Lance thread, oh it's time atmo

[Viper]

I swear I didn't make the beginning of this video of Lance training in the velodrome:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WxsewIR-Dc8

And Lance gave a reporter a water bottle of stfu yesterday (Hincapie is to his right as always):

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Mk4-EduOpQE

Will Lance smackdown tomorrow's TT and say to the peleton in his best Schwarzenegger, "I'm back":

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EfgoLO5paKg

A 2.4 mile prologue may not be long enough for Armstrong to snatch:

http://www.amgentourofcalifornia.com/Route/stages/prologue.html

[Steve in SLO]

Gotta love that clip of Lance teeing off at that reporter. It's good to see a member of the media called to the carpet for something negative he'd written...it wasn't as if he'd been posting on some random forum.

[r_mutt]

how dare he question lance!

typically, lance answered the question posed with the usual "i'm fighting cancer", and cancer victims all over the world are insulted by any attack on lance. please... i'm no lance basher, but for lance hide behind his foundation is pretty pathetic.

kimmage is no ordinary reporter. he's an ex-cyclist, and the author of "rough ride".

[C50]

That "reporter" was former pro cyclist Paul Kimmage. Read his book "A Rough Ride" which was one of the first to really expose doping in the sport from the viewpoint of a rider and one who freely admits to doping and how he and the others did it. By the way, he wasn't caught and then said I am sorry and forgive me and let me ride again so I can be an example. Ask him how it felt that he became an outcast by an entire sport for telling the truth and shinning the light when no one else wanted him to do it.

If you want to be an Armstrong fan for inspiring cancer patients great, I admire that too, but you ever notice how the attacks come against the people asking the questions instead of just answering the questions. Maybe he will just let his personal drug tester answer for him, oh that's right he never took a blood or urine sample in the five months he was supposedly working with Lance. That program ended before it began. Logistics? Money? I don't believe those reasons for a second and if you do you are a fool. If Lance wants something done it gets done, if he doesn't want something done it doesn't get done, at least that part of his personality we can look at a as a positive. Whoops, did I say positive?

[Viper]

how dare he question lance!

typically, lance answered the question posed with the usual "i'm fighting cancer", and cancer victims all over the world are insulted by any attack on lance. please... i'm no lance basher, but for lance hide behind his foundation is pretty pathetic.

kimmage is no ordinary reporter. he's an ex-cyclist, and the author of "rough ride".

Words matter. That man in the media, Paul Kimmage? He wrote of Lance Armstrong's comeback, "This guy (Armstrong), any other way but his bullying and intimidation wrapped up in this great cloak, the great cancer martyr . . . this is what he hides behind all the time. The great man who conquered cancer. Well he is the cancer in this sport. And for four years this sport has been in remission. And now the cancer's back."

Cancer martyr? He's the cancer in this sport and now the cancer is back?

Dude, Lance Armstrong has every right to walk up to Kimmage and knock him flat on his fat arse.

Words matter and insults count indeed.

It is Kimmage who is a wimp, hiding behind an overly inked newspaper while calling a cancer survivor a, "martyr" who, "is the cancer in this sport." Those two excerpts are enough for me. I am sold on who is the loser here and it's Kimmage by TKO.

You don't mock cancer. You don't stoop that low. A good reporter or writer doesn't have to. Kimmage is trash and should be blackballed from the sport atmo. Sh*t, what's he gonna do next? Make fun of someone's stillborn baby? Really, where the heck does one go after mocking a cancer survivor referring to him as cancer? Really ***?

Look at Armstrong below. He's literally wetting his lips ready to unload. In the sport of cycling, Armstrong is one of the very few alpha males and I applaud Armstrong's response to Kimmage, "You're not worth the seat you're sitting in."

Read here:

http://www.latimes.com/sports/la-spw-cycling-amgen-tour13-2009feb13,0,4113979.story

[e-RICHIE]

Read here:

http://www.latimes.com/sports/la-spw-cycling-amgen-tour13-2009feb13,0,4113979.story

oh the irony atmo -
the L.A. times...

[Viper]

oh the irony atmo -
the L.A. times...

:D

www.theatmoherald.org

:beer:

[C50]

I applaud Kimmage for standing up to Armstrong. Is there any investigative journalism anymore or just the softballs lobbed to Armstong like A-Roid taking batting practice. Oh that's right, David Walsh put all that facts together from the 1999 Tour and L'Equipe published them. Armstrong the alpha male should have fought all of the lies and made up facts but I never once heard the explanation of how his samples came up positive when retested once EPO could be detected. Maybe the same way Floyd's did, the French labs are out to tamper with all the American's samples. Had nothing to do with leaving the testerone patch on too long! Maybe the explanations inside a court room under cross examination without the personal attacks allowed on the questioner may not have made too much sense?

Baseball has the steroid era and cycling has had the EPO era and lets not kid ourselves cycling has had drugs in it from the very first race. Are we to believe that not only did Lance beat all his rivals to a pulp but the list of all his rivals who had chemical help (the list is too long to type but Jan and Basso and Floyd and Tyler and all the others who have been busted from tests to blood bags) couldn't beat him all juiced up? Yes this sport has a cancer or tumor or disease or whatever term you want to put on it and Kimmage was and is a guy who started the fight a long time before Vaughters and the clean team of Garmin and all the in house anti-doping programs and all the lets praise David the reformed Millar because he broke down and confessed only after being caught who by the way I saw in person win the World Time Trial Championship on EPO and not fail a drug test and Paul has paid his dues. Kimmage has earned the right to ask the tough questions and get an answer. Because of the very fact that Armstrong is the patron of the peloton it is his obligation to face the the toughest questions to make sure cycling is as clean as humanly possible. There will always be cheaters, but it is the responsibility of those who don't cheat to answer the questions that cycling has brought on itself and must be answered if there is going to be any credibility to this sport.

Kimmage wasn't afraid of what he said last year, wasn't afraid to tell it to Armstrong face to face. Armstrong it seems is the one who is afraid to sit down and answer the questions from a man who can look him in the eye rider to rider, insider to insider or maybe the answer to the questions are a little uncomfortable. May they aren't, I don't know I would just like to hear them.

[Kirk007]

having paid ones dues to ask hard questions is one thing, being a complete *sshole about it is another. His comments were in incredibly bad taste and offensive. I don't think Armstrong, or anyone else has an obligation to wrestle with a pig.

[C50]

OK, don't wrestle with a pig, even if it has lipstick on it! Just answer the questions. Betsy Andreu just won her case in court. By all accounts she has said any money won go to charity. The attacks on her go on. Greg LeMond asked questions. Without Greg LeMond there is no Lance Armstrong story that we have today. In fact a lot of cycling in this country doesn't happen without him. The attacks on him continue from the Armstrong posse. Lots of reporters asked questions, all they got was themselves on the inner circle blacklist and the "stare" by Johan B. whose entire career was spent with teams that have been established as having institutional doping.

When does the hero worship stop for just a few minutes so some legitimate, probing, investigative topics get discussed? The one person at the center of all the controversy has the power to end all the speculation and confusion and he doesn't take the opportunity to end it all right here and now once and for good. Seems a little bizarre to me.

[Viper]

I applaud Kimmage for standing up to Armstrong.

David Walsh put all that facts together from the 1999 Tour and L'Equipe published them.

Kimmage wasn't afraid of what he said last year, wasn't afraid to tell it to Armstrong face to face. Armstrong it seems is the one who is afraid to sit down and answer the questions from a man who can look him in the eye rider to rider, insider to insider or maybe the answer to the questions are a little uncomfortable. May they aren't, I don't know I would just like to hear them.

Cancer.

You don't go there.

You don't mock it, a survivor of it and refer to him/her/them as a cancer.

Ever.

You write an article, keep it above the belt and don't hit a man in the back.

He who is insulted defeats the words best through silence. Lance, by not offering an interview, places the strain directly onto the shoulders of Kimmage. Surely Lance could've offered Kimmage, "Kimbo, you're from Ireland, yes? There's another Irishman. Boy he could really write well, witty too. I suppose you've heard of Oscar Wilde? Oscar Fingal O'Flahertie Wills Wilde. Certainly you know of him. Welp my wee friend, Wilde's, 'I've known a lot of hardboiled eggs in my time, but you're twenty minutes' applies to you Kimmage. You're disgusting and dismissed."

Lance didn't do it, offer wattage of wit to a wannabe writer, tossing an insult to which Kimmage couldn't recover. I would've sooner, but I've been distracted by an outstanding episode of Battlestar Galactica. I'd have roasted Kimmage in front of the media so badly, he'd beg to announce the kitchen bell of his fifteen minutes of fame just dinged.

You defeat a liar with facts, not figures of speech nor low brow generalizations and you defeat a fool with wit, words they cannot understand.

Cancer. AIDS. Stillborn babies. The dead. Those living with disease. Surely anyone gets that you do not invoke such elements within an insult. Lance is a cancer? The cancer has returned? These words cannot be supported nor defended. They are the words of a simple-minded fool.

[r_mutt]

You defeat a liar with facts, not figures of speech nor low brow generalizations and you defeat a fool with wit, words they cannot understand.



read david walsh's from "lance to landis", and then listen to what lemond, emma o'reilly, and betsy andreu have to say.

get the facts, and then come back and discuss. because at this moment, you sound like a lance fan- and not one of cycling.

[C50]

What do you think Starbuck or Apollo would have done? Do you think if the entire cosmos was asking them questions that they could easily take the time to answer and end all debate they would. I think they would. What they wouldn't do is try and turn the questioner (and there have been plenty) into a cylon so they could just blast away with the lasers.

No need to hit the turbo button on the viper control stick and overload the engines over this. Lance has done a lot of great things but he isn't a saint and above scrutiny. No one is. Paul Kimmage isn't a saint either but he has made more of himself since retiring from riding then just a "wannabe writer" . In fact he is now a quite respected journalist and writer and to dismiss him as a "simple minded fool" only shows a lack of knowledge of who you are speaking about. He isn't working for the Enquirer or TMZ or whatever gossip papers exist today. You want to dismiss him because it comes across as you being a big Lance fan and can't get past the cancer analogy. I am not asking you to hate Lance or lesson the seriousness of the disease of cancer but look at the state of cycling or baseball or football for that matter. Performance enhancing drugs are the black eye on this generation of sports and athletes. To deny this only makes the problem continue and become worse. I have an Phil Ligget autographed copy of Cyclesport from 1998 in which is commentary that month was about the Festina doping scandel from the Tour and for his hopes that we can just get to racing. Guess what, the problem is just as bad today. Cycling still has not dealt with the realities of doping, the riders, the promoters, the UCI, the pharmaceutical companies that make the drugs, the fans all have to share in the blame.

