PDA

View Full Version : They're Running Scared. Take a Look At This Crap!




Joe Knows
06-30-2007, 10:06 PM
http://www.americanchronicle.com/articles/viewArticle.asp?articleID=30953

BillyBeer
06-30-2007, 10:07 PM
This guy was a rep to the UN

LibertyEagle
06-30-2007, 10:08 PM
Author: "retired diplomat, and former deputy permanent representative to the United Nations."

LibertyEagle
06-30-2007, 10:11 PM
"In fact the American public was if my pulse reading is correct, even expecting that Paul would drop out of the race sooner than later, and spare disquieted Americans the agony of his relentless attacks on government policies and of his aggravated abuse of the government that emboldens terrorists to launch an attack."

t is an aggravated abuse of the government because Paul works for the government and paid the salary of a congressman plus all of the emoluments he receives appurtenant thereto, all paid for out of the tax money that the government had raised which he attacked. The image he projects to angry Americans as an “oddball” that has risen from the catacomb of Hell is never held in doubt.

Give me a friggin' break! :D HOW HILARIOUS! And since he accepts a salary for his job, this idiot implies that he shouldn't speak badly of the poor little 'ol gummit.

Yeah, how many Americans do you know of that sit around and talk about their worship of government policies? :D

kalami
06-30-2007, 10:12 PM
Someone is trying to get Fox New's attention - "Please hire me."

MozoVote
06-30-2007, 10:13 PM
I'm willing to call the AP stories just lazy, and sloppy reporting. But this really is a hatchet job and a twisted interpretation of Dr Paul's arguments. (And rather smug, too.)

Wyurm
06-30-2007, 10:18 PM
edit: I'm actually thinking its a fake,

sorta like this one: http://7arp.info/

LibertyEagle
06-30-2007, 10:18 PM
This article is the funniest thing I have read in the last month!!! It's so obvious he has a bee in his UN bonnet. I think it's hilarious.

Dr. Paul needs to keep doing what he is doing and telling the truth. It will all work out.

jd603
06-30-2007, 10:18 PM
His massive effort in this smear says it all.

thuja
06-30-2007, 10:19 PM
this IS crap. he can't write. look at it again, if you can stand it, and it is clear he is ill and on medications. no one interesting will take him seriously.

Joe Knows
06-30-2007, 10:23 PM
Someone is trying to get Fox New's attention - "Please hire me."

Hilarious!

quickmike
06-30-2007, 10:23 PM
"unpublished academic papers":D

DAZ
06-30-2007, 10:23 PM
I love the part that says because treaties are the supreme law of the land and we signed a treaty to join the U.N., we can't even consider leaving it.

It was almost as painful to read his shoddy writing and grammar as it was his obtuse arguments.

MozoVote
06-30-2007, 10:23 PM
I'll admit I gave up reading it halfway through. It doesn't fit together well, and grossly misrepresents why people are interested in hearing Paul speak.

Excuse me now, I gotta "relieve my chronic anxiety or OCD ". Sheesh.

kalami
06-30-2007, 10:23 PM
Here is another one.
http://www.americanchronicle.com/articles/viewArticle.asp?articleID=30759
I just skimmed it, but your guess is as good as mine on what it's actually about. I also briefly checked his other articles and he seems like another Bush apologetic. I agree with the smug interpretation. This guy is just so of himself, and it's piercingly obvious when he tries so hard to sound like some academic. I wouldn't really worry about him though, because of the way he writes, none of the usual people who would buy into this crap will get what the hell he is talking about.

damijin
06-30-2007, 10:30 PM
I actually care about what people have to say against Ron Paul but I just couldn't sludge my way through that poorly written diatribe.

I doubt anyone else can either.

ButchHowdy
06-30-2007, 10:32 PM
Where else did I hear this concept of 'Hater' Novel, movie?

Another government label

Wyurm
06-30-2007, 10:32 PM
Here is another one.
http://www.americanchronicle.com/articles/viewArticle.asp?articleID=30759
I just skimmed it, but your guess is as good as mine on what it's actually about. I also briefly checked his other articles and he seems like another Bush apologetic. I agree with the smug interpretation. This guy is just so of himself, and it's piercingly obvious when he tries so hard to sound like some academic. I wouldn't really worry about him though, because of the way he writes, none of the usual people who would buy into this crap will get what the hell he is talking about.

I swear, this can't be for real. Anyone reading it will either be confused as heck or end up defending Dr. Paul. Its got to be a joke, there is no way someone with his complete lack of communication skills could ever be a diplomat.

quickmike
06-30-2007, 10:33 PM
I think I just found something to help me get to bed on time on weekdays......AWESOME !!!!!

