Reusse: Always are Angry Twins Followers

And here all I tried to do was indicate that not everyone hated every owner.....and then this broke out. Alas.....

You want a list of public subsidies that get my dander up? This website can't hold that much content, frankly, and it touches on the no politics edge, so I'll just say, I am not a fan of most subsidies. I think they are generally a bad investment for the taxpayer. I actually have less issue with the stadium than many other subsidies.....I just think that if you are going to beg for one for a decade, you ought to then spend the extra income, rather than pocket it. If you don't want to spend it on the team, then pay back the taxpayers in the years you underspend.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by birdwatcher

Spitting out a couple facts while ignoring the full body of work? That's essentially a mild form of dishonesty.

---

No it isn't...it's what you did in this argument...exactly what you did. You praised the Pohlads as great owners, failed to mention them offering the team up for contraction...failed to mention their constant threats for the team to be sold and moved. Why is that, exactly? You praised their spending on this last draft, more than 10% more than the next team, but fail to mention they had the most to spend, allotment -wise, to begin with...about 10% more than the team with the 2nd most to spend.

Talk about lack of full disclosure.

You want me to include the Pohlad's full body of work, you first...and understand that offering up the team for contraction and almost ensuring the moving of our team is HUGE.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by nicksaviking

Are you saying he atoned for his sins by donating to charities? He was the villian in The Grapes of Wrath for crying out loud. He was part of the problem long before he was part of the solution.

Still wondering why you won't address the disproportionate amount of stadium funding he contributed, you were the one to brought it up originally.

---

First, you're allowed to believe what you want to believe about Carl Pohlad. I couldn't care less, but I think your depiction is bizzarrely extreme, to say the least. And you had to be reminded that perhaps there's more to his story, didn't you?

And yes. I DID address the funding issue. I didn't support it then and worked to fire my legislators because of it. What part of this is confusing to you?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by birdwatcher

I won't, because I'm 100% in agreement with you on this point. Some, probably including the Pohlad Companies, might say, "Hey, it's business. Strike the best bargain you can." I would have told them to pack their bags.

But to turn around, Nick, and paint a picture of mean old Carl, grinning from ear to ear as he kicks old ladies out of their double-wide? C'mon.

---

He wasn't old at the time, he was quite young then. Your defense of the Pohlad's is pretty steadfast, if you know them I'm sorry I've offended and I respect you sticking up for them if that is the case.

That being said, I have/had little to no respect for Carl Pohlad. He manipulated the state of Minnesota in every underhanded way he could concieve. He took advantage of it's citizens from the first farm he foreclosed on, to the current tax payers that he demanded more from than he justly should have.

As for the kids, hopefully the apples fell far from the tree. That's not often the case with children who were exposed to extreme weath, but I do not know them.

Puck, you and I are done. You made your points. Boy, was I ever off base.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by birdwatcher

First, you're allowed to believe what you want to believe about Carl Pohlad. I couldn't care less, but I think your depiction is bizzarrely extreme, to say the least. And you had to be reminded that perhaps there's more to his story, didn't you?

And yes. I DID address the funding issue. I didn't support it then and worked to fire my legislators because of it. What part of this is confusing to you?

---

maybe the part where you praised how much they spent on the ballpark?

Looks like I've been dismissed...oh well.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ThePuck

Looks like I've been dismissed...oh well.

---

Dismissed perhaps, but not ignored!

Oh I forgot, my vote is for #1, though Reusse's hyperbole is annoying.

No sane fan thinks any owner would spend unlimited money, nor would any sane Twins fan think the team would spend East Coast kind of money.

The hyperbole for option two is also awful. Few say Ryan shouldn't rebuild, most just agree that he didn't need to put such little effort into free agency this year.

Way to be objective Reusse!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by nicksaviking

He wasn't old at the time, he was quite young then. Your defense of the Pohlad's is pretty steadfast, if you know them I'm sorry I've offended and I respect you sticking up for them if that is the case.

That being said, I have/had little to no respect for Carl Pohlad. He manipulated the state of Minnesota in every underhanded way he could concieve. He took advantage of it's citizens from the first farm he foreclosed on, to the current tax payers that he demanded more from than he justly should have.

As for the kids, hopefully the apples fell far from the tree. That's not often the case with children who were exposed to extreme weath, but I do not know them.

---

As a matter of fact, I do know a number of them, nick. I've never benefitted financially from having known any member of three generations of Pohlads that I've met, but yes, I know a part of the stories of a few of them, and I've personally witnessed impressive displays of personal generousity and charity. I've been exposed to their business practices too. And while the reviews, including my own, aren't perfect, they get very high grades overall out there for fair treatment of employees and for their ethics. If you cared to research this, you'll find this to be the most commonly-held opinion by people who have actual experience and knowledge of these things.

But my objection isn't personal. It's about unfair vitriol. Directed at ANYONE. You're guilty of that, nick. Happens your hatred is towards Carl for whatever reasons.

And this notion that a kid who's exposed to whatever environment is to be pre-judged? That's an insipid form of prejudice. Does a poor kid get the same treatment from you?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ThePuck

Looks like I've been dismissed...oh well.

---

Don't feel too bad. You made some good points, but using mere logic to tackle a post with "love" and "Pohlads" in the same sentence is like handling anti-matter with salad tongs.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by LaBombo

Don't feel too bad. You made some good points, but using mere logic to tackle a post with "love" and "Pohlads" in the same sentence is like handling anti-matter with salad tongs.

---

Especially when you lack the capacity to understand the context of the post and therefore apply ridiculous "mere logic", LaBombo. And when your heart is ice cold.

