- Feb 10, 2010
- 10,645
- 20
- 22,510
D-Queued said:I'm still trying to reconcile this nonsense.
True to past examples, it must mean that there is bad news about to be announced on one or more of the lawsuits. Lance just trying to lay down a smokescreen.
With respect to Mercier, though, maybe he didn't dope back then but what is he on now? How much did Lance pay him for the about face.
As a reminder, this was the tune that Mercier was singing just two years ago:
"One of the most powerful athletes in the world has been held accountable for his actions," said Scott Mercier
...
Mercier said that about four months ago, when Armstrong's doping past really became a part of the public conversation, he had a frank conversation with his wife.
"'Honey,' she said, 'aren't you glad you're not coming home and sitting down with your son and daughter - telling your kids that you're a lying fraud.'"
Some people are willing to do whatever it takes to win.
As for Armstrong's now-stripped away titles, he's not sure Armstrong couldn't have won without the drugs. As Armstrong has now said, he wanted to be a part of a level playing field by also doping - Mercier just doesn't think that's a legitimate argument.
Ok, Scott, how much did Lance pay you for the infomercial???
Dave.
It was hypnosis! Another one of Cycling's infamous ocular events.
"Look into my eyes Bro. Repeat after me, Lance Armstrong was the best evar."
Or, "These are not the droids you are looking for." moment depending on your preferences.
