the fact remains that no one on the planet can really be AWESOME with out some drugs. From Jimi Hendrix to Lance Armstrong --- all the great ones have done drugs
altho I don't think lance was completely forthcoming (and may have even lied some more), I like him more than I did before.
I'm a cancer survivor and wear a livestrong bracelet. I took it off for a while but it's back on. I never wore it as a tribute to lance...I wear it to remind people of the insidious disease it represents.
the fact remains that no one on the planet can really be AWESOME with out some drugs. From Jimi Hendrix to Lance Armstrong --- all the great ones have done drugs
sure, but those people didn't destroy the lives of others to cover-up a lie.
If Lance hadn't gone after people and sued them for slander, I would have some sympathy for him.
The fact that he went to that extent, just makes him even more of a disgusting person. I have no respect for people like that.
The joy of life comes from our encounters with new experiences, and hence there is no greater joy than to have an endlessly changing horizon, for each day to have a new and different sun.
altho I don't think lance was completely forthcoming (and may have even lied some more), I like him more than I did before.
I'm a cancer survivor and wear a livestrong bracelet. I took it off for a while but it's back on. I never wore it as a tribute to lance...I wear it to remind people of the insidious disease it represents.
its like getting rid of police brutality in police ranks. Yes, you go after the egregious blatant racists who rape black men with brooms while on duty, but you also go after the plain old everyday racist cops, and you weed out the ranks. you clean house. And that entails going into each precint in each state and finding out who's engaging in profiling and police brutality. Thats how you clean house.
Id like to see every cheater treated equally in cycling. So if you are found to be doping, it doesnt matter if you are winning Tours or if you place 100th, you are exposed, banned, and a zero tolerance policy is enacted.
Just yesterday the president of UCI came out and said they called every cyclist during those years for a chat and discussed when and if their tests indicated they had doped. so they (UCI) knew what was up. They knew who was doping and who wasnt. The headscratcher is that instead of actually doing something about it. they seem to have just allowed it to continue on with no reprecussions. No effort was made to expose or eliminate the dopers from the tour. In fact they just swept it under the rug. It was allowed to continue, and Lance and everyone else indeed had the OK from everyone in charge to cheat. Why would Contador or Hamilton or anyone else feel like they were cheating if everyone else was cheating and no one was getting punished. Cycling officials only have themselves to blame. They knew what was going on, . They had the power to ban Lance and everyone else in 99. They surely knew who was failing tests.
UCI and everyone else who knew about it and did nothing should be punished just as severely. Their should be major lawsuits filed, people should be fired and fined. and they should be made to apologize for not protecting the sport and allowing cheaters to run amok.
What have I said thats not fact? Just because someone disagrees with you doesnt mean they didnt read the reasoned decision. You made a huge assumption, in that you said lance was a complete jerk but seem willing to view the 11 teammates as somehow paragons of good. In reality, they lied for just as long as lance did, and only came forward once they were offered clear deals that would reduce their possible sentences. You make quite an assumption when you argue everyone of those 11 came forward not to save their own skin, which is exactly what happened, but to rid the sport of cheating, something that hadnt crossed their mind at all prior.
Its as I said the day he confessed. In some narrow minded folks eyes, you cant have a conflicted view of things. You can say you hate cheating and want the cycling officials who allowed this to go on to go to jail, and that any cheater should be exposed and banned, but when you say you feel conflicted about lance somehow Im defending cheating and lying and bullying. Its silly.
I could say the same thing about you. You seem willing to ignore facts and continually support and defend 11 of his teammates who are known liars and cheats. The facts are indeed in the reasoned decision.
They came forward to get better deals. Period.
for one they have not lied as long as lance has ... read up the definition of lying ... show me an instance when david zabriskie, jonathan vaughters or christian vandevelde lied about doping since 2005 ... and how can you say they didn't want to rid the sport of cheating when they decided to either form or be part of a team that is the most vocal against doping ... a team that started a movement in cycling that commits their team and riders to a level of doping standards that are stricter than wada's? ... those are facts
and again for the umpteenth time - it isn't about lance cheating ... how many times does one have to say that? ... you keep harping on everyone else cheated ... it's secondary as to why lance is an asshole ... he's an asshole because of how he treated people, how he exploited cancer for personal gain, for how he ruined people's lives and for continuing to lie to people despite the hurt he's caused ...
I agree Lance cheating is secondary and isnt the issue. The issue is cheating and doping as a whole in cycling. Its the officials who knowingly allowed it to happen and continue which is a criminal offense and by definition illegal.
Unless you know cyclists personally, I dont, you cant comment on why they did what they did. Thats just plain stupid to act otherwise. Facts are facts. Most of the 11 named in the report denied it just as long as lance did and admitted it to save their own skins and cut better deals as a result.
Every rider you named also knowingly exploited fans and the sport for money and fame.
I dont know where you keep getting this arbitrary 2005 number that this is when they stopped using and decided to become advocates for cleaning up cycling. Vande velde never admitted to doping in 2004, when he started. The reasoned decision suggests he doped all the way into near mid 2006, because he was stripped of his wins from 2004 to 2006. And he wasnt stripped of those in 2007 for instance, he was stripped of them in 2012 as a result of the reasoned decision. So he wasnt truthful until his team manager and the reasoned decision forced him to be honest. If he was so eager to create a drug free team or be a part of one, why wouldnt you admit your own part in the doping world? Lying and refusing to admit your role in doping, lying for 6-8 years, and then confessing that aint some sort of paragon of good.
I agree Lance cheating is secondary and isnt the issue. The issue is cheating and doping as a whole in cycling. Its the officials who knowingly allowed it to happen and continue which is a criminal offense and by definition illegal.
Unless you know cyclists personally, I dont, you cant comment on why they did what they did. Thats just plain stupid to act otherwise. Facts are facts. Most of the 11 named in the report denied it just as long as lance did and admitted it to save their own skins and cut better deals as a result.
Every rider you named also knowingly exploited fans and the sport for money and fame.
I dont know where you keep getting this arbitrary 2005 number that this is when they stopped using and decided to become advocates for cleaning up cycling. Vande velde never admitted to doping in 2004, when he started. The reasoned decision suggests he doped all the way into near mid 2006, because he was stripped of his wins from 2004 to 2006. And he wasnt stripped of those in 2007 for instance, he was stripped of them in 2012 as a result of the reasoned decision. So he wasnt truthful until his team manager and the reasoned decision forced him to be honest. If he was so eager to create a drug free team or be a part of one, why wouldnt you admit your own part in the doping world? Lying and refusing to admit your role in doping, lying for 6-8 years, and then confessing that aint some sort of paragon of good.
i got it from their affidavits ... in their testimony under oath ... something you apparently read ...
altho I don't think lance was completely forthcoming (and may have even lied some more), I like him more than I did before.
I'm a cancer survivor and wear a livestrong bracelet. I took it off for a while but it's back on. I never wore it as a tribute to lance...I wear it to remind people of the insidious disease it represents.
what makes you like him more now?
I dunno....I'm reading From Lance to Landis and, wow, every-fucking-one really was doping. I hated lance's defiance and jerkiness (e.g. the 7 jersey tweet) but now the lifetime ban seems a little excessive. He has been knocked down to nothing, will be disgraced forever and it just seems a little petty to say no more competition for you.....ever. oprah was awful but I think lance was somewhat contrite.
If I had known then what I know now...
