Pedaling lies

First of all, only about 2.7 people in America gave a whit about the Tour de France until Lance Armstrong won a zillion of them in a row despite almost dying from cancer.

Did I think the dude was blood doping and stuffing his sculpted body with EPO and testosterone?

Of course.

All elite cyclists had to if they wanted to be competitive. How else could they pedal up and down mountains day after day at warp speed and still have enough energy to ask themselves at night why they didn’t take up motorcycling racing instead.

Dopiness is much more helpful than cleanliness on a long bike ride.

Still, I, among countless others, admired Armstrong for the wonderful support his Livestrong foundation afforded cancer survivors.

Nevertheless, Livestrong was all part of the man’s deceit, a man who is a fascinating/disgusting blend of good and evil.

So why did Armstrong sort of confess in his semi-mea culpa with Oprah?

After all, this brute sued or trashed or attacked anybody who didn’t allow him to control his narrative.

And the overriding, pardon the pun, theme of his narrative had been that he wasn’t dirty. He had been adamant as hell about that. Downright defiant. Perhaps all the drugs had him hallucinating.

Now he has sort of come clean, and did so without contrition, because he finally got cornered and had to quit bullying, lying and subverting the law.

Plus, there is a monetary incentive. He has lost a fortune in endorsements and he has to rehab his image to become marketable again – if that is possible.

Perhaps it’s time for Lance to star in his own reality show, where all fallen celebs wind up when they need life support.


5 thoughts on “Pedaling lies

  1. Armstrong sort of fell on his, uh, Lance.

  2. Perfect title for a good column!

  3. Murray says:

    “After all, this brute sued or trashed or attacked anybody who didn’t allow him to control his narrative.”

    Zeke, this is the point where you lost me and I was wondering if you switched over from talking about Armstrong to Obama. Truth is, Armstrong isn’t as ruthless as Obama and he doesn’t have the press as much on his side. If he did, details about the Fast and Furious scandal, er, I mean the blood doping scandal would still be suppressed to this day.

  4. I was talking about Armstrong 🙂

  5. Murray says:

    You may have been talking about Armstrong, but you were describing Obama.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s