Misplaced_Sox

LOL@semi difficult ya

QUOTE (caulfield12 @ Jul 19, 2009 -> 03:44 PM) So Ozzie deliberately set up Jenks to fail yesterday as well, because he hadn't pitched for a week since the ASB? These are professional athletes paid to play a kid's game, why should they be treated like babies and their failures rationalized? He just didn't get the job done. If there's a BA/Aaron Poreda/Sean Tracey "conspiracy," why does Ozzie keep playing Gordon Beckham, a rookie, every single game? I dont want to gang up on you but that's flawed logic. One is a Veteran who has been in that predicament before and has experience to lean on, the other is a green rookie who has never pitched in a meaningful situation at the bigs coming from a starter to a reliever.

Can we agree how silly though it is to take your least used, rookie, in a situation like that when, Ozzie has never put him on in a situation like that ever prior? This was Ozzie's F you

Pena cant even pitch in a mop up role

QUOTE (Dick Allen @ Jul 19, 2009 -> 03:08 PM) Oh, so put him in the exact position you criticized Ozzie putting him today? One was bases loaded, one is with a man on, much different situations. Did you really think Poreda was going to succeed int hat situation, never being in that situation, with how much he has played?

QUOTE (Dick Allen @ Jul 19, 2009 -> 03:02 PM) He walked both guys he faced. It was awful. Do you think Ozzie should put him in the rotation so the other manager can stack his line-up against him and do you think that will all of a sudden make Poreda throw the ball over the plate? If he pisses his pants because the bases are loaded on July 18th in the 5th inning against the Baltimore Orioles, he's not ready to play for a contender in the major leagues. He needs to post an APB on the 97 mph fastball he was supposed to possess. I was not advocating putting him in the starting lineup without giving more repetitive chances out of the bullpen. To see if he could gradually adjust to MLB level of play. You know like one of the 10,000,000 times Ozzie goes to Linebrink on zero rest with a runner on, put in Poreda. Build confidence dont break it down, how many times does breaking someone really work?

QUOTE (Thunderbolt @ Jul 19, 2009 -> 03:00 PM) There is no excuse for Wise being on this team over Fields. Field can (arguably) play 3b, 1b, and Lf. Wise can play the OF, can't hit, or field, and is not a former #1 of the organization. Where is fields, he was getting hot for a while and then... nothing. Reminded me of the hot streaks Brian would go through and then he would go mysteriously missing.

Well this proves we need a long man, maybe we can audition Torres from within, or see if El Duque wants a crack at it..... no Im not joking.

QUOTE (Dick Allen @ Jul 19, 2009 -> 02:51 PM) So Ozzie is an idiot for not using Poreda and an idiot for using him. This was the exact opportunity I was talking about in a different thread where Poreda would have an opportunity to earn Ozzie's trust. Sorry, getting guys out in AA is a lot different than getting them out in the majors. In fact, Poreda would have an ugly ERA if he were in the position a lot of people want him to be in, that being in the rotation. He had a chance today and walked both guys he faced. I'm all for ripping Ozzie setting guys up to fail, but 2 batters 2 walks, that's on Poreda. So you think putting Poreda in a situation in which he had to be perfect, with location, with the game on a line, needing two outs with the bases loaded..... Is a good test. I would see a little bit of your point if he was getting even semi-regular work in a real game setting, not a spot start in some weak situation every week. If you haven't put Poreda in regular spots with runners on, and the game on the line, why do you make the jump when he has sat for almost two weeks into that spot unless you are Ozzie, just being Ozzie.

Why are people praising Ozzie for this move with Poreda? This was a terrible move and Ozzie just sticking it to the fans media, I cant wait for him to tout Wise lone HR for plugging him in today either. Ozzie is the mental midget, he slams the kid in the media, never plays him. Then says I'll show you and puts in a situation to fail. I dont know many rookies who would succeed in that situation at all. That was seriously classless indeed, and it show that Ozzie Guillen could never handle a youth movement because he always has to prove something to these "kids" always trying to tear them down. I kind of feel the way he treats BA, Fields, the other young players through the years has been terrible and has done more harm, mentally, physically.... then good. We are just lucky that Beckham is such a sure thing and confidence in abundance that Ozzie dumb comments couldn't even dent him.

QUOTE(NorthSideSox72 @ Feb 6, 2008 -> 11:02 PM) Listen carefully - you just called another poster "a real ignorant person". You need to tone it down, or you can just stop posting in here. Your choice. Back to your material information... as you have pointed out, the projects were a really poor design for everyone involved. Now we have the new plans, in great part pushed by Mayor Daley, to integrate income levels in housing. I am sure that is no perfect solution, but, be honest here - are you really saying its not an improvement from the cell block-like projects? You are missing the point. I don't know why this is so difficult to understand. Of the 100% of resident of both Cabrini and the Robert Taylor homes that signed off on Daly's plan to turn the projects area into mixed income for both a new living standard only 15% are living in those mixed use homes. The majority live no where near Chicago, their jobs lost, relocated against their will when they have SIGNED contracts to right of property. How is that acceptable? Are we going back to Old father Daly's plan to ride around in fire trucks spraying down the homeless to get them to leave now. You and iamshack are speaking as if they dont have an entitlement to their homes because they are section 8 funded, or on welfare. That is a pretty piss poor mentality to have. So I dont care remove me. Because if you obviously cannot stand or understand the plight of the poor and only think of your numbers or the tax write off it is then maybe we are better off silencing every poor person out there. He did make an ignorant assumption. Whether you see it is not the case, because I am offended. Because that was my life, filled of broken promises. I am done with this thread.