Vegas 93, Vegas 98, Vegas 00 (10 year show), Vegas 03, Vegas 06
VIC 07
EV LA1 08
Seattle1 09, Seattle2 09, Salt Lake 09, LA4 09
Columbus 10
EV LA 11
Vancouver 11
Missoula 12
Portland 13, Spokane 13
St. Paul 14, Denver 14
I agree Lance cheating is secondary and isnt the issue. The issue is cheating and doping as a whole in cycling. Its the officials who knowingly allowed it to happen and continue which is a criminal offense and by definition illegal.
Unless you know cyclists personally, I dont, you cant comment on why they did what they did. Thats just plain stupid to act otherwise. Facts are facts. Most of the 11 named in the report denied it just as long as lance did and admitted it to save their own skins and cut better deals as a result.
Every rider you named also knowingly exploited fans and the sport for money and fame.
I dont know where you keep getting this arbitrary 2005 number that this is when they stopped using and decided to become advocates for cleaning up cycling. Vande velde never admitted to doping in 2004, when he started. The reasoned decision suggests he doped all the way into near mid 2006, because he was stripped of his wins from 2004 to 2006. And he wasnt stripped of those in 2007 for instance, he was stripped of them in 2012 as a result of the reasoned decision. So he wasnt truthful until his team manager and the reasoned decision forced him to be honest. If he was so eager to create a drug free team or be a part of one, why wouldnt you admit your own part in the doping world? Lying and refusing to admit your role in doping, lying for 6-8 years, and then confessing that aint some sort of paragon of good.
i got it from their affidavits ... in their testimony under oath ... something you apparently read ...
His results, his cycling results from 04 to 06 were disqualified and erased. So obviously the invesitgators feel he doped during that period. Which is beyond the arbitrary 2005 date you keep mentioning. If he stopped doping in 2005, only 04 and 05 would have been erased.
Second, these affidavits arent from 2005 or 2006. They arent that old. Maybe a year or two old. Id suggest they are maybe even from 2012. VandeVelde didnt spend 2007-2011 tellling what he knew about doping in cycling, nor did he spend it trying to rid the world of dopers. He could have done that years ago. He could have done it in 2007. He didnt. He could have done it in 2008. He didnt.
The case turned a corner last year. They didnt have the 11 teammates speaking out until last year, thus they didnt have an affidavit.
Alot of these guys werent even punished and banned until the reasoned decision. Which indicates that something had changed as a result of those affidavits.
Plus, its sort of common sense. Had Hamilton and Vande Velde and everyone else been cooperative from the get go, from 1997 on, they wouldnt have had any of their stats erased. They lied, the reasoned decision proves that by their own admission.
altho I don't think lance was completely forthcoming (and may have even lied some more), I like him more than I did before.
I'm a cancer survivor and wear a livestrong bracelet. I took it off for a while but it's back on. I never wore it as a tribute to lance...I wear it to remind people of the insidious disease it represents.
what makes you like him more now?
I dunno....I'm reading From Lance to Landis and, wow, every-fucking-one really was doping. I hated lance's defiance and jerkiness (e.g. the 7 jersey tweet) but now the lifetime ban seems a little excessive. He has been knocked down to nothing, will be disgraced forever and it just seems a little petty to say no more competition for you.....ever. oprah was awful but I think lance was somewhat contrite.
You didnt know that? Thats the whole point of it. Not only the athletes were doping but every single person in charge, the officials, the head honchos not only knew about the doping, but knew it was widespread, but didnt do anything to stop it. As I said, cycling had gone from a sport no one cared about, to one millions of people cared about, and grandmas and kids were following the tour. Same thing happened in baseball. This extends way beyond what has been pursued in a legal sense.
Not only that, but Hamilton says 80 percent of the entire peloton was doping. Thats an enormous amount of cyclists. This involved other teams, doctors, officials, managers, press, wives, girlfriends, and on and on. Everyone knew.
Thats why Lance's statement having to look up the definition of cheating is more profound than he got credit for. If every single other cyclist on your team is doping, and every other team and every other cyclist is doping, and if the people in charge of your sport know you are doping and dont care and tacitly support you taking drugs and cheating, in that paradigm what is cheating? Whats lying? It really was as he said, as common as putting air on your tires. Everybody was doing it, and your bosses arent telling you to stop, so why would you think you were cheating. If you are a rider and 80 percent of the guys you are competing against are also using, why would anyone think what they were doing was wrong?
And not a single doper ever came out and said, "this is wrong, our sport has gone to the dogs, this whole thing is corrupt". they all played the game, they all lied, from the head of UCI to the riders, they all played the game and kept quiet because they knew if they said a word, cycling would go from MAJOR sports event, to something not cared about. And thats not just Lance or his team. That was across the board, every single team in the competition shares blame.
Cycling is the dirtiest sport. And thats a nickname for a reason.
The amount of people who knew and did nothing not only in terms of Lance and US Postal/Discovery, but on every other team and all their riders who doped, its astounding the amount of people who are culpable.
Seems the only people who didnt know was the american public.
no sympathy for lance. none whatsoever. I don't give a shit who else cheated, what place they came in, and if they did or didn't sell Lance out for their own skin saving.
he's a disgrace. period. he got banned for life and that's the least that he deserved. getting world wide shame is good in my books.
inhale the fame? cough on the shame.
Gimli 1993
Fargo 2003
Winnipeg 2005
Winnipeg 2011
St. Paul 2014
no sympathy for lance. none whatsoever. I don't give a shit who else cheated, what place they came in, and if they did or didn't sell Lance out for their own skin saving.
he's a disgrace. period. he got banned for life and that's the least that he deserved. getting world wide shame is good in my books.
inhale the fame? cough on the shame.
If you care that Lance cheated, why would you not give a shit who else cheated? Do you mean we shouldn't care in the way Lance would want us to? Like to deflect blame and all that? Because I'd agree with that, but we should still care that others cheated. Otherwise it's personal and not principle.
"See a broad to get dat booty yak 'em, leg 'er down, a smack 'em yak 'em!"
no sympathy for lance. none whatsoever. I don't give a shit who else cheated, what place they came in, and if they did or didn't sell Lance out for their own skin saving.
he's a disgrace. period. he got banned for life and that's the least that he deserved. getting world wide shame is good in my books.
inhale the fame? cough on the shame.
If you care that Lance cheated, why would you not give a shit who else cheated? Do you mean we shouldn't care in the way Lance would want us to? Like to deflect blame and all that? Because I'd agree with that, but we should still care that others cheated. Otherwise it's personal and not principle.
theres no question he;s being treated differently than the other dopers. he said as much in the interview and like the stuff about the definition of cheating, he's on point with this. Obviously he went overboard with the suing and intimidation and bullying, but take that out, and he really acted no differently than any other cyclist. He did just as he said, and like any other doper would and did do, they did whatever they had to do, to protect themselves and their interests.
I think that there is a "pile on lance" type mentality going on right now. And some of its justified, but to really clean up cycling, and i think thats what we all want, and everyone else wants, to do that, you need to do more than go after Lance and his teammates.
The mentality of cheating and doping, and the mentality that we should cover it up because we will lose money, is engrained into cycling, and sports in general. Its way deeper than bringing down and punishing one rider and one team.
I think the next step in this process should be putting the officials and head honchos feet to the fire and forcing them to admit what they did. Evidently the head of UCI just resigned, no doubt as a result of their criminal behavior in all this.
no sympathy for lance. none whatsoever. I don't give a shit who else cheated, what place they came in, and if they did or didn't sell Lance out for their own skin saving.
he's a disgrace. period. he got banned for life and that's the least that he deserved. getting world wide shame is good in my books.
inhale the fame? cough on the shame.
