GOP is better on the Economy.
* The GOP will make government smaller.
* The GOP will make government less intrusive.
* The GOP is for fiscal responsibility.
* The GOP abhors deficit spending.
* The GOP is for OPEN and ACCOUNTABLE government.
* The GOP is best in protecting the Constitution.
* The GOP is first and foremost FOR law and order.
* The GOP will "keep us safer."
* The GOP is better at Foreign Policy.
* The GOP utterly opposes "nation building".
* The GOP is better at Defense.
* The GOP is "most supportive" of the troops.
* The GOP is victimized by the "Liberal Mainstream Media".
* The GOP are the "family values" party, leading by example.
ALL are LIES, FALSE, UNTRUE, and provably bogus. Yet they are the NARRATIVES that you will hear constantly parroted by the Media, as if they are conventional wisdoms and true without any question.
By the polls, it seems only 3 out of 10 continue to be FOOLED by these manufactured myths. And that's a GOOD thing.
First of all, another great screen shot above.
Tommy, I think you're right, she was just making a reference to Edwards' remark, probably in lieu of having any real insight into the debate.
One point to make, in regard to recent items here about the medias willingness to adopt positive conservative descriptors (Maverick, straight talker, etc.), and negatives on the Dem side (inexperienced, shrill), Yellin is admittedly using a positive towards a non-Republican. Of course, it's for the one who has dropped out of the race, and at the expense of the two still running.
Col,
I don't think Yellin is "complimenting" Edwards here at all, she is actually kind of raising her eyebrows with a little "as if", while poking a little fun at Edwards......if there is a dig at all, it goes to Edwards, not the two candidates left.
Wa wa huh? I think you missed this...
YELLIN: These two people know that this is as high stakes as it gets, and they are prepared to take on all sorts of questions.
You say airball I say swish!
Here's the rule the last 30 years:
When the Republicans are being hostile and outspoken, it's called an example of their vitality and strong-mindedness.
But when the Dems. exhibit the same kind of determined behavior, it's described as unprofessional, counterproductive, alienating, or whatever other culpable term the media can come up with.
The media rules are different for Dems. That's because they back Republicans. Why? They're all Plutocrats. It very much is that simple.
The Glenn & Jessie Show?
Jessie, when you're done showing everyone how not to be an actual journalist (Google the word, Jessie) on what's supposed to CNN's show for grownups, I'm sure you'd fit in nicely as co-idiot on Beck's show.
So Let me get this straight?
If you decide to have a spirited debate then it is childish? Yellin is complely wrong.
I agree.
Yellin says Edwards, the grown-up, is out, therefore Obama and Clinton are not grown-ups, and therefore Blitzer will have to fill the role of being the only grown-up.
Prediction: Yellin tomorrow will puzzle over why some voters got to be so cynical.
For the record here, Tommy, if you don't mind:
I never said Yellin "fawned over" Edwards. I said Yellin suggests that Obama and Clinton are not grown-ups.
To keep the record straight here, I didn't say Yellin "fawned", and I didn't say Yellin "complimented".
Whatever personal conclusions you yourself want to arrive at, I don't care about.
Adding here that the YouTube Edwards "grown-up" commercial MM links to does not have Edwards saying that he is the "grown-up" or that Obama and Clinton are children.
Maybe there's some other Edwards quote or video someplace where he does say that. But this isn't it.
Exactly. I'm curious where this "grown-up" claim originated, as Edwards doesn't say he is the grown-up in the video that MM links to.
Did Yellin or CNN think Edwards was saying it because the video is titled "Grown-Up Ad"? Did they create the label? Or did Edwards say it at some other time?
All of the campaigns on both sides have made accusations, run ads against their opponents, and passionately argued positions, and have stood up for themselves. It's known as "campaigning".
If anyone's acting like children it's the media, who are the equivalent of a school kids saying "Did you hear what she said about you?? Are you going to let her get away with that?!?
I think she's doing a little of both, Tommy.
and he implied, didn't infer. ;0)
I am so disappointed in the voters - even acknowledging the constraints on the information available to the electorate through the Corporate Media - that I cannot even take joy in this opportunity to belabor Yellin' for her childish and unprofessional behavior. Given the paeons so recently sung to Edwards' candidacy by pundits of even FauxLies stripe, for forcing the other Dem candidates to adopt wholesale the planks of his populist, anti-Corporatist platform, though those recognitions were only awarded after his withdrawal, at least those pundits must have seen more than merely the haircut, the "trial lawyer" (i.e., bottom-feeding solicitor) conveyed in their representations of his campaign. Too bad they never let a hint of that other Edwards escape their "news"rooms.
As to Yellin' she likely missed the meeting where it was announced that there was no further need to denigrate Edwards - or some above are right, and she really targeted the disagreements and differences between Senators Clinton and Obama.
Try this translation:
"Now that Edwards has left the campaign and we in the media have the horse race we wanted it's safe to mention his name."
I didn't get to see any of it as I was at the usc arizona basketball game. people in line, however, had heard some of it on the radio and remarked how the two of them can't wait to destroy the economy by raising taxes and hillary's idea of freezing foreclosures and freezing interest rates.
the answer to a problem is always more and more oppressive government. show your papers, swine.
You mean like Clinton destroyed it with the "largest tax increase in history"? Or like Reagan destroyed it with an even bigger tax increase (when adjusted for inflation)?
Or maybe, one of these days, the kneejerk Republican predictions of economic calamity when the minimum wage is increased will actually come true. I wonder, will that be before or after Jeeeezzzzzzuuuuuuusssssss comes back?
How does raising taxes so that we can do things like maintain the nations infrastructure, support our vets when they come injured from senseless wars abroad, make sure all Americans have access to decent healthcare, help out our fellow citizens in a time of natural catastrophe, etc. equal "show me your papers"?
Who exactly has grown the type of oppressive government that you're referring to?
That being said, it's not as if Clinton is free from blame. He appointed Greenspan, implemented NAFTA and gutted welfare further injuring those already on the bottom rung of the economic ladder. And don't try to give him any credit (not that you are/will) for the economic increases created by the technology boom, that had nothing to do with him or his policies. Just because Bush II's reign has been an utter failure doesn't mean that the administration preceding his was all roses.
"...people in line...remarked how the two of them can't wait to destroy the economy by raising taxes"
Dammit, did I miss Ayn Rand seat cushion night again?