Yes, there has been good progress made in the last 4 years and I believe the sport and societies views on drugs and sports are going in the right direction. So the one person who personifies cycling more then anyone else of the last generation comes back to the sport after being away when this new direction is underway, he is obligated by his very stature and accomplishment whether he wants to or not to be the patron of the peloton and answer for the EPO generation. Also, his actions toward others influence how those people respond to him. Go to bed with a whore, wake up with a whore. Reap what you sow. Who is to blame? Treat those in your world as outcasts what can you expect in return? Do 2 wrongs make a right, no they don't and room to improve behavior exists on both sides and the questions still hang in the air. And the questions will not go away until they are addressed.

[Kirk007]

read david walsh's from "lance to landis", and then listen to what lemond, emma o'reilly, and betsy andreu have to say.

get the facts, and then come back and discuss. because at this moment, you are just sound like a lance fan.


I have. This ain't about doping. It ain't about Lance worship. Its about human decency or better the lack thereof. Even if all they say is true; even assuming they're true and Lance is an overbearing, drug using cheating jerk that has a posse that shuts people up and obscure the truth, and fails to show the basic decency to others that I speak of here, none of that, in my book gives license to Kimmage or anyone else to belittle cancer survivors. Nor efforts to support cancer survivors or work for a cure. Even if you happen to hate that survivor/crusader for other reasons. Even if its Lance. Ask the straight up question;leave the trash talk in the trash. Some thoughts are best kept to oneself.

I understand that this is a personal war of Kimmage's and perhaps a justified one; that he is frustrated by his inability to get the information he wants out of Lance, but he was out of line with his comments. It was a low brow attack. Doping in a sport is a choice, and while on occasion, sadly it is, most of the time it isn't a matter of life and death. Lose a few loved ones to the damn disease; talk to some of the folks who have been helped by Lance's efforts, as I have, and then you may understand why some of us take issue with Kimmage's comments. I'm with Viper on this one.

[Viper]

read david walsh's from "lance to landis", and then listen to what lemond, emma o'reilly, and betsy andreu have to say.

get the facts, and then come back and discuss. because at this moment, you sound like a lance fan- and not one of cycling.

Read his book? It's so 2007 and I read it many moons ago. If I told ya what my last name was, you'd really feel silly. Hint, my clan from County Mayo? We own Ireland.

But that's neither here nor there.

We're not, at least I'm not debating EPO and Lance. What I am stating is only a lowbrowschmuck would call a cancer survivor, "A cancer" and upon Armstrong's comeback announcement declare, "The cancer is back."

Are you getting that it's not about my stance or support of Lance or Landis, but rather the loquacious lard served up by a lumpy writer named Paul Kimmage as he insults a can-cer sur-vi-vor by calling him a can-cer?

A man's wife, kids, dog and terminal illnesses. These are things which only a twit, a classless boob would inject into a verbal insult.

If you don't get this ^ then we're having two different discussions. For you it's EPO, dope, dope, dope, EPO dope and more dope. For me, I'm going to re-state for the seventh time, it's about making one's survival of cancer into a bad joke.

Fan of Lance?

Fan of cycling?

Maybe.

What I am a fan of is nobility and Sir, may we acknowledge the great Paul Kimmage and his insults are a display of ignorance the likes of which belong in The Enquirer. What journalist would mock cancer and what paper's editor would allow it?

[Viper]

You want to dismiss him because it comes across as you being a big Lance fan and can't get past the cancer analogy.


And there we have it. You believe it credible, viable and/or humorous for Paul Kimmage to write with such poor taste in the form of a cancer analogy.

Rape.

Incest.

Brain tumor.

Just tell me where you draw the line dude. There's no such thing as a rape analogy, period, muchless a rape analogy being told to a rape victim. Correct? I never knew cancer could be an analogy, who knew?

This is all we need to know about Paul Kimmage and PLEASE folks, watch it until the ending where Kimmage loses his mind completely:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XUAO7xmNKeA

Paul Kimmage, if you're reading this, please know I am mortified to know you're Irish. Telling Lance after he answered your question, "I've lost people with cancer. I'm talking about the cancer of doping in cycling. That has been my life's work. I raced as a professional and I exposed it. Then you come along and it disappears, the problem disappears."

Paul Kimmage, you need help. Medication and a dose of reality. If you think Lance Armstrong represents the entire universe of EPO, doping and what you refer to as the cancer of the sport, you are full of blarney and nothing more. While there's no proof Lance doped, there is plenty of evidence you Mr. Kimmage are indeed a dope. Here is further proof Kimmage is but a fool and as we know, a fool and his words are soon parted:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=y6Ai6t6R1_w

:rolleyes:

[flickwet]

Some people can only justify their own existence by trying to destroy those who have succeeded where they themselves have failed. What has Kimmage done for anyone but pursue his own aggrandizement. LA has accomplished so much for so many at this point in his career. Doping is a desperate act performed by desperate athletes desperate to succeed, Lance is not now nor has he ever been a desperate man, on the other hand Kimmage was and is desperate for attention, for himself.

[C50]

Return to the Galactica, Viper. I don't find cancer humorous and if you knew how cancer has touched me personelly and my family you would feel silly for thinking I don't give those suffering the compassion they deserve.

Cancer is a very powerful analogy, you start with one cell and it can spread and before you know it, it can be everywhere. Horrible that disease. Doping starts with one and before you know it everyone is doing it just to keep up. Do I like the exchange between Kimmage and Armstrong? I don't think it serves the ultimate goal of either. Kimmage isn't going to get an interview (although the questions he has tried to get Armstrong to answer long before this that go unanswered remain legitimate ones to be sure) and Armstrong should never have started racing again if he wanted to do press conferences where he solely answered questions about cancer awareness. The era he represents and his career in particular have lots of unanswered questions and those will follow him until he answers them in whatever manner, polite or insulting they are asked.

In your OP you said Lance gave a reporter a water bottle of stfu, all I was trying to say along the way is that Lance can't always get out of the tough questions time after time by giving the questioner a water bottle of stfu. Kimmage isn't the local street reporter that doesn't know a derailleur from a tubular. He is a guy who came from the inside and has been told to stfu by everyone and not to spit in the soup. Because he refused to be intimidated we started very slowly down a road that will eventually lead to a cleaner, healthier, more credible and beautiful sport. That road like all of them will have potholes along the way, none of them are perfect nor are the humans that pedal the bikes or type on message boards. Maybe Commander Adama should head up the UCI/Pro Tour/WADA all at once so we could just concentrate on riding bikes.

[EastCoastRoadie]

I applaud Kimmage for standing up to Armstrong. Is there any investigative journalism anymore or just the softballs lobbed to Armstong like A-Roid taking batting practice. Oh that's right, David Walsh put all that facts together from the 1999 Tour and L'Equipe published them. Armstrong the alpha male should have fought all of the lies and made up facts but I never once heard the explanation of how his samples came up positive when retested once EPO could be detected. Maybe the same way Floyd's did, the French labs are out to tamper with all the American's samples. Had nothing to do with leaving the testerone patch on too long! Maybe the explanations inside a court room under cross examination without the personal attacks allowed on the questioner may not have made too much sense?


I have never been a huge fan of Lance, but this Lance bashing nonsense is putting me more in his corner every day. Putting the "facts" together 7-8 years later is just not plausible. In what court of law would this be permissible? Are you really naive enough to think that these samples just sat around for 5-6 years, and presto there was a new test that they ran and it came up positive? I am sure they have been playing with these samples for years to try and discredit Lance in any way that they can. Simple fact-the French hate American riders, especially those who win their precious race. They have always treated Lance poorly, and are motivated to try and tarnish his reputation. Like him or not, this man single handedly put the Tour de France and cycling on the map in the US. Sure LeMond won 3 times, but he is a huge jerk. And why are there never any questions about his performance? LeMond held the TT record up until a few years ago. How did he do this on 20 year old equipment and technology. Why is it accepted that LeMond was just super natural, but Lance must be a cheater. And what about last year's winner Sastre? How is he part of a new generation when he rode with Armstrong in the past. He is not part of a new generation of riders (like Contador, the Schlecks, Ricco, and others who have all been linked more strongly to cheating than Lance). The Eurpoeans just want to define the new generation as post Lance. I hope Lance kicks all their butts while posting all of his blood levels. I think he has handled himself very well considering he has always been judged as guilty until proven innocent by so many. And why was he being "randomly" tested 10-15 times every tdf while other leaders got tested 2-3 times. If they had anything solid on Lance, they would have used it a long time ago!

[michael white]

I agree that Kimmage comes across, to me, like an attention-seeking punk in that "question." Reminds me of Ann Coulter.
I realize that maybe that sounds harsh, like I'm saying Kimmage is a grovelling subhuman trannie or something . . . sorry bout that.

Lance's response was a bit schoolyard, but hey, what do expect. The guy's not an English major.

the only problem is that Kimmage might be happy he was even noticed.

I agree with Viper, basically. Don't joke about it . . . especially not to a survivor.

[Chad Engle]

If Kimmage wants to call him a doper, then call him a doper, the cancer thing is completely tasteless.

Never tested positive does not equal never doped. But he has tested positive for cancer.

There is no way to justify to me the use of cancer as a metaphor. I completely agree with the Viper.

[sloji]

Mr Reporter feeling it's his duty to right the wrongs thinks he's chasing Nazi's and in his fervor blindly accepts his duty and loses all sense of proportion. Consumed like a jilted lover he attacks again and again until every eye in the room turns on him.

[indyrider]

I've cancer in my family. I'm close to it and its a terrible disease and as we all know, many, many people are dealing with it.

BUT, Lance does seem to hide behind the cancer as a do gooder and dont get me wrong, I will give it to him on that point, he does have a positive impact on that community.

BUT, again, you cant be smoke and mirrors all the time. Those inflicted in my family, even though they aren't hardcore cyclists, are able to see him for who he is. Seems to me maybe he's not man enough to own the controversy and deal with it head on, instead of hiding behind cancer, his team, his supposed drug test doc, etc...

I just hope he gets smoked and retires for keeps, so we can move on to the next drama. Kinda reminds of #45--Jordan--when he came out of retirement.

[gemship]

Does L.A. post on this forum? I thought I recall that or maybe someone was just using his name?

[Viper]

Does L.A. post on this forum? I thought I recall that or maybe someone was just using his name?

I am Armstrong.

[r_mutt]

LeMond held the TT record up until a few years ago. How did he do this on 20 year old equipment and technology. Why is it accepted that LeMond was just super natural, but Lance must be a cheater.


iirc, his TT was one of the shortest in the history of the tour, downhill, and with a massive tailwind. combine that with world championship legs = WR.

[michael white]

Does L.A. post on this forum?

I don't think so, but I sure wouldn't say anything about someone on the web that you wouldn't say to his face. People voicing unproven suspicions about someone else in public, saying things like "they can't hide forever" or whatever. . . that just strikes me as not only automatically dismissable from every single vantage point of civilized discourse, but also as a sad spiritual mistake.

the web is a pretty good vehicle for turd throwing, although not in the sense that anyone with a brain would take it seriously.

just sayin, of course.

[jhcakilmer]

I'll definitely have to side with Viper on this one! You gotta have boundaries, and limits......class, and conduct oneself with dignity, even when you think someone else is not. IMO, it's wrong to rationalize our actions based on or in response to someones elses actions........