If you care that Lance cheated, why would you not give a shit who else cheated? Do you mean we shouldn't care in the way Lance would want us to? Like to deflect blame and all that? Because I'd agree with that, but we should still care that others cheated. Otherwise it's personal and not principle.
when I said I didn't care who else cheated, I meant it in the context of excusing his behaviour because "everyone else was doing it". they all deserve to be banned, and yes, they all deserve to be treated the same.
Gimli 1993
Fargo 2003
Winnipeg 2005
Winnipeg 2011
St. Paul 2014
no sympathy for lance. none whatsoever. I don't give a shit who else cheated, what place they came in, and if they did or didn't sell Lance out for their own skin saving.
he's a disgrace. period. he got banned for life and that's the least that he deserved. getting world wide shame is good in my books.
inhale the fame? cough on the shame.
If you care that Lance cheated, why would you not give a shit who else cheated? Do you mean we shouldn't care in the way Lance would want us to? Like to deflect blame and all that? Because I'd agree with that, but we should still care that others cheated. Otherwise it's personal and not principle.
theres no question he;s being treated differently than the other dopers. he said as much in the interview and like the stuff about the definition of cheating, he's on point with this. Obviously he went overboard with the suing and intimidation and bullying, but take that out, and he really acted no differently than any other cyclist. He did just as he said, and like any other doper would and did do, they did whatever they had to do, to protect themselves and their interests.
I think that there is a "pile on lance" type mentality going on right now. And some of its justified, but to really clean up cycling, and i think thats what we all want, and everyone else wants, to do that, you need to do more than go after Lance and his teammates.
The mentality of cheating and doping, and the mentality that we should cover it up because we will lose money, is engrained into cycling, and sports in general. Its way deeper than bringing down and punishing one rider and one team.
I think the next step in this process should be putting the officials and head honchos feet to the fire and forcing them to admit what they did. Evidently the head of UCI just resigned, no doubt as a result of their criminal behavior in all this.
but you can't take out the bullying and suing and intimidation. that's mainly why it's so deplorable. he ruined others' lives to protect his doping. no apology or admission can erase that.
Gimli 1993
Fargo 2003
Winnipeg 2005
Winnipeg 2011
St. Paul 2014
I dunno....I'm reading From Lance to Landis and, wow, every-fucking-one really was doping. I hated lance's defiance and jerkiness (e.g. the 7 jersey tweet) but now the lifetime ban seems a little excessive. He has been knocked down to nothing, will be disgraced forever and it just seems a little petty to say no more competition for you.....ever. oprah was awful but I think lance was somewhat contrite.
You didnt know that? Thats the whole point of it. Not only the athletes were doping but every single person in charge, the officials, the head honchos not only knew about the doping, but knew it was widespread, but didnt do anything to stop it. As I said, cycling had gone from a sport no one cared about, to one millions of people cared about, and grandmas and kids were following the tour. Same thing happened in baseball. This extends way beyond what has been pursued in a legal sense.
I knew there was doping...I didn't know it was THAT widespread.
I agree with your standpoint above. I wish a jounalist like david walsh would've dug into baseball last decade. That said, you're putting way to much energy into this. you could've written a novel by now.
If I had known then what I know now...
Vegas 93, Vegas 98, Vegas 00 (10 year show), Vegas 03, Vegas 06
VIC 07
EV LA1 08
Seattle1 09, Seattle2 09, Salt Lake 09, LA4 09
Columbus 10
EV LA 11
Vancouver 11
Missoula 12
Portland 13, Spokane 13
St. Paul 14, Denver 14
I dunno....I'm reading From Lance to Landis and, wow, every-fucking-one really was doping. I hated lance's defiance and jerkiness (e.g. the 7 jersey tweet) but now the lifetime ban seems a little excessive. He has been knocked down to nothing, will be disgraced forever and it just seems a little petty to say no more competition for you.....ever. oprah was awful but I think lance was somewhat contrite.
lance was not contrite because lance is still lying ... lance got a lifetime ban because he refused to cooperate and participate ... usada and wada have both asked him to testify under oath and to tell all he knows ... he refuses ... so, what are they supposed to do? ... hamilton got 8 years for a second infraction ... he's been participating in the process and has not gotten a reduction ...
the thing with lance (like everyone is trying to point out) isn't the fact he cheated ... should note here that they were clean riders ... and if you rode clean and complained about the doping ... guess who made sure you didn't have a job ... lance ... the guy ruined a few people's lives ...
the dude also exploited his cancer to pocket millions upon millions of dollars despite getting paid ridiculous amounts of money from his sponsors ... sure, i guess it costs a lot of money to sue innocent people ...
still don't understand why anyone would support a habitual liar who has only shown that the person he cares most about in this word is himself ...
still don't understand why anyone would support a habitual liar who has only shown that the person he cares most about in this word is himself ...
I don't "support" him. I mostly share your views but music makes a point now and then, too.
If I had known then what I know now...
Vegas 93, Vegas 98, Vegas 00 (10 year show), Vegas 03, Vegas 06
VIC 07
EV LA1 08
Seattle1 09, Seattle2 09, Salt Lake 09, LA4 09
Columbus 10
EV LA 11
Vancouver 11
Missoula 12
Portland 13, Spokane 13
St. Paul 14, Denver 14
not everyone will agree on this issue. so its sort of natural there would be differing opinions. Trying to tell others how to feel about figures is pointless. There were people who viewed Bill Russell or Jordan as jerks. And others viewed them as heroes. You read the ZD30 thread? There are people in that thread who support the use of torture and say its justified and legitimate. If people cant even come to the agreement that torture is wrong and a war crime, why would people come to an agreement on how to view lance?
People choose to support who they support. For some people if a hero does something bad, thats it. You cant suport them ever again. And more power to you. But for others its a complex issue. For many people, myself included, Lance didnt exploit cancer, and in fact was a worldwide advocate and activist for cancer awareness.
Obama allows torture, views violence and bombs as legitimate and conducts drone bombings of foreign countries. Yet, you talk to democrats and some people on this board, the guy is loved and respected.
Some people on here seem to have this narrow view of people and their perceptions. I know few people who when a hero of theirs does something bad, that they shun them, or dont support them anymore. Humans are much more complex than that. Im never going to hate Lance. Because I know, like myself and every single person on Earth, he is both good and bad. And I live my life according to this, Im not some hypocrite hiding online. Im vehemently opposed to the justice system in America, had planned to give a speech and refuse to serve on a jury when called for jury duty but wasnt called, and view the justice system and prisons as pointless and im opposed to both. The justice system isnt about rehabilitation, nor is it about treating people, making them better, getting them help. Its about revenge and punishment. Just ask Damien Echols. He'll tell you what 18 years in prison was like.
And in that way, I dont think prisons are justified and im for their abolition. I live my views on this issue. People are so varied, and diverse and have so many different sides to themselves.
You saw that when lance talked about his children, his son, and his mom. Whatever you may think about how he's conducted his life in public, I think he's a good dad. And its also clear to me he cares deeply about cancer and making sure a cure is found. Ive followed LiveStrong, and Lance's actions for years. Followed his tweets. And its just a constant stream of benefits for cancer survivors, maintaining good health and fitness, recognizing those who have died or are fighting cancer both famous and average people, donating to causes, etc...
I personally think Lance is a good guy. His heart is in the right place. He got lost, for decades. I think it would be a disservice and absurd to write him off. Again, where he goes from here, and what he does, he has the potential to be an even bigger hero than he was previous
not everyone will agree on this issue. so its sort of natural there would be differing opinions. Trying to tell others how to feel about figures is pointless. There were people who viewed Bill Russell or Jordan as jerks. And others viewed them as heroes. You read the ZD30 thread? There are people in that thread who support the use of torture and say its justified and legitimate. If people cant even come to the agreement that torture is wrong and a war crime, why would people come to an agreement on how to view lance?
