“Why don't you knock it off with them negative waves Moriarty? Why don't you dig how beautiful it is out here? Why don't you say something righteous and hopeful for a change?”
sittingbison wrote:This sticky is for declaring your opinions views and manifestos on the record, so it doesn't get lost in the (hog) wash
gooner wrote:On Wiggins, the guy comes across as an ***hole at times but for now, I'm inclined to believe him even though his love in for Lance portrays him in poor light. I think JV and Garmin are genuine in the way they run their team and Wiggins's leap with them and finishing 4th goes in his favour. I think he was lucky in 2012 with the route design and when it was announced I remember the general reaction was that this route was one which Wiggins could nail his colours to. That was all before his P-N, Romandie and Dauphine win. All this with Wiggins is just a gut feeling. I maybe wrong but it's on his head if he's the cheat, not me. I don't look at this as personal vindication over others.
The Father of Clean Cycling, Christophe Bassons wrote:When I look at cycling today, I get the impression that history is repeating itself: riders who are supposed to be rouleurs are climbing passes at the front of the race, and those who are supposed to be climbers are riding time trials at more than 50 kilometres per hour.
The story is beginning again, just as it did 14 years ago
Maxiton wrote: Lance Armstrong is a reprehensible character, but he is as much a victim as a perpetrator and a straw man where corruption in cycle sport is concerned. The sport is as corrupt now as it was in his heyday.
Wallace wrote:Not to pick specifically on Maxiton, but this is the thing that most drives me nuts about the current pro cycling conversation, and I feel a need to call it out as buIIlsh!t. The first ridiculous, deluded and incessantly repeated line of the pro-Lance crowd was "biggest heart, high cadence, trains harder than anyone else." When that start to fall apart, it was replaced by the desperate "most tested athlete in history, never tested positive," Then, "think of all he's done for the sport and for cancer." Naively, I thought that even the die-hard Lance fanatics would be done with him after the "circumstantial evidence/hearsay" last-ditch defense fell apart. No such luck. Now every Lance supporter offers the same, boiler-plate line, the latest lie directly from the man himself: he may be a (insert pejorative term here), but he's been unfairly singled out, martyred, the victim of a witch-hunt, etc, etc. Now, whenever you see someone criticizing LA's character, you know what's going to follow is a simplistic statement which is the result of Lance propaganda. I'm really sick of it. I don't give a $#@! about LA's character, personality, etc. He got exactly what he deserved, and what he got was--as anyone who actually followed the process of the Reasoned Decision knows--entirely fair. Armstrong's current situation is entirely the result of his own decisions. No witch-hunt, no straw men. And one on one, he's a really nice guy. The sweetest justly-punished cheat you'll ever meet.
I feel a great deal of compassion for Rick Springfield.
Users browsing this forum: veganrob, Yahoo [Bot] and 4 guestsBack to top