I don't care about LA, Floyd Landis, Tyler Hamilton, Greg Lemond.....I care about the sport of cycling. Kimmage needs to focus more on the big picture.......when I see individuals (especially of LA stature) being singled out, I tend to see it as self serving.

Everyone has to decide for themselves, but Kimmage is not a reporter that I give much credence, or readership.

[Viper]

If you watch the second video I posted, where Kimmage is interviewed for almost ten minutes, you'll hear the word, "I" nearly 1M times. You'll also hear how Kimmage believes in lifetime bans. It's like it's the World According to Paul Kimmage...he has no honor for the system and believes the UCI etc should revolve around his Big Ideas.

Please. There are rules in place. Kimmage was a two-bit cyclist and was better at biking than he is at writing.

I predicted a Top Ten for Armstrong in today's short TT. :beer: It was VERY exciting to see the big names gun for the finish line. Armstrong is back and like they told us today, he's now had two comebacks in his career. Let Kimmage chew on that piece of sod.

[peanutgallery]

I am Armstrong.

What about that weird bath scene in Spartacus?

[cadence90]

I read that interview, and watched it, and imho neither man acquitted himself with much dignity or grace.

I agree that Kimmage was over the top, but then when LA preached about mistakes and forgiving/forgetting and then proceeded to inform Kimmage that LA would never forgive him...well, I wondered if Kimmage was there dressed up as Pippo Simeoni.... :rolleyes:

LA is not God, despite what the ToC website would like people to think.
As a very public ambassador promoting an extremely worthy cause, he has a long way to go in the decorum and class departments.

[Viper]

What about that weird bath scene in Spartacus?

LOL. I saw Spartacus when I was a kid and was like ***?

I dig chicks. Here's to swimmin' with bowlegged women. :beer:

[C50]

What's wrong with lifetime bans? I believe the next step for any sport whether it be cycling, baseball, football, or Olympic is a lifetime ban. Give every athlete a window of oppurtunity to come "clean" before a certain date. Maybe it is until the start of the next playing season (something different for cycling since the season has already started) or a definitive date. Whatever is confessed to is not punishable, come clean and clear the conscience but also identify everything that has gone on and how it was done. After that date, a positive test = lifetime ban. Find out and prove the blood in the bags was yours and you didn't admit to it = lifetime ban. Thanks for playing but find a new way to make a living and stop corrupting our sport. This goes for athlete, manager, doctor or whoever else is involved. You want to clean up sports, it is easy to to do, make the commitment to do it. Follow that up with criminal prosecution for fraud. I the fan paid good money for a ticket to a game (cycling is a little different) to watch a fair game. The athlete who dopes and has an illegal advantage is guilty of fraud. Not only does that person get banned now they deal with the legal consequences. If you are a clean athlete you should be all for it to ensure a level and true playing field.

You don't want to get banned for life then don't go down the the drug road. Make it well known and enforce it to the fullest. The first sport that does this is the first one to be clean.

[goonster]

Just as Lance does not have a "patent on cancer", so too does Kimmage not enjoy a monopoly as an anti-doping crusader.

Making the cancer metaphor to Lance personally is over the line. Nobody wants a witch hunt.

[e-RICHIE]

Just as Lance does not have a "patent on cancer", so too does Kimmage not enjoy a monopoly as an anti-doping crusader.

Making the cancer metaphor to Lance personally is over the line. Nobody wants a witch hunt.


and lance used this metaphor of kimmage's (if you will) to get back to
where he wants to be - the patron of the sport atmo. he could have
easily chosen another route to make his point publically, rather than to
parrot the words of kimmage, a man with quite a good palmares as a
cyclist as well as journalist. this isn't about cancer, it's about egos atmo.

[majorpat]

this isn't about cancer, it's about egos atmo.

Afraid so, time some folks got themselves a hobby. Knitting, bird-watching...any damn thing....please.

[goonster]

this isn't about cancer, it's about egos atmo.

Agreed.

[BumbleBeeDave]

But everything everyone is saying keeps reminding me about the two qualities of Lance's that seem to come out over and over and over in his triumphs as a champion on the bike and his interpersonal relationships off the bike.

The first is his seeming need to be in control of every meticulous detail. On the bike this translates into incredibly detailed preparation for his racing. That's important to his winning the TdF 7 times. Off the bike this seems to make him difficult for others to deal with, both in public and--maybe--in his personal relationships.

The second is the obvious chip-on-the-shoulder "I'll show YOU" aspect to his personality. On the bike it makes him almost impossible to defeat when he decides he really wants something, and I think it also played a strong part in his mental fight against his cancer. Off the bike it means when he can't control everything about a particular situation he gets prickly way too fast. I've read and watched reports again and again about how this quality comes out. He can't control all the questions, gets a tough one, the chip comes out and away he goes. That's a bad personal quality to have if you're going to be in the public eye and dealing with the media in press conference type situations. It ends up making him look real in a public place where that hurts the most.

Fascinating guy . . .

BBD

[girlie]

this isn't about cancer (or cycling), it's about egos atmo.


girlie

[Viper]

Making the cancer metaphor to Lance personally is over the line.

+1M percent or trillion cause it's such a hot number these days.

Could you imagine...

Writing of Magic Johnson upon his comeback, "You're the AIDS of the NBA."

Writing of Michael Jordan upon his comeback, "This is a gamble, guess you're bored at the blackjack table in Vegas, now that your dad was shot, rumored to be involved with gambling too."

"Lance is a cancer...and the cancer has returned."

Folks if Paul Kimmage is a good journalist, than I'm in the wrong career. My little sister could write circles around him. His bitterness and jealousy towards Armstrong, combined with his utter hatred for anyone who cheated, mixed in with an angry Irishman's tongue while displaying a sincere sense of one-dimensional thinking, it's clear Kimmage is a dope.

Without proof of an Armstrong positive test to discuss, Kimmage wails about with the cheapest of shots, the lowest of brows with an insultive tongue that would have his teeth knocked out by any Irishman in any pub of Ireland.

Updike, Halberstam? Kimmage is a DNS compared to them.

Egos? Everyone has one. Like Morrissey said, "Some girls are bigger than other girls' mothers" but what matters is that Lance's determination, training and willpower have created success, while Kimmage has created very little on/off the bike. In fact, Kimmage has a recidivistic pattern of writing:

"Kimmage had been a sports journalist with the Sunday Independent in Ireland. He left for the Sunday Times soon after an incident in 2002, when the newspaper misrepresented an article he had written about Roy Keane in the wake of the Saipan saga involving Keane. The editors had taken a quote from Keane out of context to run a headline that implied Keane was planning to leave his wife."

Kimmage blamed and then left the Sunday Times for misrepresentation of his words. Seems to me Lance Armstrong simply did the very same thing, handing back a mouthful for the loquacious Kimmage to swallow. Blarney doesn't taste good, even with a side of bacon. Kimmage dreams of cleansing cycling with what? One pen, a simple mind and a dirty mouth? As Morrissey concluded, "Send me the pillow, the one that you dream on. And I'll send you mine."


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wAzmQbfZoIg

:beer:

[Tony Edwards]

I have no earthly idea whether Lance is 100% clean (there is certainly evidence to the contrary, but not, IMO, proof beyond a reasonable doubt), but I don't really believe that either Kimmage or LeMond is entirely (or even primarily) motivated by a selfless desire to see the sport cleaned up. Their actions appear to me to be motivated more by jealousy and a desire for self-aggrandizement than anything else. I think Lance had every right to be offended by Kimmage's cancer analogy, even if Lance may have been guilty of overdramatizing his offense at that press conference.

At the end of the day, no, Lance is not the most lovable person in the world, but he has the temperament of what he is - one of the greatest athletes of all time. To me he merits that title whether you believe he's clean or not, because he was clearly competing at a time that just about everyone (probably including him) was doping. Would I like to see the sport cleaned up? Absolutely. Do I think that means that Lance should be banished from the sport or stripped of credit for all of his accomplishments based solely on innuendo and inferences? No way.

[BumbleBeeDave]

I have no earthly idea whether Lance is 100% clean (there is certainly evidence to the contrary, but not, IMO, proof beyond a reasonable doubt), but I don't really believe that either Kimmage or LeMond is entirely (or even primarily) motivated by a selfless desire to see the sport cleaned up. Their actions appear to me to be motivated by jealousy and a desire for self-aggrandizement than anything else. I think Lance had every right to be offended by Kimmage's cancer analogy, even if Lance may have been guilty of overdramatizing his offense at that press conference.

At the end of the day, no, Lance is not the most lovable person in the world, but he has the temperament of what he is - one of the greatest athletes of all time. To me he merits that title whether you believe he's clean or not, because he was clearly competing at a time that just about everyone (probably including him) was doping. Would I like to see the sport cleaned up? Absolutely. Do I think that means that Lance should be stripped of credit for all of his accomplishments? No way.

Well said! +1!

BBD

[Viper]

Kimmage, all you can do is complain about me:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ElemRKA9r1c&feature=related

You hiss and groan and you constantly moan
But you don't ever go away
That's because
All you need is me

You roll your eyes up to the skies
Mock horrified
But you're still here
All you need is me

There's so much destruction
All over the world
And all you can do is
Complain about me

You bang your head against the wall
And say you're sick of it all
Yet you remain
'Cause all you need is me

And then you offer your one and only joke
And you ask me what will I be
When I grow up to be a man
Uhm, nothing!

There's a soft voice singing in your head
Who could this be?
I do believe it's me

There's a naked man standing, laughing in your dreams
You know who it is
But you don't like what it means

There's so much destruction
All over the world
And all you can do is
Complain about me

I was a small, fat child in a council house
There was only one thing I ever dreamed about
And Fate has just
Handed it to me - whoopee

You don't like me, but you love me
Either way you're wrong
You're gonna miss me when I'm gone
You're gonna miss me when I'm gone

:cool:

[flickwet]

viper, Mr edwards, bumblebeedave, me = +4

[majorpat]

Can't argue with a guy who references a good Smiths song from the heydays (80's).
Look, when you're on top (or trying to get your old spot back) everyone will target you. If Lance gets prickly...can't blame him.

What I am interested in is the conversation Bruyneel had with Alberto when he called to tell him that the Big Dog was coming back....had to be great. Anybody got info on that?

[johnnymossville]

I don't care if it was about egos, but you don't call someone a Cancer out of remission who had cancer. Kimmage trying to be clever was lame.

[Viper]

Viper...Look, when you're on top (or trying to get your old spot back) everyone will target you.

Sir, this is my life story. You can write the foreward in my autobiography. Make it all up, please include a night out with all three of Charlie's Angels and how The Bionic Man is loosely based on my teenage years. Thanks man. Here is a bonus for you:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sgCPte-5Pqc&feature=related

[r_mutt]

just ask emma o'reilly if lance doped. emma and frankie andreu know the truth.