People choose to support who they support. For some people if a hero does something bad, thats it. You cant suport them ever again. And more power to you. But for others its a complex issue. For many people, myself included, Lance didnt exploit cancer, and in fact was a worldwide advocate and activist for cancer awareness.
Obama allows torture, views violence and bombs as legitimate and conducts drone bombings of foreign countries. Yet, you talk to democrats and some people on this board, the guy is loved and respected.
Some people on here seem to have this narrow view of people and their perceptions. I know few people who when a hero of theirs does something bad, that they shun them, or dont support them anymore. Humans are much more complex than that. Im never going to hate Lance. Because I know, like myself and every single person on Earth, he is both good and bad. And I live my life according to this, Im not some hypocrite hiding online. Im vehemently opposed to the justice system in America, had planned to give a speech and refuse to serve on a jury when called for jury duty but wasnt called, and view the justice system and prisons as pointless and im opposed to both. The justice system isnt about rehabilitation, nor is it about treating people, making them better, getting them help. Its about revenge and punishment. Just ask Damien Echols. He'll tell you what 18 years in prison was like.
And in that way, I dont think prisons are justified and im for their abolition. I live my views on this issue. People are so varied, and diverse and have so many different sides to themselves.
You saw that when lance talked about his children, his son, and his mom. Whatever you may think about how he's conducted his life in public, I think he's a good dad. And its also clear to me he cares deeply about cancer and making sure a cure is found. Ive followed LiveStrong, and Lance's actions for years. Followed his tweets. And its just a constant stream of benefits for cancer survivors, maintaining good health and fitness, recognizing those who have died or are fighting cancer both famous and average people, donating to causes, etc...
I personally think Lance is a good guy. His heart is in the right place. He got lost, for decades. I think it would be a disservice and absurd to write him off. Again, where he goes from here, and what he does, he has the potential to be an even bigger hero than he was previous
the problem is, he likely never would have been any hero of any kind to anyone without the drugs. and that's fine. but to go so far as to try to discredit and ruin others' reputations and LIVES to save his own skin? that's fucking disgusting.
I view Lance as different from other dopers, because it's what he did to protect himself that sets him apart from the rest. Mark McGuire didn't out Sammy Sosa's corked bat, or anything like that to save himself. He went down with his own ship and took no one with him. I don't recall any sports figure in history ever doing what Lance did to other people.
I can't simply say the good he has done for cancer research and the hope he's given others writes off his wrongs. I can't say he's a good dad either. I don't know how anyone can. You don't know him in daily life, neither do I, so I can't and won't claim he is a good or bad father. But as far as a person's character go, you can't simply say he got "lost for decades". He could have stopped that bullshit any time he wanted to. But no, he wanted more and more and more. SEVEN titles later.
Nearly his whole life is a sham. Do I have faults? No question about it. But I can honestly say, with no doubt in my mind, I would NEVER do what Lance did. Most people wouldn't.
And, unfortunately for him, that's what makes him different from all the rest. that is what will be his legacy.
Gimli 1993
Fargo 2003
Winnipeg 2005
Winnipeg 2011
St. Paul 2014
Nearly his whole life is a sham. Do I have faults? No question about it. But I can honestly say, with no doubt in my mind, I would NEVER do what Lance did. Most people wouldn't.
And, unfortunately for him, that's what makes him different from all the rest. that is what will be his legacy.
ya ... and the bit about lance is a good guy and his heart is in the right place is just mind boggling ... nearly to a T - most that know him consider him a douchebag ... add what we KNOW of him and what he did to people - how can anyone say his heart is in the right place ... the guy was a grade A prick who had the audacity to exploit cancer to make himself uber rich ...
and let's not forget - he's still lying ... and given an opportunity to right at least one wrong in his life ... he pleaded the 5th which is almost worst than lying ... by refusing to talk - you basically admit your guilt but even in your supposed confessional interview - you couldn't right the wrong that was Betsy Andreu ... low ... real low ...
Nearly his whole life is a sham. Do I have faults? No question about it. But I can honestly say, with no doubt in my mind, I would NEVER do what Lance did. Most people wouldn't.
And, unfortunately for him, that's what makes him different from all the rest. that is what will be his legacy.
ya ... and the bit about lance is a good guy and his heart is in the right place is just mind boggling ... nearly to a T - most that know him consider him a douchebag ... add what we KNOW of him and what he did to people - how can anyone say his heart is in the right place ... the guy was a grade A prick who had the audacity to exploit cancer to make himself uber rich ...
and let's not forget - he's still lying ... and given an opportunity to right at least one wrong in his life ... he pleaded the 5th which is almost worst than lying ... by refusing to talk - you basically admit your guilt but even in your supposed confessional interview - you couldn't right the wrong that was Betsy Andreu ... low ... real low ...
i completely disagree. you name a hero, and i'll say that person is viewed as immoral by someone else. Che, MLK, Dylan, Van Morrison, Paul Mccartney.
The problem with the logic being presented, is it assume everyone on earth thinks the feels the way you do. Comes at the situation with your feelings and beliefs and opinions. And thats just not going to happen. Right after Lance confessed you had as many people coming to his defense, normal everyday fans, as you did people saying to hell with him.
I'd say the same thing about MJ. Im a huge fan, always have been, and never once felt he was guilty. In fact all the evidence points to him being innocent. And you still have some people who feel that if a person is accused of such a thing they are guilty. So they will ignore all the humanitarian stuff he did, all the great music, and thats their view of him. To me thats silly.
Or someone like Roman Polanski. Whether or not you feel he's a rapist, has little to do with whether you respect him as an artist, he's made some incredible films.
Happens all the time. The worlds never going to agree with you 100 percent on this issue my friend. All you had to do was read a few newspapers the day he confessed and you had some folks writing in saying, what that person said in the letter oprah read. That lance isnt all bad.
You are going to be holding your breath a long time waiting for the entire world to shun lance and not view him as anything but complete evil. Its just not going to happen.
i completely disagree. you name a hero, and i'll say that person is viewed as immoral by someone else. Che, MLK, Dylan, Van Morrison, Paul Mccartney.
The problem with the logic being presented, is it assume everyone on earth thinks the feels the way you do. Comes at the situation with your feelings and beliefs and opinions. And thats just not going to happen. Right after Lance confessed you had as many people coming to his defense, normal everyday fans, as you did people saying to hell with him.
I'd say the same thing about MJ. Im a huge fan, always have been, and never once felt he was guilty. In fact all the evidence points to him being innocent. And you still have some people who feel that if a person is accused of such a thing they are guilty. So they will ignore all the humanitarian stuff he did, all the great music, and thats their view of him. To me thats silly.
Or someone like Roman Polanski. Whether or not you feel he's a rapist, has little to do with whether you respect him as an artist, he's made some incredible films.
Happens all the time. The worlds never going to agree with you 100 percent on this issue my friend. All you had to do was read a few newspapers the day he confessed and you had some folks writing in saying, what that person said in the letter oprah read. That lance isnt all bad.
You are going to be holding your breath a long time waiting for the entire world to shun lance and not view him as anything but complete evil. Its just not going to happen.
no one's ignoring the humanitarian stuff he did, but if you are going to give a guy kudos for the good he did, then it stands to reason you give him shit for the bad he did.