I read about 3 paragraphs and my eyelids got really heavy.

I guess its true what they say............. even real a--holes serve a purpose in the world :D

micahnelson
06-30-2007, 10:37 PM
I went cross eyed. I like writing rebuttals. There will be no response to this one. No one will be able to read this literary refuse. Recycle it and donate the punctuation to needy children's books.

Note to the author. Punctuation to extend the length of a sentence is; not to be: used-to make;one paragraph... seem|that much(More Important)To be confused; With current writing.

See? Thats what YOU do.

V-rod
06-30-2007, 10:39 PM
Nice, at first I hated this guy, but then I googled and him and saw other bloggers ripping on this idiot. I just feel pity for him now.

FluffyUnbound
06-30-2007, 10:39 PM
I swear, this can't be for real. Anyone reading it will either be confused as heck or end up defending Dr. Paul. Its got to be a joke, there is no way someone with his complete lack of communication skills could ever be a diplomat.

I think he was probably the Dwight Schrute of the UN.

jdbrown
06-30-2007, 10:42 PM
I doubt Paul would put his position quite this way, and I'm sure someone else can take the concept and put it in more politically correct terms, but I see his position on 9-11 and other attacks we've faced in similar manner to the following situation:

Consider a pretty young woman dressed in a relatively skimpy outfit leaving a party late at night and walking by herself along some back roads through a poorer section of town. Suppose she gets attacked and sexually assaulted.

Now no one in his right mind is going to acquit the attacker simply because of what the woman was doing. He is a rapist and deserves to be punished to the fullest extent of the law. On the other hand, it is in no way excusing him or blaming the woman to suggest that her actions were foolish. She never "invited" the attack or "deserved" it. But if she had been more circumspect in her actions that night, she would have been far less likely to become a rape victim.

This is essentially how I see the situation for the United States. We never invited or deserved the attacks, but our actions have been foolish. We have some characteristics (freedoms and wealth) that don't necessarily cause hatred or terrorist attacks but might arouse some feelings of jealousy and longing. Then we go and take short cuts to get where we want to go. I seriously doubt anything we've done in the Middle East was particularly malicious. We simply did what we wanted to so that we could get what we wanted when we wanted it. We went parading through the dark neighborhoods with all our flashy bravado, and we got attacked. The attackers deserve whatever punishment comes to them in this life or the next, and they bear full responsibility for what they did. But the fact remains that we put ourselves in a position where those attacks were more likely to happen.

JB

Spirit of '76
06-30-2007, 10:54 PM
Look at the last sentence:


It does not make a hell of sense.

Huh? Is this some kind of condensation of the entire article, bizarre syntax included?

ecliptic
06-30-2007, 11:01 PM
I think he was probably the Dwight Schrute of the UN.

HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA

I think he's one of Reverend Sun Myung Moon's people!

mikelovesgod
06-30-2007, 11:42 PM
No people do take him seriously. You are implying that reason will win. It usually doesn't. Emotions are more effective than reason, so is fear. Fear can paralyze people.

angrydragon
06-30-2007, 11:54 PM
Author: Edwin A. Sumcad

I could have sworn I saw Scumbag.

WannaBfree
07-01-2007, 12:38 AM
INSIGNIFICANT 2ND TIER CANDIDATE BAFFLES SCIENTISTS BY DRAWING LARGE CROWD
coincidence theorists to research this phenomenom



http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v367/twogunkitten/crowd.jpg


:D

Dan Klaus
07-01-2007, 12:40 AM
pathetic article..luckily nobody reads his stuff and the attention given to him for his Dr. Paul tirades only fuel his need for attention.

GreyBlood
07-01-2007, 01:47 AM
I read the whole thing. I lost many brain cells in the battle. Doctors say I might make a full recovery.

While reading the article i kept thinking that this was insanely, crazily over-the-top ridiculous. like something the Daily Show would cough up.

angrydragon
07-01-2007, 01:50 AM
I read the whole thing. I lost many brain cells in the battle. Doctors say I might make a full recovery.

While reading the article i kept thinking that this was insanely, crazily over-the-top ridiculous. like something the Daily Show would cough up.

Hahaha, it's worst than beer.

Kuldebar
07-01-2007, 01:52 AM
All your base are belong to us


It is an aggravated abuse of the government because Paul works for the government and paid the salary of a congressman plus all of the emoluments he receives appurtenant thereto, all paid for out of the tax money that the government had raised which he attacked. The image he projects to angry Americans as an “oddball” that has risen from the catacomb of Hell is never held in doubt.

