It appears as though the days of civility and integrity in journalism are long gone. On March 1, National Journal’s Ron Fournier, formerly the Washington bureau chief at the Associated Press, took to Twitter to express his dissatisfaction with government sequestration, suggesting that President Obama:
Can handle Bin laden, not Boehner? He may be POTUS, but Obama incapable of “a Jedi mind meld.”
Fournier continued his violent rhetoric in a follow-up tweet, suggesting that, “Bin Laden didn’t compromise. Handled him pretty well.”
The tweets, which have not been deleted, were discovered by the website Gawker.
Fournier apparently is upset at the inaction by President Obama over the sequester, and suggests that killing Speaker John Boehner (R-Ohio) might be the best solution. To suggest that the Speaker of the House should be eliminated in the same manner as the world’s worst terrorist shows a new low for a supposedly objective journalist.
Rather than apologize or issue a retraction for his offensive commentary, the tweets remain on Fournier’s account. As someone who formerly represented the Associated Press as its Washington bureau chief, one would think Fournier would have both the decency and the professional dignity to refrain from such horrendous commentary.
It remains to be seen if the National Journal will take appropriate disciplinary action.
**UPDATE** Earlier version of blog incorrectly stated that Ron Fournier had deleted tweets in question when in fact they are still on his account.
Fournier also needs to bone up on his Star Trek and Star Wars
Curt “and the hits just keep on coming”
@Zelsdorf Ragshaft III:
I am very uncomfortable with this remark.
@DrJohn:
As am I, Dr. J. It should be removed. There is just no call for that kind of vitriol. None. We can only assume that Zelsdorf is mind numbing stupid.
It’s been removed
I keep missing all of these remarks that are getting deleted.
Will the FBI – CIA – Homeland Security investigate these ‘threatening words’ by this ?person? against a Congressman ?????
@DrJohn:
That’s rich. You put up posts every day inciting hatred for the President, not just his policies, yet somehow the logical outcome has you feeling squeamish and confused. Exactly how much should we hate him? Enough to look the other way when passing him on the street? Not enough? Enough to grab him by the lapels and slap him a few times? Too far? Don’t tell me you never thought of the consequences of your grubby little project.
I doubt Obammi would be doing the Jedi mind trick…. he’s more likely to be on the receiving end of one.
These aren’t the cuts you’re looking for….
These aren’t the cuts we’re looking for….
You can go about your sequester…
I can go about my sequester….
Move along….
Move along….
@Tom:
Hey, Tom, Obama is the one exhorting his servants to violence, not me. I am not killing Americans, he is. Nice try at projection, though.
And to answer your question, enough to vote for a Republican instead of Obama or a democrat.
@Tom: @Richard Wheeler:
Fair enough for you guys to go after ignorant posts or even Dr. J’s vast resume of articles. But I’m afraid I didn’t catch your opinion of the gentleman that believes Obama should kill Boehner. Given your own standards that not immediately denouncing such an act constitutes approval, are we too assume you find Mr. Fournier’s comments acceptable?
@Aqua: Aqua Fournier ain’t no “gentleman”—Stupid remark.
To actually threaten the assassination of a sitting POTUS as one poster did,or root for someone else to assassinate him, as did another poster—–goes beyond “stupid” or “very uncomfortable”–Agree? But to their credit Reto5 and DrJ said something and Curt rapidly deleted.
Dr.J. Your mission to consistently degrade Obama, secure Repub. votes and bring stinging defeat. How’s that been going for you?
@Richard Wheeler:
Rich, it goes beyond just the immediacy of someone suggesting that Obama, or any President, be assassinated. Imagine, for example, what would become the norm if a sitting Supreme Court Justice was to be murdered by an ideologue from the opposing side, so that the sitting President could appoint a Justice more favorable to the murderer’s ideology. Would that then become the norm for We, the People, to affect “change” within the government that we considered “good”? What about assassinations of sitting Congressmen? Or Governors? Or mayors? Or influential businessmen and women, such as Buffet?
That is the real fear when anyone suggests, or promotes, the killing of someone simply because you don’t like their politics.
@Tom:
How sad that you cannot tell the difference between not supporting the president’s policies and actual hatred for the president. But that is typical with your side of the aisle, unfortunately.
And where were you just a few years back? If you really objected to the portrayal of George Bush by the left, you would have mentioned it here and denounced those placards. But you didn’t, did you.
Remember these, Tom?
http://www.binscorner.com/pages/d/death-threats-against-bush-at-protests-i.html
I’m sure you supported those because Bush thought he had the right to use drones to kill Americans on American soil, but would never, really, never do that unless…………..
Oh, wait, that is the opinion of Eric Holder in his response to Senator Rand Paul.