Gimli 1993
Fargo 2003
Winnipeg 2005
Winnipeg 2011
St. Paul 2014
i completely disagree. you name a hero, and i'll say that person is viewed as immoral by someone else. Che, MLK, Dylan, Van Morrison, Paul Mccartney.
The problem with the logic being presented, is it assume everyone on earth thinks the feels the way you do. Comes at the situation with your feelings and beliefs and opinions. And thats just not going to happen. Right after Lance confessed you had as many people coming to his defense, normal everyday fans, as you did people saying to hell with him.
I'd say the same thing about MJ. Im a huge fan, always have been, and never once felt he was guilty. In fact all the evidence points to him being innocent. And you still have some people who feel that if a person is accused of such a thing they are guilty. So they will ignore all the humanitarian stuff he did, all the great music, and thats their view of him. To me thats silly.
Or someone like Roman Polanski. Whether or not you feel he's a rapist, has little to do with whether you respect him as an artist, he's made some incredible films.
Happens all the time. The worlds never going to agree with you 100 percent on this issue my friend. All you had to do was read a few newspapers the day he confessed and you had some folks writing in saying, what that person said in the letter oprah read. That lance isnt all bad.
You are going to be holding your breath a long time waiting for the entire world to shun lance and not view him as anything but complete evil. Its just not going to happen.
no one's ignoring the humanitarian stuff he did, but if you are going to give a guy kudos for the good he did, then it stands to reason you give him shit for the bad he did.
thats funny, cause I thought all this time I was saying he was a perfect person and all good.
no one's ignoring the humanitarian stuff he did, but if you are going to give a guy kudos for the good he did, then it stands to reason you give him shit for the bad he did.
thats funny, cause I thought all this time I was saying he was a perfect person and all good.[/quote]
that's not what I was saying.
Gimli 1993
Fargo 2003
Winnipeg 2005
Winnipeg 2011
St. Paul 2014
I always had a feeling that Lance was doping. In a sport where doping is so common, he was no different than anybody else in that sport. Another fraud.
2000 - Chicago, IL 2003 - Champaign, IL 2006 - Chicago, IL 1 & 2 2007 - Chicago, IL Lollapalooza 2009 - Chicago, IL 1 & 2 2010 - St. Louis, MO 2011 - East Troy, WI 1 & 2 (PJ20 Destination Weekend) 2012 - Atlanta, GA, Missoula, MT 2013 - Chicago, IL (Wrigley Field), Dallas, TX, Oklahoma City, OK 2014 - St. Louis, MO, Tulsa, OK, Moline, IL (No Code, IL), Saint Paul, MN, Milwaukee, WI (Yield, WI) 2016 - Greenville, SC (Vs, SC), Raleigh, NC, Columbia, SC, Boston, MA (Fenway Park 1), Chicago, IL (Wrigley Field 1 & 2)
2018 - Seattle, WA (Safeco Field 2), Chicago, IL (Wrigley Field 1 & 2), Boston, MA (Fenway Park 2)
2020 - Nashville, TN, St. Louis, MO, Oklahoma City, OK, Phoenix, AZ, ?? 2022 - Nashville, TN, St. Louis, MO, Oklahoma City, OK, Phoenix, AZ, Las Vegas, NV 2023 - St. Paul, MN 2, Fort Worth, TX 2, Austin, TX 1, and Austin, TX 2
2024 - Portland, OR and Chicago, IL (Wrigley Field 1 & 2)
2012 - Temple of the Dog East Troy, WI (PJ20 Destination Weekend) 2014 - Soundgarden Tinley Park, IL (with Nine Inch Nails)
2014 - Alice in Chains Davenport, IA
2016 - Chris Cornell Solo Madison, WI and Peoria, IL (official hometown show)
2016 - Temple of the Dog San Francisco, CA (both shows) 2017 - Soundgarden Dallas (cancelled) RIP Chris Cornell
2018 - Smashing Pumpkins Chicago, IL (first show)
2019 - Alice in Chains Milwaukee, WI
2022 - Jerry Cantrell Chicago, IL 2023 - Jerry Cantrell Milwaukee, WI
RIP Andrew Wood, Kurt Cobain, Layne Staley, and Chris Cornell
RIP Mom (may your star shine the brightest in the sky, our family loves and misses you very much, we'll meet again)
another great example of someone flawed also having positive aspects to them, would be Elia Kazan. Among his films he directed were On the Waterfront, Streetcar, and East of Eden. 3 of the greatest films ever created. Yet, he also ruined peoples lives and did something pretty reprehensible when he named names during the Mccarthy Hearings era and told on "suspected commies" in Hollywood.
This is a guy who ruined peoples lives too. But, he also created 3 undeniable cinematic masterpieces with a capital M. And in general he seems to have been a pretty good guy.
another great example of someone flawed also having positive aspects to them, would be Elia Kazan. Among his films he directed were On the Waterfront, Streetcar, and East of Eden. 3 of the greatest films ever created. Yet, he also ruined peoples lives and did something pretty reprehensible when he named names during the Mccarthy Hearings era and told on "suspected commies" in Hollywood.
This is a guy who ruined peoples lives too. But, he also created 3 undeniable cinematic masterpieces with a capital M. And in general he seems to have been a pretty good guy.
I personally can't put "ruined people's lives" and "a pretty good guy" in a statement describing the same person.
Gimli 1993
Fargo 2003
Winnipeg 2005
Winnipeg 2011
St. Paul 2014
another great example of someone flawed also having positive aspects to them, would be Elia Kazan. Among his films he directed were On the Waterfront, Streetcar, and East of Eden. 3 of the greatest films ever created. Yet, he also ruined peoples lives and did something pretty reprehensible when he named names during the Mccarthy Hearings era and told on "suspected commies" in Hollywood.
This is a guy who ruined peoples lives too. But, he also created 3 undeniable cinematic masterpieces with a capital M. And in general he seems to have been a pretty good guy.
I personally can't put "ruined people's lives" and "a pretty good guy" in a statement describing the same person.
So you think people are either good or bad, and theres no grey? How do you explain people like MLK who are universally considered saints and great people, but had very flawed personal lives as well? He is about as clear cut for "good" as any person we could come up with. But he had a problem with feminism, cheated on his wife, and possibly was a homophobe. Was he a good person or bad?
Ive never met a person who was all one thing. We all are a combination of both.
For me I think human beings are incredibly complex and to reduce people down to levels of good or bad is like Bush's "evil doers" concept. Its naive and childish. It presupposes the idea, that to take the 9/11 hijackers as examples, that they all were horrible people and conducted their whole lives as such. And thats just not true. Several hijackers were described as nice people, which caused a great deal of surprise on the behalf of friends and family who wouldnt ever have guessed someone like that would be involved in the murder of 3,000 people. United 93 the movie, suggests one of the hijackers actually had second, and third and fourth thoughts about particpating in the hijacking of the plane that was downed in Pennsylvania. Things arent black and white. Never have been.
'
It presents a us versus them mentality that has far reaching concepts if such a view is accepted. We think one way, and those other people think another way. We are good, and right, and those other people are evil and bad and not human.
It makes an Other out of people society deems deviant.
It makes complete sense why people think this way, its simple, its easy, and it allows people to be classified in a simple manner. Good or Bad. But whats good or bad and moral, can change depending on the era, depending on the culture, and from one family to another. It can also depend on societies view of the laws
A good example of all this is in some families and religions suicide means a person is going to hell. Hell from what we are told doesnt have good people in it. Also included would be children who were never baptized, and billions of people adults and babies, who are Hindus or Muslims or whatever religion.
another great example of someone flawed also having positive aspects to them, would be Elia Kazan. Among his films he directed were On the Waterfront, Streetcar, and East of Eden. 3 of the greatest films ever created. Yet, he also ruined peoples lives and did something pretty reprehensible when he named names during the Mccarthy Hearings era and told on "suspected commies" in Hollywood.