This is the Man who saved Twins Baseball for all of us, Judge Harry Crump. http://4.bp.blogspot.com/_evoBtXXWMA...1600/crump.gif
The Pohlad's did everything they could to liquidate the Twins and cash in on a big pay day. Judge Crump blocked them.
If the Pohlad's had been successful, this thread along with Twins Daily would not exist.
I am thankful for judge Crump. I have not forgiven the Pohlad's.


USATODAY.com - Judge orders Twins to play next season

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by birdwatcher

But my objection isn't personal. It's about unfair vitriol. Directed at ANYONE. You're guilty of that, nick. Happens your hatred is towards Carl for whatever reasons.

And this notion that a kid who's exposed to whatever environment is to be pre-judged? That's an insipid form of prejudice. Does a poor kid get the same treatment from you?

---

I never used the word hate, as a rule I generally don't use that word toward people, nor have I attacked you, the vitriol is coming from your side. I've been called ignorant, unchritable and now prejeduced by you since lunch. As for my reasons for my lack of respect, I've listed those already.

I rightly assumed you had a personal connection to the family and appologized that the words said about them wounded, but you're not going to swing the opinion of them on an internet forum by going on the attack. Perhaps they give to charities and maybe they treat their employees decently, but their most high profile venture happens to be one of the states most charished possesions. If they wanted to have an untarnished image, they should have thought about that in their dealings with the one business that is in the media most often. They didn't think that way, or they didn't care, either way they've used the Twins as a weapon to reap huge profits, and all from the pockets of the people who love the team the most.

I was very much in favor of a new, partially publicly funded stadium for the Twins. I, for one, wouldn't have any problem with the portion of stadium costs the Pohlad family was asked to contribute if they were in fact contributing that amount. Instead, they are funding their stadium contribution from stadium revenue at the expense of the team on the field. In effect, they aren't contributing any of their own money towards building the stadium. I find that dishonest at best, and that is my problem with the Pohlad family. They got their stadium, their franchise value more than doubled, and they haven't lived up to their end of the bargain.

Happy Trolls are just as bad as Hateful Trolls. That some people don't find blind optimism offensive, doesn't mean that pollyanneishness doesn't negatively affect many people's participation in discussion. It offends my intellect when someone brandishes their baseless happy-takes as legitimate. Just as it offends my intellect when someone tries to frame their ideological pessimism as critical analysis. That one narrative unreasonably casts Hicks as the hero and the other defiantly scripts Correia as the villain hardly matters in terms of each's repugnance.

Away from the Pohlads and back to Reusse's article--the premise of this thread. He learned his "journalism" from Don Riley decades ago and often repeats the theme of rabid homerism and the derision of outsiders. Well that's part of "Minnesota Nice"--and the folks here drink that Kool-Aid by the gallon. The Twins (and their management) have been bashed bloody this off-season (Reformation) and the Jesuits have been summoned (or should I have used the Russian example? substitute Cossaks then) to beat the "haters" (apostates) back to the "True Faith" (Trust Us and trust Terry). This response was inevitable. The tome expected--"Them" are: unrealistic in their expectations, ungrateful for the gifts bestowed, unappreciative of the wisdom and love provided and must immediately repent or face eternal xxxxnation.

Reusse is bashing those who use electronic media to vent--which is basically what he gets paid to do. He needs a "timeout".

My points of contention with the Twins lie in the following areas: 1) their duplicitious nature 2) their arrogance and 3) their sense of entitlement.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by birdwatcher

Especially when you lack the capacity to understand the context of the post and therefore apply ridiculous "mere logic", LaBombo. And when your heart is ice cold.

---

You seem to be having a problem understanding the difference between attacking an argument, and attacking a poster.

Ease up, or you'll be taking a timeout from the forum.

Chief, I'm confused. So, they're paying their agreed-to contribution, right? And out of their own revenue stream, not someone else's, right? I mean, you're certainly not arguing that the stadium revenue, or any other revenue stream, belongs to anyone but the Twins, right? Why do you believe that the stadium revenue is something other than their own revenue? And if it IS their revenue, why do you care if that's the stream they use to pay their obligation?

Now, I totally get the point you and others make that the Twins aren't giving us the product they ought to give us. I partially agree that they're short-changing us in the short-term on the quality of the product.

Where, in the bargain "we" made with the Pohlads, was it promised they would pay their contribution from some other bucket than from their operations? Maybe I'm missing something, Chief, but I don't believe I'm entitled to a better product because of some bargain or promise. I AM entitled to not buy the product if it's crappy or too expensive. And I have chosen to avoid Target Field, sadly, because it pisses me off that MOST of our community can't afford the product. Why? Because Kevin Correia and his ilk deserve $5M, because the Twins and MLB are greedy, and because fans greedily demand that their team jack up their payroll so teams end up paying lightweights like Delmon Young $5 freakin' million dollars.

So, why do we let ourselves off the hook for this whole economic abomination and slap the bullseye on Pohlad? Because we can, I suppose.

I like this and I like Reusse (what little I’ve read of him). My two-cents, as a 45-year, far-off fan, is that I never bought into “The Twins have some of the best fans in the country” line that I often hear. The bulk of local fans are extremely affectionate when we win—and that’s delightful—but the fans that follow most closely and are most knowledgeable are indeed, quite critical. I remember a line in Danny Thompson’s book about how about 1500 fans came out for a game in the mid-1970’s, and they turned out to be the team’s biggest booers. No, they are not quite Phillies fans, but the whole “Minnesota-nice” thing doesn’t wash with me, and that’s fine.