home

Lance Armstrong on Oprah

By Jeralyn, Section Media
Posted on Thu Jan 17, 2013 at 08:17:18 PM EST
Tags: Lance Armstrong (all tags)
Share This: Digg! StumbleUpon del.icio.us reddit reddit

Lance Armstrong interview on Oprah is airing now. It took me 10 minutes to find the channel (220 on Denver's comcast.)

He says the last time he "crossed the line" was in 2005. He did no blood transfusions or doping in 2009 and 2010.

He denied that he expected or required his top riders to dope.

< Suburban Chicago Cops Charged With Ripping Off Drug Dealers | U.S. Attorney Carmen Ortiz Speaks About Aaron Swartz >

  • The Online Magazine with Liberal coverage of crime-related political and injustice news

  • Contribute To TalkLeft


    • Display: Sort:
    Lance Armstrong on Oprah | 24 comments (24 topical)

    Readers Must Login or Create an Account to Comment

    Is there anyone on the planet who (5.00 / 1) (#1)
    by Anne on Thu Jan 17, 2013 at 08:31:58 PM EST
    believes anything he says?

    Is there any reason to believe him?

    he's a creep (none / 0) (#17)
    by TeresaInPa on Sun Jan 20, 2013 at 06:01:27 PM EST
    I heard a guy say on TV that they all take drugs so whoever does it best should be the winner...but I am guessing that most people are disgusted by this whole spectacle.  Right now Armstrong is in an incredible amount of denial, that he can compete again, that what he did was not so bad, that he had to do it to level the playing field......

    Parent
    It's a self-interested and venal (5.00 / 2) (#4)
    by observed on Thu Jan 17, 2013 at 09:20:20 PM EST
    confession. He just wants the appearance fees for competing in triathlons.
    Does he really need (none / 0) (#8)
    by Reconstructionist on Fri Jan 18, 2013 at 09:10:44 AM EST
     the relatively (considering his wealth) small appearance fees? I'll not quibble with self-interested or even venal, but I suspect his motives run deeper than getting checks from Triathlon promoters.

    Parent
    He's a latter-day Nixon working to (none / 0) (#11)
    by oculus on Fri Jan 18, 2013 at 05:26:15 PM EST
    re burnish his legacy.

    Parent
    That's my take (none / 0) (#21)
    by Reconstructionist on Mon Jan 21, 2013 at 12:49:38 PM EST
      He's too old now to be competitive at the highest level in  any sport and the appearance fees are chump change for him.

      That said, I don't think he did his legacy much good. It seemed to me his whole spin was, yeah I know I was an a*h** but I had to be or I would have been caught sooner.

    Parent

    He was still the best (5.00 / 1) (#7)
    by indy in sc on Fri Jan 18, 2013 at 08:33:10 AM EST
    of a field full of cheaters.  Cycling is and has been rife with PED and blood doping for many years.  I actually don't begrudge him the cheating that much.  What makes him So intolerable to me is the way he completely defamed and destroyed anyone who dared to speak the truth about him.  Some of them had unclean hands themselves and didn't have the purest of motives, but some of Lance's actions towards them went far beyond the pale.  

    The Reason... (5.00 / 1) (#9)
    by ScottW714 on Fri Jan 18, 2013 at 10:18:30 AM EST
    ...cycling is full of cheaters is people exactly like Armstrong, who basically insisted people get on enhancers or leave.  

    I understand giving him a pass, but not me, if people like him didn't exist, neither would the rampant use of enhancers in cycling.  He went above and beyond user status to godfather like control over testing and usage for everyone on his team.

    And now, his hollow confession comes with the added benefit of snitch, which of course was the group he was suing right and left in the past.  This is Lance trying to salvage the train wreck he created and like Lance has always done, he's doing it by stepping on anyone in his way.

    No sympathy from me and I really hope all those ill-gotten gains are given back to the true beneficiaries.

    Parent

    Speaking (5.00 / 1) (#18)
    by lentinel on Sun Jan 20, 2013 at 06:12:44 PM EST
    of beneficiaries, how and why did the US Postal Service, with 32 million dollars of what I believe to be our money, wind up sponsoring a pro cycling team?

    Parent
    Well, there certainly (5.00 / 1) (#19)
    by Zorba on Sun Jan 20, 2013 at 06:18:19 PM EST
    is that, lentinel.  I never understood this, nor did I approve of it.

    Parent
    Well... (none / 0) (#20)
    by ScottW714 on Mon Jan 21, 2013 at 11:12:04 AM EST
    ...because they don't receive any government funding, their income is derived from their service/products.  They are essentially like any other business and I would imagine they believed, mistakenly, that sponsoring a team would be a good business decision.

    So while it's our money, its voluntarily given and not taken from our paychecks.