This is a guy who ruined peoples lives too. But, he also created 3 undeniable cinematic masterpieces with a capital M. And in general he seems to have been a pretty good guy.
I personally can't put "ruined people's lives" and "a pretty good guy" in a statement describing the same person.
So you think people are either good or bad, and theres no grey? How do you explain people like MLK who are universally considered saints and great people, but had very flawed personal lives as well? He is about as clear cut for "good" as any person we could come up with. But he had a problem with feminism, cheated on his wife, and possibly was a homophobe. Was he a good person or bad?
Ive never met a person who was all one thing. We all are a combination of both.
For me I think human beings are incredibly complex and to reduce people down to levels of good or bad is like Bush's "evil doers" concept. Its naive and childish. It presupposes the idea, that to take the 9/11 hijackers as examples, that they all were horrible people and conducted their whole lives as such. And thats just not true. Several hijackers were described as nice people, which caused a great deal of surprise on the behalf of friends and family who wouldnt ever have guessed someone like that would be involved in the murder of 3,000 people. United 93 the movie, suggests one of the hijackers actually had second, and third and fourth thoughts about particpating in the hijacking of the plane that was downed in Pennsylvania. Things arent black and white. Never have been.
'
It presents a us versus them mentality that has far reaching concepts if such a view is accepted. We think one way, and those other people think another way. We are good, and right, and those other people are evil and bad and not human.
It makes an Other out of people society deems deviant.
It makes complete sense why people think this way, its simple, its easy, and it allows people to be classified in a simple manner. Good or Bad. But whats good or bad and moral, can change depending on the era, depending on the culture, and from one family to another. It can also depend on societies view of the laws
A good example of all this is in some families and religions suicide means a person is going to hell. Hell from what we are told doesnt have good people in it. Also included would be children who were never baptized, and billions of people adults and babies, who are Hindus or Muslims or whatever religion.
That sort of clarity just isnt possible.
I for one don't believe the hijackers to be evil people. I think they are passionate in their views against western society, not all of it unfounded, but ultimately misguided people who think the only thing they can do to survive is by destroying their perceived enemy.
I never said that assholes can't have good qualities. Of course, every human can potentially have redeeming qualities. BUT, to go so far as to call someone who has ruined the lives of others a "pretty good guy" to me is to ignore the bad he has done to others. Of course there's a grey area, but in this discussion, about Lance specifically, I think he's a bad person. A bad role model to his kids, a bad friend, a bad team partner, a bad spokesperson, the list goes on. That's pretty damning evidence.
And your example earlier about Michael Jackson doesn't really apply here. He was never convicted of anything, so no, I don't think he was a bad person. I think he was a man's body stuck with a child's brain. It is of course short sighted and ignorant for people to think he's a bad person just because of being accused of something, but that just shows ignorance more than anything. I actually felt bad for him. He just loved kids because all he wanted was to be a kid himself. He never fucking touched anybody.
Lance is just an asshole.
Gimli 1993
Fargo 2003
Winnipeg 2005
Winnipeg 2011
St. Paul 2014
Comments
what makes you like him more now?
sure, but those people didn't destroy the lives of others to cover-up a lie.
If Lance hadn't gone after people and sued them for slander, I would have some sympathy for him.
The fact that he went to that extent, just makes him even more of a disgusting person. I have no respect for people like that.
- Christopher McCandless
someone hijacked imalive's account
Id like to see every cheater treated equally in cycling. So if you are found to be doping, it doesnt matter if you are winning Tours or if you place 100th, you are exposed, banned, and a zero tolerance policy is enacted.
Just yesterday the president of UCI came out and said they called every cyclist during those years for a chat and discussed when and if their tests indicated they had doped. so they (UCI) knew what was up. They knew who was doping and who wasnt. The headscratcher is that instead of actually doing something about it. they seem to have just allowed it to continue on with no reprecussions. No effort was made to expose or eliminate the dopers from the tour. In fact they just swept it under the rug. It was allowed to continue, and Lance and everyone else indeed had the OK from everyone in charge to cheat. Why would Contador or Hamilton or anyone else feel like they were cheating if everyone else was cheating and no one was getting punished. Cycling officials only have themselves to blame. They knew what was going on, . They had the power to ban Lance and everyone else in 99. They surely knew who was failing tests.
UCI and everyone else who knew about it and did nothing should be punished just as severely. Their should be major lawsuits filed, people should be fired and fined. and they should be made to apologize for not protecting the sport and allowing cheaters to run amok.
I agree Lance cheating is secondary and isnt the issue. The issue is cheating and doping as a whole in cycling. Its the officials who knowingly allowed it to happen and continue which is a criminal offense and by definition illegal.
Unless you know cyclists personally, I dont, you cant comment on why they did what they did. Thats just plain stupid to act otherwise. Facts are facts. Most of the 11 named in the report denied it just as long as lance did and admitted it to save their own skins and cut better deals as a result.
Every rider you named also knowingly exploited fans and the sport for money and fame.
I dont know where you keep getting this arbitrary 2005 number that this is when they stopped using and decided to become advocates for cleaning up cycling. Vande velde never admitted to doping in 2004, when he started. The reasoned decision suggests he doped all the way into near mid 2006, because he was stripped of his wins from 2004 to 2006. And he wasnt stripped of those in 2007 for instance, he was stripped of them in 2012 as a result of the reasoned decision. So he wasnt truthful until his team manager and the reasoned decision forced him to be honest. If he was so eager to create a drug free team or be a part of one, why wouldnt you admit your own part in the doping world? Lying and refusing to admit your role in doping, lying for 6-8 years, and then confessing that aint some sort of paragon of good.
i got it from their affidavits ... in their testimony under oath ... something you apparently read ...
I dunno....I'm reading From Lance to Landis and, wow, every-fucking-one really was doping. I hated lance's defiance and jerkiness (e.g. the 7 jersey tweet) but now the lifetime ban seems a little excessive. He has been knocked down to nothing, will be disgraced forever and it just seems a little petty to say no more competition for you.....ever. oprah was awful but I think lance was somewhat contrite.
Vegas 93, Vegas 98, Vegas 00 (10 year show), Vegas 03, Vegas 06
VIC 07
EV LA1 08
Seattle1 09, Seattle2 09, Salt Lake 09, LA4 09
Columbus 10
EV LA 11
Vancouver 11
Missoula 12
Portland 13, Spokane 13
St. Paul 14, Denver 14
His results, his cycling results from 04 to 06 were disqualified and erased. So obviously the invesitgators feel he doped during that period. Which is beyond the arbitrary 2005 date you keep mentioning. If he stopped doping in 2005, only 04 and 05 would have been erased.
Second, these affidavits arent from 2005 or 2006. They arent that old. Maybe a year or two old. Id suggest they are maybe even from 2012. VandeVelde didnt spend 2007-2011 tellling what he knew about doping in cycling, nor did he spend it trying to rid the world of dopers. He could have done that years ago. He could have done it in 2007. He didnt. He could have done it in 2008. He didnt.
The case turned a corner last year. They didnt have the 11 teammates speaking out until last year, thus they didnt have an affidavit.
Alot of these guys werent even punished and banned until the reasoned decision. Which indicates that something had changed as a result of those affidavits.
