Jenkins Speaks

[Velodude]

She is no worse than the gang here. This place is pretty pathetic as well.

But not so pathetic that you have posted, to date, 177 times.

 

[Aleajactaest]

But not so pathetic that you have posted, to date, 177 times.

Is that too many or too few? I post when I see something I feel like responding to.

I'd post more but there is a limit to how many torches and pitchfork parties I want to attend.

 

[peterst6906]

I'd post more but there is a limit to how many torches and pitchfork parties I want to attend.

Well if you didn't attend so many, you'd have more time to post here instead. Priorities, they're a killer.

 

[red_flanders]

Back to the topic.

 

[Benotti69]

She is no worse than the gang here. This place is pretty pathetic as well.

But you cant stay away.


Jenkins the paid shill. Hope the WP sees her for what she is, doing PR for the fraud.

 

[lean mean &green]

"Sometimes it is a real compliment to be out there on your own. My dad (longtime Sports Illustrated writer Dan Jenkins) taught me this – you take the prevailing attitude, you turn it upside down and you ask yourself if the opposite point of view is smarter. And, a lot of times it is. This does mean being out there on your own."
- Sally Jenkins

Dad's advice was quite good, it's a shame she didn't follow it when she should have - 10 or 12 years ago.

 

[Page Mill Masochist]

So a sports writer decides to write about his private failings and condemn him. Yet he played his sport by the rules.

The same writer defends a sports figure who systematically cheated and broke the rules.

Here is Sally Jenkins lecturing Barry Bonds.

And then here is Jenkins siding with Roger Clemens.

So let's sum up. Jenkins blasts Tiger Woods and Barry Bonds. But she goes easy on Joe Paterno and Clemens, and she celebrates Armstrong.

Does Jenkins adjust her standards by race? Gotta ask.

 

[Tom375]

Here is Sally Jenkins lecturing Barry Bonds.

And then here is Jenkins siding with Roger Clemens.

So let's sum up. Jenkins blasts Tiger Woods and Barry Bonds. But she goes easy on Joe Paterno and Clemens, and she celebrates Armstrong.

Does Jenkins adjust her standards by race? Gotta ask.

Incredible no other words for it! How can she call out Bonds and stick by Lance for what would appear (admittedly not overly familiar with Bond's case) to be exactly the same issue doping/cheating. If she applies the same logic to both cases she has to come up with the same answer. She managed not to. For what reason money? not wanting to admit she's wrong? Is she in love with Lance? I dunno but it stinks to high heaven..

 

[Hugh Januss]

She is no worse than the gang here. This place is pretty pathetic as well.

And it gets more so whenever you turn up.

 

[Hugh Januss]

Here is Sally Jenkins lecturing Barry Bonds.

And then here is Jenkins siding with Roger Clemens.

So let's sum up. Jenkins blasts Tiger Woods and Barry Bonds. But she goes easy on Joe Paterno and Clemens, and she celebrates Armstrong.

Does Jenkins adjust her standards by race? Gotta ask.

Interesting, never noticed that before. Sure seems like she has a double standard that aligns with skin color. Maybe she's never gone black?

 

[Pazuzu]

Here is Sally Jenkins lecturing Barry Bonds.

And then here is Jenkins siding with Roger Clemens.

So let's sum up. Jenkins blasts Tiger Woods and Barry Bonds. But she goes easy on Joe Paterno and Clemens, and she celebrates Armstrong.

Does Jenkins adjust her standards by race? Gotta ask.

Jenkins is a tool and an embarrassment. However, I found an instance of her supporting Marion Jones and reversing her assesment of Bonds. So it may not be fair to paint her as a racist.

"WADA is not working. Drug use has not been curbed, much less cured, at the elite level, while at the high school level upwards of 10 percent of boys may be using steroids, according to some estimates. Instead of solutions, we have showboat trials and vicious public condemnations of athletes such as Marion Jones. These are saddening, and they aren't getting us anywhere, except deeper into a vortex of bad law and science, black markets and failed social policy. During the home run chase, I excoriated Barry Bonds for everything from his collar size to his surliness, and I was wrong. What's needed is not sweeping judgment, but freer and more sympathetic discussion of the alternatives.

Basically, she's pro performance enhancing drugs. http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/10/11/AR2007101102285.html Still, I wonder how she feels about Armstrong taking PEDs with impunity while bringing down the heat on Hamilton? Even for Jenkins, you'd think this crosses an ethically boundary. I know, I know, it's not murder.. but still?