ROFL

angrydragon
07-01-2007, 01:56 AM
He's a politician in disguise, or maybe he helps write the tax code.

buffalokid777
07-01-2007, 02:03 AM
I tried to email this piece of crap....

It looks like it wouldn't send....

Go ahead...

Try to send this piece of crap an email....

I think he might have a script to prevent getting his real email...

Anyone know how to reach him???

I have a few choice words for this piece of garbage.......

angrydragon
07-01-2007, 02:08 AM
edwin.sumcad@cox.net

The email doesn't work?

lonestarguy
07-01-2007, 02:10 AM
http://www.americanchronicle.com/notices/contributor_policy.asp

....Political Writers. Our policy prohibits caustic attacks on elected leaders, government officials, politicians, and non-elected (appointed) policymakers. We expect your submissions to be truthful, civil, and well-mannered, following the established traditions of polite society and good taste. If you are not able to write about important issues of the day and, instead, repeatedly make personal or insulting attacks on anyone, your account will be closed. And if you are unable to provide a source or reference for a questionable statement, your submission will not be published and/or deleted. Do not request an author account with the specific intention to personally attack, denigrate, or defeat politicians, candidates or propositions because (a) we are not interested and (b) your articles will not be released.

Heck, if someone wants to take Somecad on, be my guest. He's clearly a neo-con hack wannabee. The article appears to be a direct vitriolic attack on Dr. Ron Paul, counter even to americanchronicle writer guidelines. Thus Somecad should be dismissed as a writer and as a 'contributor' to the americanchronicle.

Plus, Somecad fails to include those 5 or 6 footnotes that he uses to attack RP, because they are too long. What a crock! It's a clear indication that this writer, and I use that term loosely, has much to hide from, not the least of which is the truth.

Spirit of '76
07-01-2007, 03:02 AM
Heck, if someone wants to take Somecad on, be my guest. He's clearly a neo-con hack wannabee. The article appears to be a direct vitriolic attack on Dr. Ron Paul, counter even to americanchronicle writer guidelines. Thus Somecad should be dismissed as a writer and as a 'contributor' to the americanchronicle.

Hey, great catch.

Here's the letter I just sent:


Dear Editors,

I understand that your editorial policy expressly prohibits vitriolic language, which you define as "language of extreme bitterness and malignancy of temper", which "includes rancor (deep-seated ill-will) and/or spiteful, poisonous, or noxious language."

I am writing to inform you of a most egregious violation of this policy on the part of a Mr. Edwin Sumcad in his attempt at an article entitled "Most Despised GOP Presidential Aspirant Used By Haters Of America To Air Chips On the Shoulder", article number 30953. In this piece of writing, Mr. Sumcad airs his grievances against Congressman Ron Paul in a very disturbing manner.

As if the title alone were not evidence of the vitriolic nature of this screed, we see that within the first two paragraphs of this piece, Mr. Sumcad refers to Dr. Paul's supporters as "incorrigible haters of America and . . . congenital bangers of whatever America represents" and likens expressions of support for Congressman Paul to a "chronic disorder" that can only be relieved when "hatred is puked out of the system".

Leaving aside his misrepresentations of Congressman Paul's message and agenda, we can see that he goes on in paragraph six to again insult Dr. Paul's supporters by likening them to "social lepers in the Bible" and saying that they "they are very toxic to American voters who abhor them".

The venom does not stop flowing at paragraph six, however. In paragraph nine he leaves off insulting Dr. Paul's supporters long enough to throw a few pot-shots at Dr. Paul himself. Here we see that he refers to the congressman as "an 'oddball' that has risen from the catacomb of Hell".

In the next paragraph he returns to slandering Dr. Paul's supporters by accusing them of being "haters of America" suffering from "chronic anxiety or OCD". Immediately after that, in the one short sentence that makes up paragraph ten, he accuses Congressman Paul's supporters of having "no brain".

In paragraph thirteen he adds bigotry to his bag of tricks when he refers to Congressman Paul's followers discussing matters of economics as "hillbillies" who "think that they had become Keynesian experts in macroeconomics overnight".

In paragraph fifteen he again accuses Dr. Paul's supporters of lacking "any brain here anyone can see" because of their stance on the continuation of military operations in Iraq.

Do you see a pattern here? The rest of the article devolves into a barely coherent mass of insults wherein we see Dr. Paul called a "scatterbrain", a "loquacious windtalker", an "extraterrestrial idol", and a "hater". Further insults are thrown at the congressman's supporters as well.