QUOTE(iamshack @ Feb 6, 2008 -> 08:51 PM) And what does it matter that the developers, which did not even include Obama, paid $1 for the property? I used to work for the Mayor's Office and the City sold vacant/abandoned/damaged properties all the time for $1. The City often can't afford to rehabilitate the property itself, so it transfers ownership to someone in the private sector who is eligible for federal tax credits and they make it happen that way....there's nothing shady about the fact that the land for that development was bought for $1. It is about making money off poor people, disenfranchising them of their home by promises of integration in a mixed income society, like as promised. You obviously will never understand and you sound like a real ignorant person. Live a day in a poor person's shoes. Go to work with them, listen to their problems, then go home with them. Understand the realities you are talking about. This was not vacant land. The inhabitants of said ghettos signed off a new proposal to rehab land for the chance to live in an integrated society and not one that bred more poor people. The ghetto was first designed as a social construct to keep people poor, it becomes a breeding ground for cheap workforce. Reference the Dr. Martin Luther King on those points about the systematic poverty. You don't promise people one thing and then turn your back and make a profit off them because they don't have a voice to speak out from. Obama also bought land for part of his house for a dollar, he was not rehabbing the land.

QUOTE(iamshack @ Feb 6, 2008 -> 07:39 PM) You know, these are great and all...but honestly, I'm sure there are plenty of people who have had great experiences with all the candidates. The Clinton's are the masters of this technique, and it's been on display since Bill's campaigns and his SOTU addresses. Frankly, I think it's gotten quite old. As for your repeated references to Obama's role in tearing down the projects, don't you think you are oversimplifying things a bit? There are so many factors that have gone into whether to leave those projects in place or what to do with them that we could spend days discussing that issue. Yet you are trying to pin the entire thing on Obama, as if he just strolled in there, snapped his fingers, and the wrecking balls were let loose. I'm not sure what the answer is regarding what to do with those areas, but one thing is clear: they were replete with drugs, violence, and absolute poverty for a long period of time. Whether it was right for the residents to be displaced, I'm not sure. But those were certainly not areas where anything very positive could happen at all. The odds of anyone raised there of living a healthy, stable, and happy upbringing were quite minute. My disagreement with Obama was not with tearing down the projects, they needed to be torn down, but my disagreement was with the initial, and agreed upon by residents that they would have homes in these new mixed income building, at least a 75% mix of former project inhabitants, and the rest sold market to other non income capped buyers. This was a deal that Obama worked on as a lawyer, co brokered with Rezko holdings, and they changed that to 30% housing for them and 20% "workable income" houses. Workable income being loosely based upon 65,000 for single 120,00 for married, which no on at Cabrini Green made. they were brokered out on behalf of Obama and his law firm, and Rezko made much more money. How is this good politics? I lived in the Robert Taylor Homes, also a rezko holding which Obama's law firm brokered from under the inhabitants. He came to our little part of the woods and made a big speech how we wouldnt end up like Cabrini Green residents, but we did. The poor shuttled off to Tinley, Oak Lawn, Cottage Grove. Away from their jobs, their family, their friends, instead of in the planned new mix use income homes they promised. http://www.suntimes.com/news/politics/4253...obama13.article You need to have lived it, to understand it. I made it out, not so many did.

Another strong piece of anecdotal evidence of Hillary's strength and endeavors for others. http://www.mydd.com/story/2008/2/6/181048/8171#2 Where are the Obama anecdotes? Despite the ones he riffs from Martin Luther King, Langston Hughes, or Paul Laurence Dunbar. Better yet I say you Chicagoan go track down the Cabrini Green residents they moved around the state and ask them about Obama's "change." I am still in contact with ten people from there if you want an address.http://www.mydd.com/story/2008/2/6/181048/8171#2

QUOTE(iamshack @ Feb 6, 2008 -> 06:48 PM) Those last few sentences are hitting what I am going to mention- sure, she gets labeled as a b**** because she can be so focused and ruthless....but she also can get away with crying whereas a man could not have. It's absolutely a matter of what sort of behavior is traditionally expected of women, just as we have been judging men on what sort of behavior is traditionally expected of men... Men cry in office are called patriotic, and brave. Women cry and they are weak and emotional. I remember several media outlets clapping with optimism the tears bush would shed over spicy kung pao meal. Said "it makes him more human, like us."