 

[Tom375]

Jenkins is a tool and an embarrassment. However, I found an instance of her supporting Marion Jones and her assesment of Bonds. So it may not be fair to paint her as a racist.

Agreed evidence is a bit sketchy to say the least - to make quite such a sweeping accusation as yet...

Basically, she's pro performance enhancing drugs.

Hilarious - wonder what made her change her mind? Lancey baby? Book deals baby? , not wanting to look like the biggest kretin in journalism since A. K. *** of the Times covered Chemical Ali's pronouncement s of the war in Iraq as the truth.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/10/11/AR2007101102285.html Still, I wonder how she feels about Armstrong taking PEDs with impunity while bringing down the heat on Hamilton? Even for Jenkins, you'd think this crosses an ethically boundary. I know, I know, it's not murder.. but still?

Hmm gotta feeling she's got no problem crossing ethical boundaries - just like Lance didn't..

 

[Merckx index]

Jenkins is a tool and an embarrassment. However, I found an instance of her supporting Marion Jones and reversing her assesment of Bonds. So it may not be fair to paint her as a racist.

"WADA is not working. Drug use has not been curbed, much less cured, at the elite level, while at the high school level upwards of 10 percent of boys may be using steroids, according to some estimates. Instead of solutions, we have showboat trials and vicious public condemnations of athletes such as Marion Jones. These are saddening, and they aren't getting us anywhere, except deeper into a vortex of bad law and science, black markets and failed social policy. During the home run chase, I excoriated Barry Bonds for everything from his collar size to his surliness, and I was wrong. What's needed is not sweeping judgment, but freer and more sympathetic discussion of the alternatives.

Basically, she's pro performance enhancing drugs. http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/10/11/AR2007101102285.html Still, I wonder how she feels about Armstrong taking PEDs with impunity while bringing down the heat on Hamilton? Even for Jenkins, you'd think this crosses an ethically boundary. I know, I know, it's not murder.. but still?

This is very interesting. So she's not as hypocritical as I thought. She came out for legalizing PEDs back in 2007, at a time when LA was retired and undergoing no investigations or under any kind of pressure suggesting he might be outed as a doper. I didn't realize this. It does make her support of LA's doping more consistent. She didn't become a born again PED supporter only after LA was sanctioned. And she retracted her earlier statements about Bonds. She apparently is capable of admitting mistakes.

OK, Sally looks better to me now. There's still a lot of problems about LA and her relationship to him that she's not acknowledging. She would have far more credibility if she admitted LA was not just another doper. But to argue for permitting PEDs is a valid position, even if unpopular.

 

[thehog]

This is very interesting. So she's not as hypocritical as I thought. She came out for legalizing PEDs back in 2007, at a time when LA was retired and undergoing no investigations or under any kind of pressure suggesting he might be outed as a doper. I didn't realize this. It does make her support of LA's doping more consistent. She didn't become a born again PED supporter only after LA was sanctioned. And she retracted her earlier statements about Bonds. She apparently is capable of admitting mistakes.

OK, Sally looks better to me now. There's still a lot of problems about LA and her relationship to him that she's not acknowledging. She would have far more credibility if she admitted LA was not just another doper. But to argue for permitting PEDs is a valid position, even if unpopular.

I think you might be forgetting the two books she penned whereby the story was he was clean.

If your stance is the permitting of doping then good. But to flog two books under the guise of the opposite is not only hypocritical but sick. Especially when the theme is cancer survival.

 

[Merckx index]

I think you might be forgetting the two books she penned whereby the story was he was clean.

If your stance is the permitting of doping then good. But to flog two books under the guise of the opposite is not only hypocritical but sick. Especially when the theme is cancer survival.

Those books were published several years before she reversed her views on doping. So I don't see anything hypocritical about that, unless she knew all along that he was doping, which is a possibility. But if she did know, hypocrisy is the least of her sins.

In 2007 apparently she reversed her stand on PED use in sports. She was no longer writing books about LA then, nor even, as far as I know, writing columns about him. After all, he was retired at that point, and somewhat out of the news. If she still believed that LA had been clean those earlier years, there still would be nothing hypocritical about reversing her opinion at that point. Just because you think PED use in sports should be permitted doesn't mean you can't admire someone who you believe wins clean.

I agree with you about the cancer survival theme, though. It does smack of hypocrisy to support use of substances that may promote cancer, which may possibly have even caused LA's cancer. It would be very interesting to see her response to that. If it could somehow be proven that PED use did cause or make more likely LA's cancer, I wonder how she would continue to support their use.