    Speaking of bad business decisions at the USPS.  Those one price boxes are just about the dumbest idea ever.  One is only going to use them if the price of shipping it normally, is more.

    I was at a dive shop a couple months ago, and they were unpacking lead weights from one of those boxes.  I asked them some questions and we all had a good laugh when they told me they shipped 60lbs for $10.  The USPS managed to put a maximum cost for shipping smaller items, idiots.

    Parent

    I (5.00 / 1) (#22)
    by lentinel on Mon Jan 21, 2013 at 04:47:33 PM EST
    never quite got the notion that the Post Office was not related to the US government.

    Granted that, what possible benefit could it be to the Post Office, any post office,  to put 32 million bucks into a pro bicycling team? Did they think it would was us to mail our letters - those letters we had been saving and not mailing - and now - we see a patch on the arm of a man riding a bicycle and smile broadly- and think,  "I'm going to mail those dang envelopes. Christmas greetings from 1997; an overdue bill to that pesky yet lovable electric company; that subscription to Field and Stream...;"

    Oh say does that star spangled company still post photos of most wanted criminals? They should put that on Armstrong's arm.

    Parent

    If I Had to Guess... (5.00 / 1) (#24)
    by ScottW714 on Tue Jan 22, 2013 at 09:00:43 AM EST
    ...FedEx and UPS have probably taken away from their bottom line.  

    I think it it's dumb as well, but since other companies, who actually make profits and smart business decisions, sponsor teams, it's not that crazy to understand why they did it.

    The problem, part of what you mentioned, is that their business model isn't lacking in product recognition, it's lacking in service.  So instead of putting their name on stuff, they should be spending those funds on customer service training and quit hiring rude aholes that work at the speed of super slow squared.

    Parent

    As long as the US government (none / 0) (#23)
    by Zorba on Mon Jan 21, 2013 at 08:12:15 PM EST
    can require that the USPS pre-fund their promised health care benefits for retirees for the next 75 years (retirees, I might add, who have not even been born yet), which it has done, then I guess that, indeed, the USPS is related to the government.
    I am not aware that our government has made this mandate for any private business.  So, what can we conclude from this?   Probably that our government not only ultimately controls the Post Office, but that they have deliberately set up the rules so that it will fail, in order that they can use this as an excuse to privatize the whole thing.

    Parent
    Indy, you don't know (none / 0) (#10)
    by SuzieTampa on Fri Jan 18, 2013 at 03:49:12 PM EST
    that he was better than others. He had all the top doctors and stuff. Plus, people react differently to drugs. Clearly, he was the best at cheating, but not necessarily the best athlete.

    Parent
    Actually, since it's almost invitable (5.00 / 1) (#14)
    by sarcastic unnamed one on Fri Jan 18, 2013 at 05:36:31 PM EST
    that some/many cheaters have not been caught, I'm not sure he is the best at cheating...

    Parent
    But he was the best of the cheaters! (none / 0) (#13)
    by sarcastic unnamed one on Fri Jan 18, 2013 at 05:34:30 PM EST


    Parent
    ...best athlete of the cheaters. (none / 0) (#15)
    by sarcastic unnamed one on Fri Jan 18, 2013 at 05:37:41 PM EST


    Parent
    I am now tied with Lance (5.00 / 1) (#12)
    by sarcastic unnamed one on Fri Jan 18, 2013 at 05:34:00 PM EST
    for Tour de France victories.

    He still leads in Pinocchios (5.00 / 1) (#16)
    by CoralGables on Fri Jan 18, 2013 at 07:48:11 PM EST
    The Washington Post Fact Checker gave him 28  Pinocchios today. That's a one day record that could live forever.

    Parent
    It took (none / 0) (#2)
    by BobW on Thu Jan 17, 2013 at 08:57:30 PM EST
    It took a lot of ball to fess up.


    Ha Ha Good one. (5.00 / 1) (#5)
    by Mr Natural on Thu Jan 17, 2013 at 10:18:33 PM EST
    Even so, this thread is as close as I'll come to watching that lamer.

    Parent
    Yeah, after so many years of lying (3.50 / 2) (#3)
    by shoephone on Thu Jan 17, 2013 at 09:20:03 PM EST
    Lance is so courageous, huh?

    Parent
    Here I am... (none / 0) (#6)
    by unitron on Fri Jan 18, 2013 at 07:26:13 AM EST
    ...wondering what the outcome of the hostage crisis really was, so I'll know whether or not "Algerian Rescue" will be the new slang term for what the GOP and the rest of the right would do to the economy if not stopped, and the media don't want to spend any air time on anything but this bum!

    Lance Armstrong on Oprah | 24 comments (24 topical)

    Readers Must Login or Create an Account to Comment