[majorpat]

Viper was born in a cross-fire hurricane and raised by a toothless, bearded hag. Despite obvious childhood disadvantages, he overcame these to rise to the top of the forum.

[Viper]

just ask emma o'reilly if lance doped.

Tis' an Irish conspiracy. Drunks mocking dopers. :)

Please:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2zg9gYIta-E

Irish blood, English heart
This I'm made of
There is no one on earth I'm afraid of
And no regime can buy or sell me

I've been dreaming of a time when
To be English is not to be baneful
To be standing by the flag, not feeling shameful
Racist or racial

Irish blood, English heart
This I'm made of
There is no one on earth I'm afraid of
And I will die with both of my hands untied

I've been dreaming of a time when
The English are sick to death
Of Labour, and Tories
And spit upon the name Oliver Cromwell
And denounce this royal line that still salute him
And will salute him
FOREVER...


:beer:

[majorpat]

just ask emma o'reilly if lance doped. emma and frankie andreu know the truth.

The TRUTH?!? You can't handle the truth....

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8hGvQtumNAY

As much as the movie makes Jack out to be th villain....there's a bit 'o truth to what he says

Like a wise man once said...don't ask a question that you really don't want the answer to

Just sayin'

[Viper]

Viper was born in a cross-fire hurricane and raised by a toothless, bearded hag. Despite obvious childhood disadvantages, he overcame these to rise to the top of the forum.

Awesome, I just ran it past the editor and this will be the first sentence.

And here's the working title, you pick the one:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6fzzJnfsU2I

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=e8U6Cij1mSU

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1TxVqf6sd7c

:beer:

[girlie]

Viper was born in a cross-fire hurricane and raised by a toothless, bearded hag. Despite obvious childhood disadvantages, he overcame these to rise to the top of the forum.

Ok that's some funny ****!

girlie

[r_mutt]

Like a wise man once said...don't ask a question that you really don't want the answer to

Just sayin'


wha?

sounds good but in this case, makes no sense.

[majorpat]

Awesome, I just ran it past the editor and this will be the first sentence.

And here's the working title, you pick the one:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6fzzJnfsU2I

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=e8U6Cij1mSU

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1TxVqf6sd7c

:beer:

How about "Paint a Vulgar Picture" ?

[majorpat]

wha?

sounds good but in this case, makes no sense.

Bike racing has warts like everything else. I still dig it, don't need or want to know how it all works.
Read Joe Parkin's new book...races were bought sometimes, I'm OK with it.
To put it another way...I really like sausage but could probably do without a detailed inventory of the contents.

[r_mutt]

Bike racing has warts like everything else. I still dig it, don't need or want to know how it all works.
Read Joe Parkin's new book...races were bought sometimes, I'm OK with it.
To put it another way...I really like sausage but could probably do without a detailed inventory of the contents.


i've read the usual books, including a dog in a hat. it's no shock to me.

[Samster]

not relevant to the LA topic at all, but at this point in my life i have an exceedingly low opinion of all but a few journalists. not that my opinions matters to 99.999% of the population, but just sayin'...

[e-RICHIE]

we should remember that kimmage's quote was from september iirc
and there was no real purpose (other than grandstanding atmo) to
use it as fodder in the TOC press conference ??? months later. if i
am wrong on the date, can someone point to that article? thanks -

[Frustration]

And there we have it. You believe it credible, viable and/or humorous for Paul Kimmage to write with such poor taste in the form of a cancer analogy.

Rape.

Incest.

Brain tumor.

Just tell me where you draw the line dude. There's no such thing as a rape analogy, period, muchless a rape analogy being told to a rape victim. Correct? I never knew cancer could be an analogy, who knew?

This is all we need to know about Paul Kimmage and PLEASE folks, watch it until the ending where Kimmage loses his mind completely:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XUAO7xmNKeA

Paul Kimmage, if you're reading this, please know I am mortified to know you're Irish. Telling Lance after he answered your question, "I've lost people with cancer. I'm talking about the cancer of doping in cycling. That has been my life's work. I raced as a professional and I exposed it. Then you come along and it disappears, the problem disappears."

Paul Kimmage, you need help. Medication and a dose of reality. If you think Lance Armstrong represents the entire universe of EPO, doping and what you refer to as the cancer of the sport, you are full of blarney and nothing more. While there's no proof Lance doped, there is plenty of evidence you Mr. Kimmage are indeed a dope. Here is further proof Kimmage is but a fool and as we know, a fool and his words are soon parted:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=y6Ai6t6R1_w

:rolleyes:



Kimmage reminds me of a dung beatle.


Just find some ***** you can cling too and keep rolling it around... That's how you make your living...



Kimmage is another of a few of the "anti Dopers" much like the stolen underground guy "li'l pimp" of something like that... Guys that couldn't make a living, even as dopers in the pro's. They still want a place on the sport so they dig in by slinging poo as high up the food chain as they can in hopes that someone will notice who threw it.


Maybe one day we find the the lump of ***** Kimmage keeps pushing around actually has a Diamond inside. At that point, good for Paul.


But right now it's just *****.

[Viper]

we should remember that kimmage's quote was from september iirc
and there was no real purpose (other than grandstanding atmo) to
use it as fodder in the TOC press conference ??? months later. if i
am wrong on the date, can someone point to that article? thanks -

Atmo, when Don Fanucci insulted, Vito Corleone didn't pull the trigger right away. No, he smiled, nodded, walked away, sat down, had some pasta, vino, talked it over with friends, waited for the Feast and pow, Vito took care of business. This is how we roll in New York and Texas is the same. Less Italians and pasta down there, more BBQ, but the cowboys work the deal much the same.

For me, if I were on Astana I'd tell Paul Kimmage, "Pauly, why you say such things, eh? These things you say yesterdays ago, they stay today, like the gravy stain on my wife's tablecloth. Why you say such things Pauly? Cancer, you don't go there Pauly. You insult me in September, whatta ya say now? Fuggetaboutit. You're dead to me. You ask me now why I don't talk to you no more, why I give you no interview at the Bada Bing, eh? Fuggetaboutit. You take my boy fishing tomorrow, okay? It's almost flounder season, they'll be jumping in the boat."

Vendettas know no date and it wasn't revenge Wyatt Earp was seeking, it was a reckoning.

atmo: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-GREE8GdRrc

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ffAiiIn3AIY

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OCEL2ajEOp8&feature=PlayList&p=43D115ACFA334208&playnext=1&index=3

:beer:

[BumbleBeeDave]

we should remember that kimmage's quote was from september iirc and there was no real purpose (other than grandstanding atmo) to use it as fodder in the TOC press conference ??? months later. if i
am wrong on the date, can someone point to that article? thanks -

. . . on YouTube I had this same thought. The only citation we have to what Kimmage supposedly said is from Armstrong himself. While Armstrong seems to be doing an admirable job of controlling himself in the press conference while describing the supposed subtext of the whole situation, I also have to keep in mind that Armstrong is no dummy and has already demonstrated his considerable acting abilities to deceive his opponents during races. He's demonstrably adept at playing head games. He may very well be doing so here as well. He has to be aware that he is playing to an audience that is far more prone to believe in his credibility than Kimmage's, and that the majority of those listening can be expected to treat what he says with more credibility than Kimmage.

It would be interesting to be able to read Kimmage's alleged original story that had the objectionable metaphor in it. In the meantime, I also found this interview with Kimmage from AFTER the notorious press conference.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=y6Ai6t6R1_w&feature=related

In the 6 minute interview, while he does not acknowledge actually making the comparison that Armstrong accuses him of, Kimmage also comes across as pretty reasonable for a guy who's obviously grinding an axe, and makes some good points about Armstrong's highly publicized promises about transparency with the Catlin anti-doping program, and then his low-key abandonment of those promises. He also points out that as soon as Armstrong returns to the sport, all of a suddenly there are two sets of rules for the biological passport program--6 months for everyone else before racing, but only 5 months for Armstrong to allow him to race in the TDU. He also acknowledges that he did not believe David Millar should have been allowed to return to the sport, but now that he has, Millar has made great contributions to the anti-doping effort. Kimmage certainly does not come across as a loony or rabidly self-righteous crusader. Interesting viewing . . .

Lastly, Viper, while I see your point about Don Corleone, keep in mind that in doing so you are actively comparing Armstrong to a despicable (though fictional) criminal. Are you sure that's what you want to do?

BBD

[Viper]

Vito Corleone. JAWS was the villain, but in Benchley's heart, the shark was the victim atmo.

Let's not over-micro-nano psychoanalyze this. It's very, very basic. Paul Kimmage throws down some amazing, astonishing insults referring to Lance Armstrong as, "A cancer" who announced his return to professional cycling whereby Kimmage furthered, "The cancer has returned."

End of story. I rest my case. Everything else is obfuscation and fluff.

Notions that Armstrong should've been nicey-nicey to Paul Kimmage in a press conference, ***? What playground did some people grow up on? Is Lance Armstrong supposed to be what, politically correct in a conversation with an jackarse? Lance Armstrong has every right to pound Kimmage from every direction with words and if it were me, I'd knock Kimmage's two front teeth out. Hell let him sue me, I've got lawyers, guns and money.

If Lance was a female, let me ask you this...would the insult be even larger and more sickly? If Lance was Lana Armstrong, recovered from breast cancer...what would it take for some to say to themselves, "Wow, that is some really low sh*t, the comments by Paul Kimmage are just beyond the pale."

Viperstrong: Paul is that you?

Paul Kimmage: Yes it is. Why won't you allow me to interview you?

Viperstrong: Fool, you chubby thing there. I forgot you rode pro. Must be the Twinkies and Guinness. Listen fool, you called me a cancer and referred to my comeback as a cancer returning.

Paul Kimmage: Yes, but-

Viperstrong: Don't speak. You've said enough. (Viper approaches Kimmage).

Paul Kimmage: What?

Viperstrong: What do you want for Christmas?

Paul Kimmage: I dunno, a red rider BB gun and-

Viperstrong: (with a straight right to Kimmage's mouth). Paul, all you want for Christmas is your two front teeth.

[e-RICHIE]

Let's not over-micro-nano psychoanalyze this. It's very, very basic. Paul Kimmage throws down some amazing, astonishing insults referring to Lance Armstrong as, "A cancer" who announced his return to professional cycling whereby Kimmage furthered, "The cancer has returned."



for the record here - wasn't his story and comment 5-6 months before
the TOC, and in an online interview as well (corrections welcomed)? and
he did not use the same diction at the press conference atmo. it was
lance who decided to sidetrack the question and make this scene. why?
i know why atmo.


end of story. i rest my case. everything else is obfuscation and fluff.

[Viper]

end of story. i rest my case. everything else is obfuscation and fluff.

Mainly true. The bikes you had ruined out West in the cross race. Did the people who destroyed them make good on it? Are they paying for the repairs? Or do you need to involve a lawyer as they deny making things right? Or wait. There is a six month time period whereby all is simply overlooked and forgotten.

Paul Kimmage kicked Armstrong's dog and spat on his girlfriend's face. Whether it was last June or September does not matter. Words are weapons.