 

[Oldman]

You are all thinking too much. A biographer for hire maintains their franchise, particularly if the subject is controversial. Lance has always about myth manufacture and maintenence so I'm thinking she's already working on the next story. He's still got enough money to pay her even if his tome of resurrection doesn't sell.

 

[simo1733]

I am sure that the next book would out sell the previous volumes.I would certainly buy it.Like watching a car crash.A terrible thing but you can't turn away.

 

[veganrob]

I am sure that the next book would out sell the previous volumes.I would certainly buy it.Like watching a car crash.A terrible thing but you can't turn away.

If there is another book, pease do not buy it. You would be contributing to the farce and is exactly what they want.

 

[lean mean &green]

Jenkins is a tool and an embarrassment. However, I found an instance of her supporting Marion Jones and reversing her assesment of Bonds. So it may not be fair to paint her as a racist.

"WADA is not working. Drug use has not been curbed, much less cured, at the elite level, while at the high school level upwards of 10 percent of boys may be using steroids, according to some estimates. Instead of solutions, we have showboat trials and vicious public condemnations of athletes such as Marion Jones. These are saddening, and they aren't getting us anywhere, except deeper into a vortex of bad law and science, black markets and failed social policy. During the home run chase, I excoriated Barry Bonds for everything from his collar size to his surliness, and I was wrong. What's needed is not sweeping judgment, but freer and more sympathetic discussion of the alternatives.

Basically, she's pro performance enhancing drugs. http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/10/11/AR2007101102285.html Still, I wonder how she feels about Armstrong taking PEDs with impunity while bringing down the heat on Hamilton? Even for Jenkins, you'd think this crosses an ethically boundary. I know, I know, it's not murder.. but still?

interesting quotes from jenkins. this is a wonderful example of ignorance about an issue and emotional reasoning. it appears to be the only tools her feeble mind has to work with.

 

[Fortyninefourteen]

interesting quotes from jenkins. this is a wonderful example of ignorance about an issue and emotional reasoning. it appears to be the only tools her feeble mind has to work with.

Classic. Exactly the way my ex-wife would argue. To the death.

 

[thehog]

Those books were published several years before she reversed her views on doping. So I don't see anything hypocritical about that, unless she knew all along that he was doping, which is a possibility. But if she did know, hypocrisy is the least of her sins.

In 2007 apparently she reversed her stand on PED use in sports. She was no longer writing books about LA then, nor even, as far as I know, writing columns about him. After all, he was retired at that point, and somewhat out of the news. If she still believed that LA had been clean those earlier years, there still would be nothing hypocritical about reversing her opinion at that point. Just because you think PED use in sports should be permitted doesn't mean you can't admire someone who you believe wins clean.

I agree with you about the cancer survival theme, though. It does smack of hypocrisy to support use of substances that may promote cancer, which may possibly have even caused LA's cancer. It would be very interesting to see her response to that. If it could somehow be proven that PED use did cause or make more likely LA's cancer, I wonder how she would continue to support their use.

I agree with MarkW on all of this. Cycling is a filthy cesspit and even the cyclists can’t admit to the troubles that cycling has.

If you add up the data from rider comments and people like Jenkins almost all are saying; “it was a long time ago” – “Without a positive test is it really doping?” etc.

From Wiggins, to Horner, to Sanchez, to Contador, to Jenkins the general reaction is “no positive test – clean” or “what’s the big deal”.

I agree with you also on Jenkins. She’s not moved far from her stance. However, point being that if Armstrong never had been unveiled she’d still be pretending he’s clean. That’s the difference.

 

[Velodude]

If there is another book, pease do not buy it. You would be contributing to the farce and is exactly what they want.

Maybe the new book will be hard to find in bookstores if it has been accurately shelved in the fiction section.

 

[Barnaby]

Maybe the new book will be hard to find in bookstores if it has been accurately shelved in the fiction section.

Perhaps they could file it in the 'Mental Wellbeing' section. Thats where SJ will be lurking.

 

[Fortyninefourteen]

Maybe the new book will be hard to find in bookstores if it has been accurately shelved in the fiction section.

Or sold in 4" rolls, perforated every 4 "........

 

[MacRoadie]

Maybe the new book will be hard to find in bookstores if it has been accurately shelved in the fiction section.

A more accurate location would be in the bathroom, on a spool, cut into 4"x4" perforated sheets...