In a supreme twist of irony, near the end of this bizarre diatribe, Sumcad takes a break from spewing venom at Dr. Paul long enough to offer to offer to tutor Dr. Paul in "the rudiments of protocol, diplomatic niceties and international leadership [to refine his language as a congressman who wants to be President of the United States]" and pledges to help provide the congressman with a "special makeover" of "his vulgar public persona".

As if the clear vitriol were not bad enough, the sheer number of typographical, grammatical, and idiomatic errors found in the article do no service to the American Chronicle's editorial reputation. This is certainly not an article of which your publication can be proud.

I hope that you will stand by your editorial standards, as this is without doubt a clear violation of your policy regarding vitriol. I urge you to take steps to protect your reputation as a credible journalistic publication by removing this article from your archives and/or printing an apology to Congressman Paul and his numerous supporters.

Thank you for your consideration.

Most sincerely,
etc. etc. etc.

angrydragon
07-01-2007, 03:09 AM
They'll ignore emails criticizing the article, or they'll be defending it some way.

You should have signed it, JOE KICKASS!

Spirit of '76
07-01-2007, 03:20 AM
You should have signed it, JOE KICKASS!

Dude, don't reveal my alter ego! :cool:

Trance Dance Master
07-01-2007, 03:21 AM
As pilots said in WWII, "when you're flying over the target, that's when you get the flak". Dr. Paul is making lots of progress. How much the MSM smears him is a good way to measure how much progress he is making.

I ATTENDED THE RALLY IN IOWA! Only two people debated with me, only one for more than 5 minutes, and Tancredo supporter. The other complained about abortion and gays, he couldn't debate more than 30 seconds.

Man from La Mancha
07-01-2007, 03:36 AM
Nice letter Spirit of '76. It's beyond my talents.

Spirit of '76
07-01-2007, 03:41 AM
Nice letter Spirit of '76. It's beyond my talents.

Thanks, but I'm sure you could do just as well. :)

Tin_Foil_Hat
07-01-2007, 03:54 AM
I couldn't even force myself to read all that.

Is that the best they have?

iddo
07-01-2007, 05:10 AM
http://www.americanchronicle.com/notices/contributor_policy.asp

....Political Writers. Our policy prohibits caustic attacks on elected leaders, government officials, politicians, and non-elected (appointed) policymakers. We expect your submissions to be truthful, civil, and well-mannered, following the established traditions of polite society and good taste. If you are not able to write about important issues of the day and, instead, repeatedly make personal or insulting attacks on anyone, your account will be closed. And if you are unable to provide a source or reference for a questionable statement, your submission will not be published and/or deleted. Do not request an author account with the specific intention to personally attack, denigrate, or defeat politicians, candidates or propositions because (a) we are not interested and (b) your articles will not be released.

Heck, if someone wants to take Somecad on, be my guest. He's clearly a neo-con hack wannabee. The article appears to be a direct vitriolic attack on Dr. Ron Paul, counter even to americanchronicle writer guidelines. Thus Somecad should be dismissed as a writer and as a 'contributor' to the americanchronicle.

Nice find from their contributor policy...
Does anyone know what's Ron Paul's position with regard to libel lawsuits? There are a couple of straightforward slanders in this article, for example: "...which he believed justified the terrorists’ attacks killing thousands of innocent Americans". If this article was about someone other than RP, he might sue the writer and the publisher. But I think that RP rejects libel lawsuits on libertarian principles, i.e. that everyone has a right to free expression as long as it doesn't involve violence, and that it's not legitimate to use the power of the state in order to punish others via libel lawsuits. Anyone knows if I'm correct and that's RP's position?
Maybe we could then start a petition saying that because RP is a libertarian and doesn't agree that the state is authorized to deal with libel, we instead demand that they fire the guy who wrote this article? Or maybe it's not worth it to waste time on this clown...?

rich34
07-01-2007, 07:30 AM
I emailed him this:


"You sir, like all in this great country are entitled to their own opinion. Just like the Paul supporters, we too, are entitled to our opinion. The man speaks a powerful message that appeals to most that hear it. This is not communist China, or the old Soviet Union! We can support whomever we feel like supporting and that is the beauty of America! If the man has no chance of winning, like you believe, why bother? Makes perfect sense to me. You have a good day sir and a happy 4th!"

As Paul said, win them with our kindness!

Bradley in DC
07-01-2007, 08:04 AM
I tried to email this piece of crap....

It looks like it wouldn't send....

Go ahead...

Try to send this piece of crap an email....

I think he might have a script to prevent getting his real email...

Anyone know how to reach him???

I have a few choice words for this piece of garbage.......