I'm not getting why you believe what Kimmage said in September is irrelevant in February? (neither would a Judge or court of law if it was slander/libel atmo).

I'm not getting why you believe a man shouldn't stand up for himself? Here is the whole video:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XUAO7xmNKeA

Kimmage: "Lance, you've spoken recently about the return of Ivan Basso and Floyd Landis after their suspensions and compare them to David Miller, and that they should be welcomed back in the way that David Miller was welcomed back. It was one obvious difference in that David Miller has been pronounced in his anti-doping stance, where these guys have admitted to nothing. What is it about these dopers that you seem to admire so much?"

Lance: "The reason why you didn't get it, Paul (an interview) when I decided to come back, for what I think is a very noble reason ... you said, folks, the cancer has been in remission for four years, but our cancer has now returned, meaning me. So I think it goes without saying, no, we're not going to sit down and do an interview," Armstrong said. "And I don't think anyone in this room would sit down for this interview. You're not worth the chair you are sitting on with a statement like that, with a disease that touches everyone around the world."

What if a reporter had said something wildly insulting about a Team Atmo rider which involved rape, incest, cancer, death or anything of this low level. How would you react? While you may choose to ignore the reporter, sue the reporter, meditate over green tea, those are your choices. Armstrong has his choices too. He chose to hand Kimmage a dose of stfu and it didn't taste too good for Kimmage as he began to babble and lost his cool.

[BumbleBeeDave]

for the record here - wasn't his story and comment 5-6 months before
the TOC, and in an online interview as well (corrections welcomed)? and
he did not use the same diction at the press conference atmo. it was
lance who decided to sidetrack the question and make this scene. why?
i know why atmo.

end of story. i rest my case. everything else is obfuscation and fluff.

. . . the ORIGINAL comments from Kimmage. I don't trust either one of these guys, Kimmage or Armstrong. Whether Armstrong's response to Kimmage was true or not, I can see that he was deliberately framing Kimmage in order to score points with the rest of the media and get them on his side as he answered a question that A) he couldn't avoid answering in this very public setting, and B) that would be very difficult to give an answer to that everyone would accept.

Did Armstrong realize that's what he was doing? I think so. He's no dummy. Armstrong has such a contentious relationship with the media because, IMHO, he can't control them. I think that bothers him a lot.

BBD

[e-RICHIE]

Did Armstrong realize that's what he was doing? I think so. He's no dummy. Armstrong has such a contentious relationship with the media because, IMHO, he can't control them. I think that bothers him a lot.

BBD

these are the L.A. Times atmo -
just sayin'.

[Viper]

. . . the ORIGINAL comments from Kimmage. I don't trust either one of these guys, Kimmage or Armstrong. Whether Armstrong's response to Kimmage was true or not, I can see that he was deliberately framing Kimmage in order to score points with the rest of the media and get them on his side as he answered a question that A) he couldn't avoid answering in this very public setting, and B) that would be very difficult to give an answer to that everyone would accept.

Did Armstrong realize that's what he was doing? I think so. He's no dummy. Armstrong has such a contentious relationship with the media because, IMHO, he can't control them. I think that bothers him a lot.

BBD

As a journalist, you should be embarrassed by Paul Kimmage. I, a professional internet Cat 1 writer :) , I am mortified for the man:

“What is it about the dopers that you admire so much?” asked Paul Kimmage of London’s Sunday Times. Kimmage was referring to cyclists Floyd Landis and Ivan Basso, who served suspensions after being judged dirty and whom Armstrong said should be welcomed back into the sport for having served their time.

The question obviously was inflammatory bait. It worked. Armstrong asked Kimmage his name and affiliation. Kimmage responded. Armstrong nodded. The man reportedly remembers everything. He remembered the name and what that name wrote when Armstrong announced his return to cycling last fall.

“You wrote, ‘Cancer has been in remission for four years but now our cancer has returned.’” Armstrong said.

Meaning, Armstrong had been retired from the sport for four years and now he is back.

I have never been one to criticize other writers. I’m a First Amendment guy all the way. Freedom to express goes a long way with me. Call Armstrong dirty, if you want. Call him a no-good cheater who deceived people. Call him a low-down so-and-so. Fine. That’s within bounds.

But this? A cancer? To someone who has survived cancer? Who has raised $275 million to combat the disease? Cycling is cycling but cancer is death, a horrible, horrible way to die and should never be used as a metaphor for doping. I know I shouldn’t have felt this, because Lance is a big boy, but I felt embarrassed for him.

“I am here so I don’t have to deal with it (cancer) anymore, so that you don’t have to deal with it anymore, and yet you said I was the cancer,” Armstrong said. “You are not worth the chair you are sitting on with a statement like that.”

Armstrong did not raise his voice through the exchange. He did not quicken the pace of speech. He was firm, in control but there was no mistaking his meaning.

Armstrong said he welcomed Landis and Basso back because he believes in second chances, that people get a chance to make things right after getting them wrong. Then he said something no one, even Kimmage if he could admit it, would dispute.

“I’m not sure I ever will be able to forgive you for that statement,” Armstrong said. “And I’m not sure anyone around the world who has been affected by this disease will forgive you.”

I met Kimmage afterward, told him it appeared he agitated Armstrong. His response was something I didn’t expect.

“If that (agitating Armstrong) is the only thing on my epitaph, I will die a happy man,” Kimmage said.

I guess he was kidding. Least I hope he was. Because if he wasn’t, then I feel more embarrassed for him than for Armstrong. Journalists need higher aspirations than causing agitation. Sure, Armstrong will face more doping questions during the Tour of California. And for the rest of his life, for that matter.

But Armstrong deserves the respect, and the disease deserves the respect, that cancer never be used as a heartless prop, a cold play on words. Drugs and cancer should never be used, unless it’s the first helping to cope with the second."

Read article here:

http://www.pressdemocrat.com/article/20090212/NEWS/902120180?Title=Armstrong_takes_inflammatory_bait_ and_runs_with_it

[Viper]

these are the L.A. Times atmo -
just sayin'.

Actually it's being covered by every major newspaper in the world. From Europe...

Blazin' Saddles: Soup spitting

Eurosport - Tue, 17 Feb 14:07:00 2009

Paul Kimmage's one dimensional probing of Lance Armstrong ahead of the Tour of California was an insightful piece of anthropology.

Now Blazin' Saddles is not one to make lousy, stupid, eejit Irishman jokes, but calling arguably the world's most inspiring cancer campaigner and best rider the "cancer of cycling" was always a tad foolhardy.

It's a bit like brazenly telling an iconic one-legged personality (s)he hasn't got a leg to stand on - or worse, telling a blind narcoleptic to wake up and see the light.

Yes, the Irish journalist (pictured centre) and former pro does have the backbone to ask the questions that so many don't dare, but his latest assault made him look a bitter and uncompassionate man. Which, essentially, is what he is.

Ever since Kimmage's own cycling career (three Tours in the late 80s, one completed in 131st place, one ninth place stage finish) ended, he has blamed the doping climate of the peloton for shattering his dreams.

His subsequent book Rough Ride spilled the beans on his colleagues' systematic drug taking and earned Kimmage universal vilification. He had spat in the pot Belge, so to speak. Verily, what goes on the Tour, stays on the Tour.

Talk about breaking the code - even Alan Turing would have approved.

Undeterred, Kimmage has used The Sunday Times as a launch-pad in his quest to hound the dopers, and last year greeted Armstrong's return with the claim that "the cancer's out of remission".

Frankly, this was astonishing. Regardless of Armstrong's past - and he has never officially tested positive - cycling is men in Lycra while cancer is, to be blunt, death. Hence Lance's brutal, personal assault on Kimmage last week.

Below are some extracts from the press conference (with BS commentary and scoring in brackets).

PK: "What is it about these dopers that you seem to admire so much?" (Actually, it's a pertinent question. 1-0 Kimmage)

LA: "Excuse me, what is your name again? (Nice faux naivety: he knows full well who he is. Equaliser: 1-1)

PK: "Paul Kimmage, Sunday Times. I asked for an interview but didn't get one." (Are you surprised?)

LA: "The reason why you didn't get it Paul (1-2 simply for his use of Kimmage's first name) - I wanted to make sure that was you because I don't know what you look like (he knows full well: 1-3 for mind games) - when I decided to come back, for what I think is a very noble reason (2-3: unnecessary - reeks of self-grandeur), you said, 'Folks, our cancer has now returned' - meaning me. I am here to fight this disease..... (2-4 for his fixing gaze and calm demeanour)

"So it goes without saying (but I'll say it anyway - classic: 2-5), no we are not going to sit down and do an interview. You are not worth the chair you are sitting on with a statement like that, with a disease that touches everyone around the world." (2-6: he has put himself above the sport and has a point)

"Now to answer your question, in fairness to you, although I'm not sure you deserve it. (2-7: by now, Kimmage looks ridiculous)

"Do we make mistakes, all of us? Absolutely. As a society are we supposed to forgive and forget and let people get back to their job. Absolutely. (3-7: hardly an admission of guilt, but not the best retort either)

"I'm not sure I will ever forgive you for that statement. And I'm not sure that anybody around the world affected by this disease will forgive you." (3-8: back to what he does best)

PK: "You don't have a patent on cancer. (4-8: excellent point; despite the 'noble' cause, Lance often deflects attention with his cancer shield) I've lost people too. (4-9: oh Paul, that's a bit like pulling the 'I have friends who are black' line) I'm interested in the cancer of doping in cycling. That has been my life's work! I raced as a professional and I exposed it. Then you come along and the problem disappears." (4-10: sorry, what's that whining noise?)

So, there you have it. Armstrong emerges victorious. Although this is but round one.

In a rare pique of seriousness, BS is going to say this: Kimmage can be a good, captivating writer, but such personal quests do not add up to quality investigative journalism. Isn't he the other side of a tarnished coin? Kimmage may see his own quest as noble, but in truth it is as blinkered, selfish and morally dubious as the dopers ruining the sport.

After the press conference, Kimmage reportedly told a colleague: "If that (agitating Armstrong) is the only thing on my epitaph, I will die a happy man." That kind of sums it up, really.

And yet, just as cycling needs the dopers in order to prove the tests are keeping the sport in check, so too does cycling need people like Kimmage asking the questions and spitting in the soup.

The problem here is that cancer clearly doesn't need such a man. And nor does Lance need someone p***ing on his parade.

Back to the racing.

Article here:

http://uk.eurosport.yahoo.com/17022009/58/blazin-saddles-soup-spitting.html

Of note I described Kimmage as very one-dimesional. Many people do too.

[Charles M]

I am


As a cycling Journo I am embarrased by Kimmage...


What I would like to see is journalism. The presentaion of something, or the investigation of an angle that brings something to light...



not pissing and moaning flipped poorly into the form of a question.

[Viper]

I'd still like to read. . . the ORIGINAL comments from Kimmage. I don't trust either one of these guys, Kimmage or Armstrong.