@johngalt:
You mean like the plan that was hatched out of John Kerry’s Vietnam Vets Against The War, where Kerry claimed he was not there, but FBI reports, written prior to Kerry’s denial, specifically named him?
@johngalt: J.G. Obviously I agree with you. None should promote violence towards someone simply because they don’t like their politics. Here we are dealing specifically with remarks MADE recently.
@Richard Wheeler:
Remarks that you immediately chastised Dr. J for not removing only to be told that Dr. J did not have the authority/capability of removing. You jumped the gun on criticizing Dr. J. And yes, you admitted that Dr. J, in fact, did not have that capability ONLY after Curt told you.
Why do you not condemn the photos of a behead George Bush? You criticize someone for being mute on disgusting posts about Obama but not Bush. (feel free to come back and criticize the posters of Bush, Mr. Johnny Come-Lately)
@retire05: @retire05: My agreement with J.G.’s post makes my position on this crystal clear.Reread as needed.
Semper Fi
THAT’S JUST HOW FAR THE LIB JOURNALIST THINK IT CAN BE DONE,
THEY JUST REFLECT THE OBAMA REVENGE OPEN BOX,
WHEN HE SLIPPED OUT HIS TONGUE PUBLICLY, TO THE VOTERS RIGHT BEFORE THE ELECTION,
AND DON’T FORGET HIM SAYING, TO FACE THE ENEMY WITH A WEAPON,
IF THEY BRING A KNIFE , BRING A GUN SAID HE,
HE WAS TALKING ABOUT THE OPPOSIT PARTY, AT THE BEGINING OF HIS TERM IN 2008
SO NO SURPRISE TO FIND HIS RADICAL FAITHFUL, MANY FOURNIER MORE
INDOCTRINATED TO THE POINT OF NOT BEING ABLE TO KEEP THEIR TONGUE
ON THEIR MURDEROUS EVIL DEATH WISH ON WHO DARE TO CHALLENGE THEIR MASTER,
@Richard Wheeler:
No, no, no. It doesn’t work that way, Richard. I am holding you to the same standards you on the left hold the right. If you do not denounce the actions against something, like the placards of a beheaded Bush, or calling for the assassination of Bush. then you will be presumed to be in agreement simply due to your silence. That was the standard you applied to Dr. J. It is the standard that should be applied to you now.
@Richard Wheeler:
Yes I do agree. I saw it almost daily from 2000 until 2008. It wasn’t right then, it’s not right now.
@Richard Wheeler:
And what does that matter? The point I made is the same, whether the remarks were made here recently, or whether they were made back when Bush was President, or in the future when someone else is in charge. That is the foundation for strong convictions, Rich, when the point itself is valid, regardless of time or location.
I believe that you and Tom are making a mistake with Dr.J and his opinions, Rich. To clarify this, why don’t you ask him what he thinks or thought about the Patriot Act. Maybe his answer will give you pause to consider that it isn’t Obama, the man, that he dislikes, or hates, but certain principles he stands for. Just a thought.
@Aqua:
Of course I don’t find it acceptable. But in terms of actual threats, of actual danger, that’s a drop in the Pacific compared to what Obama’s dealing with. Do you really think, if you could query the Secret Service, that they would assess the danger to John Boehner even in the same ballpark as Obama? Most of the hatred aimed at John Boehner eminates from his own party! Am I missing the websites on the Left that traffic in anti-Boehner rhetoric, that call him anti-American (or not an Amrican), a tyrant, a dictator? Is John Boehner portayed as a bogeyman coming to take my guns away, my freedom away, all those things we’re told are worth dying, or dealing death, for? Are Leftists threatening to move to Canada if John Boehner doesn’t get his act together?
In my lifetime, there’s been no politician I fear the worst for than Obama. People have demonized him to such an irrational degree that I fear it’s almost inevitable that some nut is going to be riled up into taking his shot at infamy. Dr John shakes those cages daily. So his “shock” seems disingenuous to say the least. The guy’s been telling us our imminent slavery is just around the corner for years, so eventually some idiot is going to listen.
@Tom:
Sorry, but I gotta disagree with this, Tom. I’d say that the hatred, or dislike, that Boehner receives is relatively equal, from both political sides. For the progressives within the Democratic party, he isn’t progressive enough. And for the conservatives, he is too progressive. Just my opinion, of course.
@retire05: Reto5 I strongly condemn any personal threats against “w”
Aqua Absolutely true.
Re DrJ Let him fire at will–It’s been made clear by some respected Conservatives on this blog that he hurts the cause he claims to serve. I concur.
J.G. If it’s true Boehner is disliked equally by both sides he must be doing something right.lol
Tom Well done.