Let's please try to follow the good doctor's lead and kill them with kindness--no more "angry emails" please.

nayjevin
07-01-2007, 08:48 AM
(attempt at) EXHAUSTIVE APPROACH TO EMAILS/ PHONE CALLS TO AUTHORS/REPORTERS (http://www.ronpaulforums.com/showthread.php?t=5095)

Spirit of '76
07-03-2007, 10:52 AM
Here's the letter I just sent:


Dear Editors,

I understand that your editorial policy expressly prohibits vitriolic language, which you define as "language of extreme bitterness and malignancy of temper", which "includes rancor (deep-seated ill-will) and/or spiteful, poisonous, or noxious language."

I am writing to inform you of a most egregious violation of this policy on the part of a Mr. Edwin Sumcad in his attempt at an article entitled "Most Despised GOP Presidential Aspirant Used By Haters Of America To Air Chips On the Shoulder", article number 30953. In this piece of writing, Mr. Sumcad airs his grievances against Congressman Ron Paul in a very disturbing manner.

As if the title alone were not evidence of the vitriolic nature of this screed, we see that within the first two paragraphs of this piece, Mr. Sumcad refers to Dr. Paul's supporters as "incorrigible haters of America and . . . congenital bangers of whatever America represents" and likens expressions of support for Congressman Paul to a "chronic disorder" that can only be relieved when "hatred is puked out of the system".

Leaving aside his misrepresentations of Congressman Paul's message and agenda, we can see that he goes on in paragraph six to again insult Dr. Paul's supporters by likening them to "social lepers in the Bible" and saying that they "they are very toxic to American voters who abhor them".

The venom does not stop flowing at paragraph six, however. In paragraph nine he leaves off insulting Dr. Paul's supporters long enough to throw a few pot-shots at Dr. Paul himself. Here we see that he refers to the congressman as "an 'oddball' that has risen from the catacomb of Hell".

In the next paragraph he returns to slandering Dr. Paul's supporters by accusing them of being "haters of America" suffering from "chronic anxiety or OCD". Immediately after that, in the one short sentence that makes up paragraph ten, he accuses Congressman Paul's supporters of having "no brain".

In paragraph thirteen he adds bigotry to his bag of tricks when he refers to Congressman Paul's followers discussing matters of economics as "hillbillies" who "think that they had become Keynesian experts in macroeconomics overnight".

In paragraph fifteen he again accuses Dr. Paul's supporters of lacking "any brain here anyone can see" because of their stance on the continuation of military operations in Iraq.

Do you see a pattern here? The rest of the article devolves into a barely coherent mass of insults wherein we see Dr. Paul called a "scatterbrain", a "loquacious windtalker", an "extraterrestrial idol", and a "hater". Further insults are thrown at the congressman's supporters as well.

In a supreme twist of irony, near the end of this bizarre diatribe, Sumcad takes a break from spewing venom at Dr. Paul long enough to offer to offer to tutor Dr. Paul in "the rudiments of protocol, diplomatic niceties and international leadership [to refine his language as a congressman who wants to be President of the United States]" and pledges to help provide the congressman with a "special makeover" of "his vulgar public persona".

As if the clear vitriol were not bad enough, the sheer number of typographical, grammatical, and idiomatic errors found in the article do no service to the American Chronicle's editorial reputation. This is certainly not an article of which your publication can be proud.

I hope that you will stand by your editorial standards, as this is without doubt a clear violation of your policy regarding vitriol. I urge you to take steps to protect your reputation as a credible journalistic publication by removing this article from your archives and/or printing an apology to Congressman Paul and his numerous supporters.

Thank you for your consideration.

Most sincerely,
etc. etc. etc.


No answer yet, so:

Dear Editors,

As I have not yet received a response indicating whether or not you plan to uphold your own editorial policy regarding vitriol in this case, I am forwarding my original letter to you, as it might have escaped your attention the first time.

I will also be opening this letter up and forwarding it to the Society of Professional Journalists, the International Press Institute, the Organization of News Ombudsmen, a number of popular blogs, and a number of top Journalism Schools around the country. Don't you agree that this would make an excellent case study for students learning about journalistic ethics?

Thanks again for your consideration. I look forward to your acknowledgment that you intend to stand by the standards that you yourself have set for works included in your publication.

Most sincerely,
etc. etc. etc.

Spirit of '76
07-03-2007, 07:53 PM
Victory!

http://ronpaulforums.com/showthread.php?p=49658#post49658

Mesogen
07-03-2007, 08:47 PM
Bra - effing - VO!

Spirit of '76
07-03-2007, 08:54 PM
VO? :confused: :D