Plus, its sort of common sense. Had Hamilton and Vande Velde and everyone else been cooperative from the get go, from 1997 on, they wouldnt have had any of their stats erased. They lied, the reasoned decision proves that by their own admission.
You didnt know that? Thats the whole point of it. Not only the athletes were doping but every single person in charge, the officials, the head honchos not only knew about the doping, but knew it was widespread, but didnt do anything to stop it. As I said, cycling had gone from a sport no one cared about, to one millions of people cared about, and grandmas and kids were following the tour. Same thing happened in baseball. This extends way beyond what has been pursued in a legal sense.
Not only that, but Hamilton says 80 percent of the entire peloton was doping. Thats an enormous amount of cyclists. This involved other teams, doctors, officials, managers, press, wives, girlfriends, and on and on. Everyone knew.
Thats why Lance's statement having to look up the definition of cheating is more profound than he got credit for. If every single other cyclist on your team is doping, and every other team and every other cyclist is doping, and if the people in charge of your sport know you are doping and dont care and tacitly support you taking drugs and cheating, in that paradigm what is cheating? Whats lying? It really was as he said, as common as putting air on your tires. Everybody was doing it, and your bosses arent telling you to stop, so why would you think you were cheating. If you are a rider and 80 percent of the guys you are competing against are also using, why would anyone think what they were doing was wrong?
And not a single doper ever came out and said, "this is wrong, our sport has gone to the dogs, this whole thing is corrupt". they all played the game, they all lied, from the head of UCI to the riders, they all played the game and kept quiet because they knew if they said a word, cycling would go from MAJOR sports event, to something not cared about. And thats not just Lance or his team. That was across the board, every single team in the competition shares blame.
Cycling is the dirtiest sport. And thats a nickname for a reason.
The amount of people who knew and did nothing not only in terms of Lance and US Postal/Discovery, but on every other team and all their riders who doped, its astounding the amount of people who are culpable.
Seems the only people who didnt know was the american public.
he's a disgrace. period. he got banned for life and that's the least that he deserved. getting world wide shame is good in my books.
inhale the fame? cough on the shame.
Fargo 2003
Winnipeg 2005
Winnipeg 2011
St. Paul 2014
If you care that Lance cheated, why would you not give a shit who else cheated? Do you mean we shouldn't care in the way Lance would want us to? Like to deflect blame and all that? Because I'd agree with that, but we should still care that others cheated. Otherwise it's personal and not principle.
theres no question he;s being treated differently than the other dopers. he said as much in the interview and like the stuff about the definition of cheating, he's on point with this. Obviously he went overboard with the suing and intimidation and bullying, but take that out, and he really acted no differently than any other cyclist. He did just as he said, and like any other doper would and did do, they did whatever they had to do, to protect themselves and their interests.
I think that there is a "pile on lance" type mentality going on right now. And some of its justified, but to really clean up cycling, and i think thats what we all want, and everyone else wants, to do that, you need to do more than go after Lance and his teammates.
The mentality of cheating and doping, and the mentality that we should cover it up because we will lose money, is engrained into cycling, and sports in general. Its way deeper than bringing down and punishing one rider and one team.
I think the next step in this process should be putting the officials and head honchos feet to the fire and forcing them to admit what they did. Evidently the head of UCI just resigned, no doubt as a result of their criminal behavior in all this.
when I said I didn't care who else cheated, I meant it in the context of excusing his behaviour because "everyone else was doing it". they all deserve to be banned, and yes, they all deserve to be treated the same.
Fargo 2003
Winnipeg 2005
Winnipeg 2011
St. Paul 2014
but you can't take out the bullying and suing and intimidation. that's mainly why it's so deplorable. he ruined others' lives to protect his doping. no apology or admission can erase that.
Fargo 2003
Winnipeg 2005
Winnipeg 2011
St. Paul 2014
I knew there was doping...I didn't know it was THAT widespread.
I agree with your standpoint above. I wish a jounalist like david walsh would've dug into baseball last decade. That said, you're putting way to much energy into this. you could've written a novel by now.
Vegas 93, Vegas 98, Vegas 00 (10 year show), Vegas 03, Vegas 06
VIC 07
EV LA1 08
Seattle1 09, Seattle2 09, Salt Lake 09, LA4 09
Columbus 10
EV LA 11
Vancouver 11
Missoula 12
Portland 13, Spokane 13
St. Paul 14, Denver 14
lance was not contrite because lance is still lying ... lance got a lifetime ban because he refused to cooperate and participate ... usada and wada have both asked him to testify under oath and to tell all he knows ... he refuses ... so, what are they supposed to do? ... hamilton got 8 years for a second infraction ... he's been participating in the process and has not gotten a reduction ...
the thing with lance (like everyone is trying to point out) isn't the fact he cheated ... should note here that they were clean riders ... and if you rode clean and complained about the doping ... guess who made sure you didn't have a job ... lance ... the guy ruined a few people's lives ...
the dude also exploited his cancer to pocket millions upon millions of dollars despite getting paid ridiculous amounts of money from his sponsors ... sure, i guess it costs a lot of money to sue innocent people ...
still don't understand why anyone would support a habitual liar who has only shown that the person he cares most about in this word is himself ...
I don't "support" him. I mostly share your views but music makes a point now and then, too.
Vegas 93, Vegas 98, Vegas 00 (10 year show), Vegas 03, Vegas 06
VIC 07
EV LA1 08
Seattle1 09, Seattle2 09, Salt Lake 09, LA4 09
Columbus 10
EV LA 11
Vancouver 11
Missoula 12
Portland 13, Spokane 13
St. Paul 14, Denver 14
People choose to support who they support. For some people if a hero does something bad, thats it. You cant suport them ever again. And more power to you. But for others its a complex issue. For many people, myself included, Lance didnt exploit cancer, and in fact was a worldwide advocate and activist for cancer awareness.
Obama allows torture, views violence and bombs as legitimate and conducts drone bombings of foreign countries. Yet, you talk to democrats and some people on this board, the guy is loved and respected.
Some people on here seem to have this narrow view of people and their perceptions. I know few people who when a hero of theirs does something bad, that they shun them, or dont support them anymore. Humans are much more complex than that. Im never going to hate Lance. Because I know, like myself and every single person on Earth, he is both good and bad. And I live my life according to this, Im not some hypocrite hiding online. Im vehemently opposed to the justice system in America, had planned to give a speech and refuse to serve on a jury when called for jury duty but wasnt called, and view the justice system and prisons as pointless and im opposed to both. The justice system isnt about rehabilitation, nor is it about treating people, making them better, getting them help. Its about revenge and punishment. Just ask Damien Echols. He'll tell you what 18 years in prison was like.
And in that way, I dont think prisons are justified and im for their abolition. I live my views on this issue. People are so varied, and diverse and have so many different sides to themselves.
You saw that when lance talked about his children, his son, and his mom. Whatever you may think about how he's conducted his life in public, I think he's a good dad. And its also clear to me he cares deeply about cancer and making sure a cure is found. Ive followed LiveStrong, and Lance's actions for years. Followed his tweets. And its just a constant stream of benefits for cancer survivors, maintaining good health and fitness, recognizing those who have died or are fighting cancer both famous and average people, donating to causes, etc...
I personally think Lance is a good guy. His heart is in the right place. He got lost, for decades. I think it would be a disservice and absurd to write him off. Again, where he goes from here, and what he does, he has the potential to be an even bigger hero than he was previous
the problem is, he likely never would have been any hero of any kind to anyone without the drugs. and that's fine. but to go so far as to try to discredit and ruin others' reputations and LIVES to save his own skin? that's fucking disgusting.