BBD

Ask and ye shall receive. I have my eye teeth into this story and Kimmage has a lot of flesh to bite atmo. Here:

Paul Kimmage: "He´s the cancer in this sport ... and now the cancer’s back"
Forum - TOURGOTT´S INN



von rolleur am 25 Sep. 2008 10:48

Transkript eines Radio-Interviews mit Paul Kimmage zum Armstrong-Comeback:

"My reaction … I’m reminded of that memorable scene in The Shawshank Redemption, where Andy crawled through a giant pipe of steaming excrement in order to escape to freedom. That’s how I feel right now about Armstrong’s come back. I feel like we’ve been dragged through this pile of steaming excrement. And the enthusiasm that I had built up about the sport in the last couple of years has been all but completely wiped out in the last couple of hours.

Let’s turn the clock back to Armstrong’s last apparition in the sport. The Tour de France 2005. He’s standing on the podium. And he makes this big impassioned speech. Which is basically saying ‘The last thing I’ll say to the people who don’t believe in cycling, the cynics, the sceptics: I’m sorry for you. I’m sorry you can’t dream big. I’m sorry you don’t believe in miracles.’ That was 2005, his last ride in the the Tour de France. And the people flanking him on that podium were Ivan Basso and Jan Ullrich. And a month after that race ended the French newspaper L’Equipe reported that in his first winning Tour de France, in 1999, Armstrong had tested positive for EPO. Six separate samples taken during that race revealed positive tests for EPO.

This return, he wants us to believe that it’s all about saving the world from cancer. That’s complete bull****. It’s about revenge It’s about ego. It’s about Lance Armstrong. I think he’s trying to rewrite his exit from the sport. He’s sat back and he’s watched the last two years and he cannot stand the idea that there are clean cyclists now that will overtake his legacy and buy the memory of all the crap that he put the sport through.

When I heard it being mooted first that he was coming back, I thought well that’s fine, because the first thing ASO are going to say is ‘sorry Lance, we’ve seen your results from the 1999 tests , you’re not coming back.’ I expected a similar statement from Pat McQuaid. What’s happened instead is that Christian Prudhomme has said ‘yes, you can come back, no problem.’ And Pat McQiad has said ‘I really admire this man, he’s a tremendous ambassador for cycling.’ What we’re getting here is the corporate dollars and the money that’s going to accompany this guy back into the game. The money that’s going to bring for Nike, one of the big sponsors of the Tour. And for the UCI, who have been experiencing some serious problems in the last couple of years.

Much as you want to say the sport has changed, as quickly as they can change their own opinions – McQuaid, who says one thing in private and quite the opposite in public, and Prudhomme – if they can change so quickly then I’m sorry, it’s really very, very difficult to have any optimism with regard to Armstrong and the way the sport was moving forward. For me, if he comes back next year, the sport takes two steps back.

I spent the whole Tour this year with Slipstream, the Garmin team. That wasn’t by accident. I chose that team deliberately, because of what they were saying about the sport and the message they were putting out. But also the fact that so many of that team had raced with Armstrong during his best years and knew exactly what he got up to. And the stuff that I learnt on that Tour about him and what he was really like was absolutely shocking, really shocking.

What’s going to happen now is he comes back and everybody’s going to wave their hands in the air and give him a big clap. And all the guys who really know what he’s about are going to feel so utterly and totally depressed. And I’m talking about Jonathan Vuaghthers, who raced with Armstrong that first winning Tour and who doped. And if you look at that Tour, Armstrong’s first win, there were seven Americans on that team. Frankie Andreu has said he used EPO. Tyler Hamilton has been done for [blood doping]. George Hincapie was exposed as a doper by Emma O’Reilly, the team soigneur. Christian Vand Velde and Jonathan Vaughters … both are members of Slipstream and would promote the notion that this was not a clean team by any means. When you look at that and what Armstrong’s done and how he’s seemingly got away with it, it just makes his come back very hard to stomach.

Astana’s the absolute perfect team for him. He’d be renewing his old acquaintance with Bruyneel, who wanted to hire Basso last year. Will he be renewing his old acquaintance with Ferrari, the famous doctor? Will Bruyneel be taking pictures of the questioning journalists and pinning them on the side of his bus?

When Armstrong talks about transparency, this is the greatest laugh. When he talks about embracing this new transparency … I’m really looking forward to that. I’m really looking forward to my first interview request with him and seeing how that comes back. Because that would really make it interesting.

This guy, any other way but his bullying and intimidation wrapped up in this great cloak, the great cancer martyr … this is what he hides behind all the time. The great man who conquered cancer. Well he is the cancer in this sport. And for two years this sport has been in remission. And now the cancer’s back."

Link for above his here:

http://www.forumromanum.de/member/forum/entry.user_446690.4.1105181354.paul_kimmage_he%C2% B4s_the_cancer_this_sport_and_now-tourgott%C2%B4s_inn.html

[fiamme red]

Viper, I haven't followed the whole thread, so just to be clear: are you a fan of Paul Kimmage or not? :rolleyes:

[Viper]

Viper, I haven't followed the whole thread, so just to be clear: are you a fan of Paul Kimmage or not? :rolleyes:

LOL. You know what we need? Kimmage to do an exposé on Viper. That'd make my St. Patrick's Day. :beer:

I dare someone in CO to frak with Jack Brunk during the Triple Bypass. Go ahead, make my day, knock that battery off Kimmage's shoulder atmo. I will domestique for Brunk and we will win in Colorado. Victory and beer shall be ours!!!

"Astana’s the absolute perfect team for him. He’d be renewing his old acquaintance with Bruyneel, who wanted to hire Basso last year. Will he be renewing his old acquaintance with Ferrari, the famous doctor? Will Bruyneel be taking pictures of the questioning journalists and pinning them on the side of his bus?

When Armstrong talks about transparency, this is the greatest laugh. When he talks about embracing this new transparency … I’m really looking forward to that. I’m really looking forward to my first interview request with him and seeing how that comes back. Because that would really make it interesting.

This guy, any other way but his bullying and intimidation wrapped up in this great cloak, the great cancer martyr … this is what he hides behind all the time. The great man who conquered cancer. Well he is the cancer in this sport. And for two years this sport has been in remission. And now the cancer’s back."

[Viper]

Starring Lance Armstrong with special guest, Paul Kimmage.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AbJRmf5DPko

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7wIbO-eD-hs


For Paul Kimmage:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AbJRmf5DPko

We hate it when our friends become successful,
We hate it when our friends become successful.
Oh, look at those clothes,
Now look at that face it's so old,
And such a video, Well, it's really laughable,
Ah hahahaha etc.
We hate it when our friends become successful,
And if they're northern
That makes it even worse and
If we can destroy them
You bet your life we will destroy them.
If we can hurt them, well,
We may well.
It's really laughable,
Ah hahahaha etc.
You see, it should have been me.
It could have been me.
Everybody knows, everybody says so.
They say, "Oh, you have loads of songs,
So many songs,
More songs than they can stand --
Verse, chorus, middle eighth break"
Just listen,
"La la la etc."


And for Lance:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7wIbO-eD-hs


In the absence of your love
and in the absence of human touch
I have decided
I'm throwing my arms around
around Paris because, only stone and steel
accept my love

In the absence of your smiling face
I've traveled all over the place
and I have decided
I'm throwing my arms around
around Paris because, only stone and steel
accept my love

I'm throwing my arms around
around Paris because, only stone and steel
accept my love

I'm throwing my arms around
Paris because nobody wants my love
nobody wants my love, nobody needs my love
nobody wants my love.

yes you made yourself plain
yes you made yourself very plain

[Viper]

I am


As a cycling Journo I am embarrased by Kimmage...


What I would like to see is journalism. The presentaion of something, or the investigation of an angle that brings something to light...



not pissing and moaning flipped poorly into the form of a question.


For Paul Slimmage:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sWNGF1SkAAM&feature=related

The sanest days are mad
Why dont you find out for yourself ?
Then youll see the price
Very closely

Some men here
They have a special interest
In your career
They wanna help you to grow
And then syphon all your dough
Why dont you find out for yourself ?
Then you'll see the glass
Hidden in the grass

Youll never believe me, so
Why dont you find out for yourself ?
Sick down to my heart
Thats just the way it goes

Some men here
They know the full extent of
Your distress
They kneel and pray
And they say
Long may it last

Why dont you find out for yourself ?
Then you'll see the glass
Hidden in the grass
Bad scenes come and go
For which you must allow
Sick down to my heart
Thats just the way it goes

Dont rake up my mistakes
I know exactly what they are
And ... what do you do ?
Well ... you just sit there
Ive been stabbed in the back
So many many times
I dont have any skin
But thats just the way it goes

[e-RICHIE]

Re: The Armstrong/Kimmage exchange
Editor,

Speaking for myself as one of the many "around the world affected by (cancer)," (In my childhood, cancer claimed my father, and later on, my sister as well.) I hold nothing against Mr. Kimmage for his recent characterization of Mr. Armstrong, and I surely do not appreciate Mr. Armstrong assuming the authority to speak for me — especially with such intolerant, hateful words telling someone that they are "not worth the chair they are sitting on."

Indeed, if even half of what has legitimately been alleged about Armstrong is true — the numerous firsthand accounts and sworn testimony of former teammates and associates, the undisputed test results, his conduct towards those who have spoken out about doping within cycling — then Kimmage's metaphor (and that’s what it was, not any sort of insult to those affected by cancer) is appropriate, perhaps even understated.

Armstrong has never credibly addressed these charges, choosing instead to respond with public displays of hostility that have now descended to the level naked aggression with his brutal verbal assault on the very worth on another human being. However unwittingly, Armstrong makes Kimmage look like a prophet in alleging revenge as the motive for his comeback, since we have just seen the first score being settled.

At least in his exchange with Greg LeMond last September, Armstrong insisted that the press conference would not "go negative" since he meant to "talk about the global cancer campaign, the comeback to cycling, and the credibility in and around that." At that point, I was willing to give him the benefit of the doubt, but any "credibility" he could have commanded is now gone, not only as a result of his treatment of Mr. Kimmage, but also his having reneged on a public promise to subject himself to "the most advanced anti-doping program in the world," which would be conducted in a "completely independent" manner because "ultimately…we as fans must get back to enjoying the race and respecting the riders and their performances." (Perhaps the drama of Armstrong’s press-conference "performance" is intended for the public's viewing enjoyment.)

This time, he did not even try to conceal his contempt, which he had the gall to wrap in self-righteous outrage on behalf of those he professes to represent and care about, but whom he is all too willing to exploit for advantage in his personal feuds. Such conduct is beyond the pale from a public spokesperson (even a self-appointed one) for any sort of worthy cause, and it lays bare the dark forces at work in this man – forces that may now be said to constitute an ugly blight not just upon cycling, but the fight against cancer itself.
Charles Howe,
Olmsted Falls, Ohio

text mined from XXX (http://velonews.com/article/88020/mailbag-velonews-readers-contribute-pithy-observations-and)

[BBB]

As this thread has expanded in size, I like e-ritchie, wonder why the fuss is being made now when in fact Kimmage's comments were made last September. Armstrong himself made the issue an issue by raising it in the press conference (in fact he did dis Kimmage not long after the comments were made last year , but again it passed un-noticed).