@Tom: You’ll just have to trust me when I tell you that the absolute last thing I want is for harm to come to Obama.
I’d be more than happy with impeachment.
@Richard Wheeler:
@ JG,
My point is that dislike for Boehner isn’t typically visceral. There are a lot of moderate Democrats who think he’s actually done the best he can as far as working with the President, given his conference. I really do think the extremes in his party hold him in much lower regard than anyone on the other side of the aisle, because he’s not uncompromising, and therefore not pure. He isn’t an ideologue, or a policy wonk; he’s an old-fashioned backroom deal-maker, which means he would have been much better off having been born a generation earlier when his talents would have been more appreciated. I don’t see much to hate there.
Edit: Sorry, that was a response to JG post #23
@retire05:
First of all, you have no idea what my thoughts or feelings were at the time regarding any GWB derangement. But what i find most interesting is your predictable slide into defending your own actions based on the actions of those you perceive as your enemies. It’s always an “eye for an eye” with you, and I doubt there’s any depth you would’t sink to and justify as long as you could point to an equally heinous depth being plumbed on the other side. Enjoy yourself down there with your kind.
@Tom:
That statement is disingenuous, even if the idea of his own party disliking him more than the opposition has merit. To suggest what you are suggesting is, in effect, calling conservatives “extreme”.
@johngalt:
Poor choice of words. My point is that there is a group of Republican congressmen who are identified as being in the more conservative-wing, budget hawks, and/or Tea Partiers, who have clashed with Boehner and basically refused to follow his lead. They voted against Plan B, which was a debacle for Boehner, and in an unprecedented display, they didn’t support Boehner for reelection as Speaker.
@Tom:
I do not find Boehner any more credible, responsible, or rational, than I do the leadership within the Democratic party.
Liberals within the Democratic party are in the same boat as the conservatives within the GOP, they just haven’t realized it yet.
@johngalt:
Oh, I’m pretty sure Dennis Kucinich knows he’s persona non grata at the White House.
@Tom:
I wasn’t necessarily talking about people like Kucinich, just as I wasn’t talking about people like Ron Paul. It’s the electorate that hasn’t figured it out, yet, from either side.
@Richard Wheeler:
Then you should have said so, without being proded into it.
You only subscribe to the “respected” Conservatives on this blog that in some way, however small that measure may be, agrees with you or are willing to attack other conservatives. Anyone else you discount.
WHAT IF one arrive to the conclusion that OBAMA MUST KILL BOEMER
LIKE FOURNIER DID,
SO THE IDEA OF IT COME FROM THE FACT THAT OBAMA HAS THE POWER TO KILL AMERICANS
WITH HIS DRONES, THIS HAS BEEN TOLD BY HOLDER IN WRITING
FOURNIER DID NOT MENTION THIS PART, BUT IT SURE FIT IN HIS THOUGHT,
BUT IT’S LIKE A BOOMERANG COMING BACK TO KILL OBAMA.
WHAT’S GOOD FOR THE GEESE IS GOOD FOR THE GANDER
@Tom:
I am using the left wing rule; if you are mute about an action, then you must approve of it. Isn’t that the way it works for liberals? Conservatives must, no matter how absurd the accusations are, denounce them in order to show their disapproval? The same applies to you, bubba. It’s now all Alinsky, all the time, for both sides.
What actions of mine would you be referring to? I quickly responded to the stupid statement made here.
It’s your kind that deals in heinous behavior, with their signs of a beheaded Bush, and their calls for his assassination. I doubt you can find anything even close from conservatives who most certainly have valid apprehensions about Obama. And if you do, you will also find that if any sign like that showed up at any TEA Party rally, the idiots carrying them were promptly ask to leave.
@retire05: I make a strong statement against those who threatened W and YOU FIND FAULT’. You truly are a BORE as other Conservatives on here have REPEATEDLY SUGGESTED. You just don’t know how to leave well enough alone.
The Conservatives I respect on here, Word,Aye,Mata,Aqua have a quality you totally lack–CLASS
No coincidence they reprimand you so regularly.
@Tom:
While anything is possible, I don’t see anyone making an attempt on Obama. Hell, Mitt Romney got more death threats in two years than Obama has in four. There was a whole Twitter hashtag called #RomneyDeathRally. And I haven’t see the right produce a film called Death of President, like the left did with George W. Bush.
That’s not to say there should be a threats made to any POTUS or politician, or even someone that you disagree with politically. I just think the left tends to act like there was never any vitriol toward a president until Obama took office.
@Richard Wheeler:
Only after I called you on it.
You are entitled to your opinion. Of course, you want to drag others into the mix as you don’t have the cajones to fight your own battles.