I view Lance as different from other dopers, because it's what he did to protect himself that sets him apart from the rest. Mark McGuire didn't out Sammy Sosa's corked bat, or anything like that to save himself. He went down with his own ship and took no one with him. I don't recall any sports figure in history ever doing what Lance did to other people.
I can't simply say the good he has done for cancer research and the hope he's given others writes off his wrongs. I can't say he's a good dad either. I don't know how anyone can. You don't know him in daily life, neither do I, so I can't and won't claim he is a good or bad father. But as far as a person's character go, you can't simply say he got "lost for decades". He could have stopped that bullshit any time he wanted to. But no, he wanted more and more and more. SEVEN titles later.
Nearly his whole life is a sham. Do I have faults? No question about it. But I can honestly say, with no doubt in my mind, I would NEVER do what Lance did. Most people wouldn't.
And, unfortunately for him, that's what makes him different from all the rest. that is what will be his legacy.
Fargo 2003
Winnipeg 2005
Winnipeg 2011
St. Paul 2014
ya ... and the bit about lance is a good guy and his heart is in the right place is just mind boggling ... nearly to a T - most that know him consider him a douchebag ... add what we KNOW of him and what he did to people - how can anyone say his heart is in the right place ... the guy was a grade A prick who had the audacity to exploit cancer to make himself uber rich ...
and let's not forget - he's still lying ... and given an opportunity to right at least one wrong in his life ... he pleaded the 5th which is almost worst than lying ... by refusing to talk - you basically admit your guilt but even in your supposed confessional interview - you couldn't right the wrong that was Betsy Andreu ... low ... real low ...
i completely disagree. you name a hero, and i'll say that person is viewed as immoral by someone else. Che, MLK, Dylan, Van Morrison, Paul Mccartney.
The problem with the logic being presented, is it assume everyone on earth thinks the feels the way you do. Comes at the situation with your feelings and beliefs and opinions. And thats just not going to happen. Right after Lance confessed you had as many people coming to his defense, normal everyday fans, as you did people saying to hell with him.
I'd say the same thing about MJ. Im a huge fan, always have been, and never once felt he was guilty. In fact all the evidence points to him being innocent. And you still have some people who feel that if a person is accused of such a thing they are guilty. So they will ignore all the humanitarian stuff he did, all the great music, and thats their view of him. To me thats silly.
Or someone like Roman Polanski. Whether or not you feel he's a rapist, has little to do with whether you respect him as an artist, he's made some incredible films.
Happens all the time. The worlds never going to agree with you 100 percent on this issue my friend. All you had to do was read a few newspapers the day he confessed and you had some folks writing in saying, what that person said in the letter oprah read. That lance isnt all bad.
You are going to be holding your breath a long time waiting for the entire world to shun lance and not view him as anything but complete evil. Its just not going to happen.
no one's ignoring the humanitarian stuff he did, but if you are going to give a guy kudos for the good he did, then it stands to reason you give him shit for the bad he did.
Fargo 2003
Winnipeg 2005
Winnipeg 2011
St. Paul 2014
thats funny, cause I thought all this time I was saying he was a perfect person and all good.
thats funny, cause I thought all this time I was saying he was a perfect person and all good.[/quote]
that's not what I was saying.
Fargo 2003
Winnipeg 2005
Winnipeg 2011
St. Paul 2014
2003 - Champaign, IL
2006 - Chicago, IL 1 & 2
2007 - Chicago, IL Lollapalooza
2009 - Chicago, IL 1 & 2
2010 - St. Louis, MO
2011 - East Troy, WI 1 & 2 (PJ20 Destination Weekend)
2012 - Atlanta, GA, Missoula, MT
2013 - Chicago, IL (Wrigley Field), Dallas, TX, Oklahoma City, OK
2014 - St. Louis, MO, Tulsa, OK, Moline, IL (No Code, IL), Saint Paul, MN, Milwaukee, WI (Yield, WI)
2016 - Greenville, SC (Vs, SC), Raleigh, NC, Columbia, SC, Boston, MA (Fenway Park 1), Chicago, IL (Wrigley Field 1 & 2)
2022 - Nashville, TN, St. Louis, MO, Oklahoma City, OK, Phoenix, AZ, Las Vegas, NV
2023 - St. Paul, MN 2, Fort Worth, TX 2, Austin, TX 1, and Austin, TX 2
2014 - Soundgarden Tinley Park, IL (with Nine Inch Nails)
2017 - Soundgarden Dallas (cancelled) RIP Chris Cornell
2023 - Jerry Cantrell Milwaukee, WI
This is a guy who ruined peoples lives too. But, he also created 3 undeniable cinematic masterpieces with a capital M. And in general he seems to have been a pretty good guy.
I personally can't put "ruined people's lives" and "a pretty good guy" in a statement describing the same person.
Fargo 2003
Winnipeg 2005
Winnipeg 2011
St. Paul 2014
So you think people are either good or bad, and theres no grey? How do you explain people like MLK who are universally considered saints and great people, but had very flawed personal lives as well? He is about as clear cut for "good" as any person we could come up with. But he had a problem with feminism, cheated on his wife, and possibly was a homophobe. Was he a good person or bad?
Ive never met a person who was all one thing. We all are a combination of both.
For me I think human beings are incredibly complex and to reduce people down to levels of good or bad is like Bush's "evil doers" concept. Its naive and childish. It presupposes the idea, that to take the 9/11 hijackers as examples, that they all were horrible people and conducted their whole lives as such. And thats just not true. Several hijackers were described as nice people, which caused a great deal of surprise on the behalf of friends and family who wouldnt ever have guessed someone like that would be involved in the murder of 3,000 people. United 93 the movie, suggests one of the hijackers actually had second, and third and fourth thoughts about particpating in the hijacking of the plane that was downed in Pennsylvania. Things arent black and white. Never have been.
'
It presents a us versus them mentality that has far reaching concepts if such a view is accepted. We think one way, and those other people think another way. We are good, and right, and those other people are evil and bad and not human.
It makes an Other out of people society deems deviant.
It makes complete sense why people think this way, its simple, its easy, and it allows people to be classified in a simple manner. Good or Bad. But whats good or bad and moral, can change depending on the era, depending on the culture, and from one family to another. It can also depend on societies view of the laws
A good example of all this is in some families and religions suicide means a person is going to hell. Hell from what we are told doesnt have good people in it. Also included would be children who were never baptized, and billions of people adults and babies, who are Hindus or Muslims or whatever religion.
That sort of clarity just isnt possible.
I for one don't believe the hijackers to be evil people. I think they are passionate in their views against western society, not all of it unfounded, but ultimately misguided people who think the only thing they can do to survive is by destroying their perceived enemy.
I never said that assholes can't have good qualities. Of course, every human can potentially have redeeming qualities. BUT, to go so far as to call someone who has ruined the lives of others a "pretty good guy" to me is to ignore the bad he has done to others. Of course there's a grey area, but in this discussion, about Lance specifically, I think he's a bad person. A bad role model to his kids, a bad friend, a bad team partner, a bad spokesperson, the list goes on. That's pretty damning evidence.
And your example earlier about Michael Jackson doesn't really apply here. He was never convicted of anything, so no, I don't think he was a bad person. I think he was a man's body stuck with a child's brain. It is of course short sighted and ignorant for people to think he's a bad person just because of being accused of something, but that just shows ignorance more than anything. I actually felt bad for him. He just loved kids because all he wanted was to be a kid himself. He never fucking touched anybody.
Lance is just an asshole.
Fargo 2003
Winnipeg 2005
Winnipeg 2011
St. Paul 2014