Why not seperate the issues. If you don't like the "cancer is back" comment, just say so, rather than use this as a platform to vilify a man who does indeed (in my opinion) write well and is obviously writing from a perspective that most of us in the cheap seats do not appreciate. Kimmage wrote a number of articles during the TdF last year - check them out. Are these articles "bad journalism"? If so, why? What about his non-cycling articles?

If you take the "cancer is back" issue out of the equation, you are left with a guy who is writing about what he sees as a "cancer" in a sport that is common to all of us on this forum. Obviously doping was/is an issue. To use the LA example, his seven TdF victories were bookended nicely by two considerable doping scandles - Festina and Puerto. Like Kimmage says, are we just expected to believe the problem just went away in the intervening seven years? Only the most naive rose tinted glasses wearing fan would say yes to that question. Obviously, this is not 'evidence' against Armstrong, but he has to be prepared for hard questions about doping generally and the many doping allegations raised against him personally - and lets not quibble, there are a lot - and not just get annoyed or pull out the cancer fund raising halo each and every time. Surely no one really has a problem with a journalist or journalists asking hard questions about doping?

[Johny]

Re: The Armstrong/Kimmage exchange
Editor,

Speaking for myself as one of the many "around the world affected by (cancer)," (In my childhood, cancer claimed my father, and later on, my sister as well.) I hold nothing against Mr. Kimmage for his recent characterization of Mr. Armstrong, and I surely do not appreciate Mr. Armstrong assuming the authority to speak for me — especially with such intolerant, hateful words telling someone that they are "not worth the chair they are sitting on."

Indeed, if even half of what has legitimately been alleged about Armstrong is true — the numerous firsthand accounts and sworn testimony of former teammates and associates, the undisputed test results, his conduct towards those who have spoken out about doping within cycling — then Kimmage's metaphor (and that’s what it was, not any sort of insult to those affected by cancer) is appropriate, perhaps even understated.

Armstrong has never credibly addressed these charges, choosing instead to respond with public displays of hostility that have now descended to the level naked aggression with his brutal verbal assault on the very worth on another human being. However unwittingly, Armstrong makes Kimmage look like a prophet in alleging revenge as the motive for his comeback, since we have just seen the first score being settled.

At least in his exchange with Greg LeMond last September, Armstrong insisted that the press conference would not "go negative" since he meant to "talk about the global cancer campaign, the comeback to cycling, and the credibility in and around that." At that point, I was willing to give him the benefit of the doubt, but any "credibility" he could have commanded is now gone, not only as a result of his treatment of Mr. Kimmage, but also his having reneged on a public promise to subject himself to "the most advanced anti-doping program in the world," which would be conducted in a "completely independent" manner because "ultimately…we as fans must get back to enjoying the race and respecting the riders and their performances." (Perhaps the drama of Armstrong’s press-conference "performance" is intended for the public's viewing enjoyment.)

This time, he did not even try to conceal his contempt, which he had the gall to wrap in self-righteous outrage on behalf of those he professes to represent and care about, but whom he is all too willing to exploit for advantage in his personal feuds. Such conduct is beyond the pale from a public spokesperson (even a self-appointed one) for any sort of worthy cause, and it lays bare the dark forces at work in this man – forces that may now be said to constitute an ugly blight not just upon cycling, but the fight against cancer itself.
Charles Howe,
Olmsted Falls, Ohio

text mined from XXX (http://velonews.com/article/88020/mailbag-velonews-readers-contribute-pithy-observations-and)

OOO

[Viper]

Re: The Armstrong/Kimmage exchange
Editor,

Speaking for myself as one of the many "around the world affected by (cancer)," (In my childhood, cancer claimed my father, and later on, my sister as well.) I hold nothing against Mr. Kimmage for his recent characterization of Mr. Armstrong, and I surely do not appreciate Mr. Armstrong assuming the authority to speak for me — especially with such intolerant, hateful words telling someone that they are "not worth the chair they are sitting on."

Indeed, if even half of what has legitimately been alleged about Armstrong is true — the numerous firsthand accounts and sworn testimony of former teammates and associates, the undisputed test results, his conduct towards those who have spoken out about doping within cycling — then Kimmage's metaphor (and that’s what it was, not any sort of insult to those affected by cancer) is appropriate, perhaps even understated.

Armstrong has never credibly addressed these charges, choosing instead to respond with public displays of hostility that have now descended to the level naked aggression with his brutal verbal assault on the very worth on another human being. However unwittingly, Armstrong makes Kimmage look like a prophet in alleging revenge as the motive for his comeback, since we have just seen the first score being settled.

At least in his exchange with Greg LeMond last September, Armstrong insisted that the press conference would not "go negative" since he meant to "talk about the global cancer campaign, the comeback to cycling, and the credibility in and around that." At that point, I was willing to give him the benefit of the doubt, but any "credibility" he could have commanded is now gone, not only as a result of his treatment of Mr. Kimmage, but also his having reneged on a public promise to subject himself to "the most advanced anti-doping program in the world," which would be conducted in a "completely independent" manner because "ultimately…we as fans must get back to enjoying the race and respecting the riders and their performances." (Perhaps the drama of Armstrong’s press-conference "performance" is intended for the public's viewing enjoyment.)

This time, he did not even try to conceal his contempt, which he had the gall to wrap in self-righteous outrage on behalf of those he professes to represent and care about, but whom he is all too willing to exploit for advantage in his personal feuds. Such conduct is beyond the pale from a public spokesperson (even a self-appointed one) for any sort of worthy cause, and it lays bare the dark forces at work in this man – forces that may now be said to constitute an ugly blight not just upon cycling, but the fight against cancer itself.
Charles Howe,
Olmsted Falls, Ohio

text mined from XXX (http://velonews.com/article/88020/mailbag-velonews-readers-contribute-pithy-observations-and)


1). Charles Howe (above) is a dude on the internet. We're all entitled to an opinion atmo.

2). Lance would NOT have had to put Paul Kimmage in his place had Kimmage not crossed the line of insults last September atmo.

3). Paul Kimmage started this, Lance simply handed him back a dose of medicine atmo.

4). Last September? I don't know what I had for lunch on September 7th, but that doesn't impact the price of crude oil out of Saudi Arabia; insulting a person to the extent Paul Kimmage did requires follow up. Lance Armstrong has continued to deny Kimmage an interview. Paul Kimmage caught up with Lance at ToC and Lance did a very manly thing. Perhaps this microphone-moment of Armstrong scares Beta Males or adds to the flame of hatred or jealousy for those who already hate Lance. The question is, what does it say about a person who will allow their hatred of someone, Lance Armstrong, that they'll overlook the simple sense of logic: that calling a cancer survivor, "A cancer" and upon his return, "This cancer has now returned" are comments so low, disgusting, they simply cannot be tolerated. Sour grapes much? What is it that drives anyone to think Kimmage's comments are okay? Does anyone have the ability to say that Kimmage's comments are beautiful, remarkable with a deep sense of artistic journalism?


5). e-RICHIE, you seem to hate Lance. That's okay, fine. Let me ask you, will you answer this question...why do you hate Lance? I know you're a smart cat, but I think Lance deserves to know the answer and it's proper to to be honest. This is a loaded question and to be fair, you can't answer it because the moment you do, you'll eliminate your posts' content. Haters hate, haters are blind and while you've done all you can to support Kimmage, aye, the rub, the bend in the fork, the rusted lug is...why do you hate Lance? Things change when you have to fill in the blanks. Explain to me how a cancer survivor earned this, "You ARE a cancer and when you returned to cycling, so did the cancer." Cause with this logic, a journalist can call a rape victim from a female cycling team a, "Skinsuit slut" or an aged golfer who suffered a stroke and upon his comeback, can be referred to as, "Droopy dog."

I don't like EPO, drugs or cheating. But I don't hate the athlete. I resent their lies and excuses or denial. I don't hate the gun, I hate the sick freak who murders with it. There's even a portion of society that hates all gun owners, period. It's clear that Paul Kimmage hates Lance Armstrong, it's no longer professional for him as a writer, it's personal. Kimmage's 'work' is filled with disturbing low blows.

President Reagan was shot, who would cheer the writings of John Hinkley Jr? Only a radical. Dad dug Elvis, thought The Beatles were wussies, but who would endorse the rantings of Mark Chapman? Certainly we can separate our personal dislike of a Reagan or a Lennon from the sick, sad words of the twisted individuals that caused sorrow. Could you imagine a journalist writing blonde jokes within a news piece in the 1970's pertaining to the Son of Sam killings?

I don't hate Lance and with my genuine Irish smile, I have nothing to be jealous of, but I do wonder how a Lance-hater can think his/her opinion carries worthy weight, significant substance in the Kimmage Affair. Once someone allows his/her hatred of Lance to overcome the Kimmage cancer insults, they've become a radical as they smirk and smile while whispering, "I really hate that Lance mofo, he deserves those cheapshots."

Shoes. Could you imagine being in the shoes/cleats of a lymphoma survivor? Yes, you fought lymphoma, an immune system cancer and you're trying to comeback on your cross racing gig which you love. After a few years of chemo and battles, you make it back. You clip in, do your best in the season, but, a journalist who hates the success of Sachs Cycles has a vendetta against you, writes in The Cheshire Herald, "Richard Sachs is no longer immune to the strains of cross. As Sachs limped his way around the courses, a biopsy and examination of his weakened results in 2008 declare to all, it's now time to stick to making frames and no longer riding them." Now you can handle those insults how you so choose, just don't ask me to defend the author. I couldn't, even with my wit and every Star Wars toy I have at my disposal.

"Never insult anyone by accident."
~Robert A. Heinlein


My name is e-RICHIE,

And I hate Lance Armstrong because __________________________________________________ __________________________________________________ __________________________________________________ __________________________________________________ __________________________________________________ _____________________________________________ .

Regards,
e-RICHIE

[e-RICHIE]

1). Charles Howe (above) is a dude on the internet. We're all entitled to an opinion atmo.

2). Lance would NOT have had to put Paul Kimmage in his place had Kimmage not crossed the line of insults last September atmo.

3). Paul Kimmage started this, Lance simply handed him back a dose of medicine atmo.

4). Last September? I don't know what I had for lunch on September 7th, but that doesn't impact the price of crude oil out of Saudi Arabia; insulting a person to the extent Paul Kimmage did requires follow up. Lance Armstrong has continued to deny Kimmage an interview. Paul Kimmage caught up with Lance at ToC and Lance did a very manly thing. Perhaps this microphone-moment of Armstrong scares Beta Males or adds to the flame of hatred or jealousy for those who already hate Lance. The question is, what does it say about a person who will allow their hatred of someone, Lance Armstrong, that they'll overlook the simple sense of logic: that calling a cancer survivor, "A cancer" and upon his return, "This cancer has now returned" are comments so low, disgusting, they simply cannot be tolerated. Sour grapes much? What is it that drives anyone to think Kimmage's comments are okay? Does anyone have the ability to say that Kimmage's comments are beautiful, remarkable with a deep sense of artistic journalism?