And only because of the reasons I previously cited, do you hold them in high esteem. If they started disagreeing with you, they would not be your best buds for long.
@retire05: I’m not dragging anybody in. As you know Mata and Aye had you pegged before I arrived. Since then you’ve doubled down and brought additional scorn upon yourself.
Seriously doubt if they’ll ever stop agreeing with what a classless bore you truly are. We’ll see.
Aqua No sane person would suggest there wasn’t vitriol against W, Clinton,Reagan,Carter etc. Threats of physical violence is what all should denounce AS IT HAPPENS.
Semper Fi
Richard Wheeler
stop picking on our CONSERVATIVES, NOBODY NEED YOUR RANTING,
you are not a perfect specimen, to decide to pick on other,
you do it with insults, and that is wrong,
anyone can throw a stone if he is perfect, that’s not your case,
bye
@Aqua:
It’s probably pointless to argue who was the recipient of more vitriol, but I do see with Obama a different strain of venom. Most of the attacks I saw on Bush were characterizing him as being a warmonger, or even a war criminal: they were attacks on his actions. I will grant you there were some attacks on this character and his intelligence, as well, but I would say his actions as President, particularly related to war, were the principle drivers. The attacks on Obama, which began BEFORE he was even President, I should add, were attacks on him on the most personal level: he’s not an American, he’s not a Christian, he hates America, he wants America to fail, he’s not one of us. The fact is certain elements on the Right engaged in a systematic attempt to de-Americanize and dehumanize Obama that can’t be compared to anything that’s happened to a major politician in my memory.
Aqua
the lib project their inner fear, by wishing death to opponant ,
because they know the opponent is right on the dot,
and they prefer to see him dead than try to understand their man is at fault, the man is failing the people,
they can’t stand hearing it, they are afraid for their jobs too, and are ready to do anything to save obama because their jobs are on the line, THEY COULD NOT CARE LESS FOR AMERICANS
bye
@Richard Wheeler:
You most certainly are when you refer to others in order to substantiate your remarks. Or do you think that others are just too stupid to understand that?
How would you be aware of ANY opinion of others here at FA before you arrived?
You bring scorn upon yourself when you seek the aid of others to fight your battles for you. Tell me, Richard, when were you emascuated so that you required backup by getting others to help you fight what should be your own battles?
@Richard Wheeler:
Is that on your schedule, even though we may be asleep at the time, or just simply away from the computer at the time? Sorry, but I think that I will ignore that directive from you. Heck, you don’t even follow that one. Your first comment here was directed solely at a poster’s comment, and you didn’t even address the topic at all until Aqua called you out on it.
@Tom:
Perspective, Tom. From the point of view of those on the right, Obama is being treated with kid gloves compared to how the left treated Bush.
Is either viewpoint correct? I doubt it. It’s probably a mixture of both viewpoints, once the facts are separated from the hysterics.
Add this to the long list of items about which retire05 is insufferably ignorant.
Rich has gotten the smack-down on an ample number of occasions.
@retire05:
How do you know I was mute back in 2004? Were you following me around?
The fact of the matter is that I was fully supportive of the invasion of Afghanistan in 2002, and at the time of the lead up to the Iraq war, I was highly influenced by what was characterized at the time as “Liberal Hawks”, people like George Packer and Christopher Hitchens. So even though I was not a big fan of Bush, I felt very torn over Iraq, and mostly bought the arguments to proceed with the invasion. Like many Liberal Hawks, I’ve since regretted that stance for many different reasons. My views have evolved on the use of force, or I should say, the unintended consequences of the use of force have evolved my thinking on the decision making process. While I blame Bush for some of this, I blame others in his administration a lot more, and I blame myself and the public too.
Don’t be obtuse. Is that the first comment you’ve ever made? You have quite the record on this site. I think we all know where you stand on a host of issues regarding the President.
I saw the same old hippy trying to give out the “Bush and Cheney are war criminals” pamphlets he made in his basement for years outside the subway I used to exit. You want to compare a few characters like that to large, well-funded organizations like the NRA who are trying to whip up “Obama is coming to take your guns” fever, be my guess. In reality, there is no comparison.
J.@johngalt: J.G. Point taken Lets make it ASAP.
Reto5 We went through this before–IMO no need to go through the archives AGAIN—boring. I’m going for a run.
@johngalt:
We probably both see it on the other side more and tend to let it slide on ours. That’s human nature, and I admit I’m guilty of it. We can play the scorecard game all day. The fact of the matter is, however, we’re dealing with the here and now. Bush is no longer President and was not assassinated. Is it really helpful to rehash his treatment or should we focus on the treatment the current President is receiving, now while we can still actually do something about it?
@Aye: They still sting.