5). e-RICHIE, you seem to hate Lance. That's okay, fine. Let me ask you, will you answer this question...why do you hate Lance? I know you're a smart cat, but I think Lance deserves to know the answer and it's proper to to be honest. This is a loaded question and to be fair, you can't answer it because the moment you do, you'll eliminate your posts' content. Haters hate, haters are blind and while you've done all you can to support Kimmage, aye, the rub, the bend in the fork, the rusted lug is...why do you hate Lance? Things change when you have to fill in the blanks. Explain to me how a cancer survivor earned this, "You ARE a cancer and when you returned to cycling, so did the cancer." Cause with this logic, a journalist can call a rape victim from a female cycling team a, "Skinsuit slut" or an aged golfer who suffered a stroke and upon his comeback, can be referred to as, "Droopy dog."

I don't like EPO, drugs or cheating. But I don't hate the athlete. I resent their lies and excuses or denial. I don't hate the gun, I hate the sick freak who murders with it. There's even a portion of society that hates all gun owners, period. It's clear that Paul Kimmage hates Lance Armstrong, it's no longer professional for him as a writer, it's personal. Kimmage's 'work' is filled with disturbing low blows.

President Reagan was shot, who would cheer the writings of John Hinkley Jr? Only a radical. Dad dug Elvis, thought The Beatles were wussies, but who would endorse the rantings of Mark Chapman? Certainly we can separate our personal dislike of a Reagan or a Lennon from the sick, sad words of the twisted individuals that caused sorrow. Could you imagine a journalist writing blonde jokes within a news piece in the 1970's pertaining to the Son of Sam killings?

I don't hate Lance and with my genuine Irish smile, I have nothing to be jealous of, but I do wonder how a Lance-hater can think his/her opinion carries worthy weight, significant substance in the Kimmage Affair. Once someone allows his/her hatred of Lance to overcome the Kimmage cancer insults, they've become a radical as they smirk and smile while whispering, "I really hate that Lance mofo, he deserves those cheapshots."

Shoes. Could you imagine being in the shoes/cleats of a lymphoma survivor? Yes, you fought lymphoma, an immune system cancer and you're trying to comeback on your cross racing gig which you love. After a few years of chemo and battles, you make it back. You clip in, do your best in the season, but, a journalist who hates the success of Sachs Cycles has a vendetta against you, writes in The Cheshire Herald, "Richard Sachs is no longer immune to the strains of cross. As Sachs limped his way around the courses, a biopsy and examination of his weakened results in 2008 declare to all, it's now time to stick to making frames and no longer riding them." Now you can handle those insults how you so choose, just don't ask me to defend the author. I couldn't, even with my wit and every Star Wars toy I have at my disposal.

"Never insult anyone by accident."
~Robert A. Heinlein


My name is e-RICHIE,

And I hate Lance Armstrong because __________________________________________________ __________________________________________________ __________________________________________________ __________________________________________________ __________________________________________________ _____________________________________________ .

Regards,
e-RICHIE






thanks, keith -
i'll choose option one:
1) We're all entitled to an opinion atmo.

[Lifelover]

.....My name is e-RICHIE,

And I hate Lance Armstrong because __________________________________________________ __________________________________________________ __________________________________________________ __________________________________________________ __________________________________________________ _____________________________________________ .

Regards,
e-RICHIE


I have absolutly no clue what e-RICHIE's feeling are towards Lance.

I do know that every person that makes a living making or selling ROAD bikes in North America, owes Lance a debt of graditude.

Without him the road bike market would be a mere fraction of what it is and everybody's wait list would be back to Pre Lance days.

[e-RICHIE]

I have absolutly no clue what e-RICHIE's feeling are towards Lance.

I do know that every person that makes a living making or selling ROAD bikes in North America, owes Lance a debt of graditude.

Without him the road bike market would be a mere fraction of what it is and everybody's wait list would be back to Pre Lance days.


is that conjecture, or do you have proof of this? no attitude intended, just
asking - since i am in the business and have a pulse on where orders come
from. you're in the industry, or just wanna be in the fray here?

[Johny]

I do know that every person that makes a living making or selling EPO in North America, owes Lance a debt of graditude.

[Viper]

thanks, keith -
i'll choose option one:
1) We're all entitled to an opinion atmo.


Is that an, "Uncle"? :)

1). Journalists aren't supposed to be like us, mere internet dudes with opinions.

Henceforth, Paul Kimmage is no longer a professional atmo, but merely a dude with an opinion. Kimmage has lost his palmarés and position in the peleton of writers. Last I checked ToC, Lance still has it, while Kimmage lost it. Armstrong already won a war against death, cancer, such quibbles with cowardly wussies the likes of Kimmage are in the end, a waste of time.

Armstrong has such bigger things to do on the bike, a saddle Kimmage's fat arse could never fit. I can almost hear the faint echo across the Atlantic from Kimmage, his garrulousness traded in for a simple "Uncle" and perhaps, even, "I'm sorry."

[e-RICHIE]

Is that an, "Uncle"? :)

1). Journalists aren't supposed to be like us, mere internet dudes with opinions.

Henceforth, Paul Kimmage is no longer a professional atmo, but merely a dude with an opinion. Kimmage has lost his palmarés and position in the peleton of writers. Last I checked ToC, Lance still has it, while Kimmage lost it. Armstrong already won a war against death, cancer, such quibbles with cowardly wussies the likes of Kimmage are in the end, a waste of time.

Armstrong has such bigger things to do on the bike, a saddle Kimmage's fat arse could never fit. I can almost hear the faint echo across the Atlantic from Kimmage, his garrulousness traded in for a simple "Uncle" and perhaps, even, "I'm sorry."


an "uncle" :) from ireland writes:
Well he is the ego in this sport. And for two years this sport has been in remission. And now the ego's back.

[Viper]

an "uncle" :) from ireland writes:
Well he is the ego in this sport. And for two years this sport has been in remission. And now the ego's back.


We all have egos. Dude you have a movie/documentary about one! :D

We'll have to settle this the old fashioned way. Armstrong, Kimmage, e-RICHIE and Viper grab fake, plastic lightsabers and battle it out in the backyard. Mom's dinner is at 6pm, so we have until then and I'm wearing Toughskin tm Jeans so you know I'm ready.

Darth Vader always makes money for his partners. One by one, our old friends are gone. Death, natural or not, prison, deported. Darth Vader is the only one left, because he always makes money for his partners atmo.

[e-RICHIE]

We all have egos. Dude you have a movie/documentary about one! :D

We'll have to settle this the old fashioned way. Armstrong, Kimmage, e-RICHIE and Viper grab fake, plastic lightsabers and battle it out in the backyard. Mom's dinner is at 6pm, so we have until then and I'm wearing Toughskin tm Jeans so you know I'm ready.

Darth Vader always makes money for his partners. One by one, our old friends are gone. Death, natural or not, prison, deported. Darth Vader is the only one left, because he always makes money for his partners atmo.



if you saw said movie/rockumentary you'd know i only
wear black wrangler 13 mwz jeans in size 31W 32L atmo.

[Lifelover]

is that conjecture, or do you have proof of this? no attitude intended, just
asking - since i am in the business and have a pulse on where orders come
from. you're in the industry, or just wanna be in the fray here?


Yoda sent me Twitter with the dope!

What was your wait list pre Lance?

[Lifelover]

I do know that every person that makes a living making or selling EPO in North America, owes Lance a debt of graditude.

Guilty or not, Lance is small change here in regards to doping.

NFL, MLB and NBA consume more in a Day than all the cyclist do in a year.

[fourflys]

is that conjecture, or do you have proof of this? no attitude intended, just
asking - since i am in the business and have a pulse on where orders come
from. you're in the industry, or just wanna be in the fray here?

I gotta go with lifelover on this one...while I don't know where you're particular orders come from (I imagine most people that have been riding bikes a lot longer than Lance tho), the cycling industry, as a whole, wouldn't be anywhere close to where it is if it wasn't for what Lance accomplished...

I was having a conversation with someone the other day about this... As a lot of people have pointed out, road cycling in the US has always been known as a fringe/snobbish sport. How many people feel thay have to put their bike on thier car to drive to somewhere to ride? From what I hear, Europe is quite the opposite. Lance has raised awareness of road cycling to a whole new level.

The one example I can cite is when I was in high school in Indiana (circa 1992)... I had just gotten a Trek 1400 and the Indiana White River State Games were coming up. I decided to do the crit, having NEVER raced before. Well, long story shot I was shoot out the back right off... BUT, I made it to the state finals becuase there were only 4 other people in this race and the top 5 went...(I didn't race the finals) I have a feeling after around 2002, this would not have been the case.

While the casual cyclist that got riding because of Lance probaly won't be buying a Sach's, Serotta or Kirk, they certainly have infused the industry and help get it back on the map in Surburban America IMHO.
Chris

[e-RICHIE]

Yoda sent me Twitter with the dope!

What was your wait list pre Lance?



oh i see - you're a statistician of sorts...
pre lance's second comeback?
pre lance's focus on a single race so that america knew about the tdf?
pre lance's first (or second, or fourth...) tdf?
pre lance's departure in the 90s?
pre lance's days as a tri guy?
pre lance's emma - or activegin - or swart - or betsy - or shakeup involving usac - or fill-in-blank?

throw me a bone atmo.

[Charles M]

LMAO...

who thinks this thread is even 2 pages long if Lance isn't the topic?





As for stats...


How bout 0 for what 4-5-6 allegations???






All hail the Lance clingons... Kimmage et al... :banana:

[bostondrunk]

Guilty or not, Lance is small change here in regards to doping.



I was thinking the same thing, even just with regards to cycling. There are plenty of dopers who are still racing, some who have served suspensions, some who have not. Why is Kimmage focused on Lance? How is the sport suddenly worse off, just because the best athlete in the world (arguably) has returned?

Just the opposite, I'd say. Cycling will gain more popularity with his return. The fact that he raises/raised millions for a good cause is a pretty nice side benefit.
Kimmage can use whatever excuse he wants about the 'cancer in cycling' comment.....it was obviously a horrible choice of words..

PS. eRitchies ego DVD was pretty good IMHO. :)

[Viper]

if you saw said movie/rockumentary you'd know i only
wear black wrangler 13 mwz jeans in size 31W 32L atmo.

I have a Salvation Army in town. I will hit them up soon, see if they have any vintage stuff. I'm 33x32, but it's all about the zipper atmo. I could see you pulling off some bell bottoms.

PS. I wanna be in the sequel. I could be something like Patrick Swayze from Roadhouse. I always had a thing for Kelly Lynch (whose break was in Vice in 1987):

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FTiglDTkya8

:cool: