Official Lance Armstrong Thread **READ POST #1 BEFORE POSTING**

[BroDeal]

http://www.latimes.com/news/local/la-me-0228-lance-armstrong-ballot-20110228,0,880722.story

I expect to see an awful lot more of this in the coming weeks.
"He's too valuable to prosecute!" will be the mantra.

As if taxes on cigs were not already ridiculously high. I cannot wait for the $1 tax for obesity research on every fast food meal.

Maybe he should levy a $1 tax on every dose of steroids.

 

[Granville57]

I cannot wait for the $1 tax for obesity research on every fast food meal.

That'll put quite a dent in this:
http://www.mcdonalds.com/us/en/food/meal_bundles/dollar_menu.html

Oh wait, maybe that was the whole point. The research is in!

 

[thirteen]

http://www.latimes.com/news/local/la-me-0228-lance-armstrong-ballot-20110228,0,880722.story

I expect to see an awful lot more of this in the coming weeks.
"He's too valuable to prosecute!" will be the mantra.

um, why go to Los Angeles to do this??? something wrong with his own backyard?

 

[BroDeal]

That'll put quite a dent in this:
http://www.mcdonalds.com/us/en/food/meal_bundles/dollar_menu.html

Oh wait, maybe that was the whole point. The research is in!

A quick google finds this current article.

http://articles.latimes.com/2011/feb/25/business/la-fi-lazarus-20110225

A proposed one cent per ounce tax on all beverages sweetened with sugar or corn syrup. Those crazy Californians. What will they think of next?

EDIT: Found the answer. A one cent tax on every 500 calories of fast food.

http://www.californiahealthline.org...t-obesity-by-expanding-proposed-soda-tax.aspx

 

[Dr. Maserati]

http://www.latimes.com/news/local/la-me-0228-lance-armstrong-ballot-20110228,0,880722.story


I expect to see an awful lot more of this in the coming weeks.
"He's too valuable to prosecute!" will be the mantra.

Correct - the 'Global Campaign' war on cancer has been ditched (did we win?) to concentrate on cancer in California - this was already evident in this earlier NYT piece announcing LA's retirement:

Now with more time on his hands, Armstrong is set to co-chair an initiative in California pushing for a tobacco tax that will directly benefit cancer research. He was asked to be the face of the campaign, taping television commercials and radio spots and starring on billboards to promote the issue to California voters, said Doug Ulman, chief executive of the Lance Armstrong Foundation.

 

[Cheat Or Be Cheated]

Correct - the 'Global Campaign' war on cancer has been ditched (did we win?) to concentrate on cancer in California - this was already evident in this earlier NYT piece announcing LA's retirement:

I think that is to be expected now that he has retired from global cycling. I believe they were getting lots of complaints about the travel expenses as well. Some people are never happy....

 

[Dr. Maserati]

I think that is to be expected now that he has retired from global cycling. I believe they were getting lots of complaints about the travel expenses as well. Some people are never happy....

So he has more free time but is going to do less travelling?
Why do you expect a significant drop in the travel expences? Did he sell his jet?

 

[Cheat Or Be Cheated]

So he has more free time but is going to do less travelling?
Why do you expect a significant drop in the travel expences? Did he sell his jet?

The global campaign was part of ComeBack 2. Campaign's don't last forever. It makes sense, now that he is not travelling the world for much publicised cycling races, that the campaign ends. If he goes to France now, for instance, it's not going to make anything like the media impact that it made last year. He has done good work in US states on banning smoking in public before, this is an extention of that. Most cancer charities hate lung cancer the most.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lzGofvQYWiU

 

[Dr. Maserati]

The global campaign was part of ComeBack 2. Campaign's don't last forever. It makes sense, now that he is not travelling the world for much publicised cycling races, that the campaign ends. If he goes to France now, for instance, it's not going to make anything like the media impact that it made last year. He has done good work in US states on banning smoking in public before, this is an extention of that. Most cancer charities hate lung cancer the most.

I thought campaigns ended when they had succeeded in their desired goal.

 

[Colm.Murphy]

The global campaign was part of ComeBack 2. Campaign's don't last forever. It makes sense, now that he is not travelling the world for much publicised cycling races, that the campaign ends. If he goes to France now, for instance, it's not going to make anything like the media impact that it made last year. He has done good work in US states on banning smoking in public before, this is an extention of that. Most cancer charities hate lung cancer the most.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lzGofvQYWiU

The gambit of having Lance be the front man for this cancer initiative campaign is nothing more than a sideways play at influencing a potential jury pool.

It is also part of keeping up an exterior of calm and acting as if nothing is amiss, despite the fact that the good ship Uniball has been taking on water for months and the usual "wind at their backs" has died down to nothing, sails slacked.

 

[Cheat Or Be Cheated]

The gambit of having Lance be the front man for this cancer initiative campaign is nothing more than a sideways play at influencing a potential jury pool.

I don't think when he was campaigning to ban smoking in Texas in 09 he had any idea that he would be prosecuted under some obscure act about federal sponsors.

 

[Colm.Murphy]

I don't think when he was campaigning to ban smoking in Texas in 09 he had any idea that he would be prosecuted under some obscure act about federal sponsors.

Probably not. I wonder how much payola he gets for these "campaigns"?

I wonder how these coalitions will react once he is indicted? Will he be yanked from the print/TV/radio/online blitz that they are assembling?

 

[webvan]

Yep, that's the way things go!

 

[Dr. Maserati]

I don't think when he was campaigning to ban smoking in Texas in 09 he had any idea that he would be prosecuted under some obscure act about federal sponsors.

He lives in Texas - not California.
Also you used the plural States about Lance and anti-smoking initiatives, which others States was he involved in?

Also, not only had Lance no idea he would be prosecuted under some obscure act about federal sponsors, I'd say he had no idea he might be prosecuted for taking, financing, trafficking, distribution of PEDs either.

 

[thirteen]

He lives in Texas - not California.
Also you used the plural States about Lance and anti-smoking initiatives, which others States was he involved in?

Also, not only had Lance no idea he would be prosecuted under some obscure act about federal sponsors, I'd say he had no idea he might be prosecuted for taking, financing, trafficking, distribution of PEDs either.

yes, which is why this should backfire big-time. we don't want him! i truly resent that he is grand-standing on my dime.

out of curiosity, which state are the depositions being taken? where would the case be tried?

 

[Dr. Maserati]

yes, which is why this should backfire big-time. we don't want him! i truly resent that he is grand-standing on my dime.

out of curiosity, which state are the depositions being taken? where would the case be tried?

The Grand Juries have been held in Los Angeles.

 

[Cheat Or Be Cheated]

He lives in Texas - not California.
Also you used the plural States about Lance and anti-smoking initiatives, which others States was he involved in?

I don't understand your point. He cares about anti smoking in Texas but not in California because he wasn't born there? Is that what you're saying?

California is a huge state which often takes the lead on issues like this. It's a good target for LiveStrong. The decision probably wasn't even taken by Armstrong btw - it's run by a board of members with its own executive.

Some people seem to think the charity should freeze all activities until this incoherent investigation is over. That's not how charities work.

Also, not only had Lance no idea he would be prosecuted under some obscure act about federal sponsors, I'd say he had no idea he might be prosecuted for taking, financing, trafficking, distribution of PEDs either.

That's speculation but we do know the initial reason was for this federal sponsor technicality.

 

[D-Queued]

...

Some people seem to think the charity should freeze all activities until this incoherent investigation is over. That's not how charities work.

...

Most of us have figured out how this charity works, and what its higher calling is.

Dave.

 

[Cheat Or Be Cheated]

Most of us have figured out how this charity works, and what its higher calling is.

Dave.

Maybe that says a lot about 'most of us'.

 

[D-Queued]

Maybe that says a lot about 'most of us'.

Pray tell.

Dave.

 

[thirteen]

The Grand Juries have been held in Los Angeles.

so he brings *his* fight to California of all states my, my, my, what a coincidence!

 

[Dr. Maserati]

I don't understand your point. He cares about anti smoking in Texas but not in California because he wasn't born there? Is that what you're saying?

California is a huge state which often takes the lead on issues like this. It's a good target for LiveStrong. The decision probably wasn't even taken by Armstrong btw - it's run by a board of members with its own executive.

Some people seem to think the charity should freeze all activities until this incoherent investigation is over. That's not how charities work.



That's speculation but we do know the initial reason was for this federal sponsor technicality.

You don't understand my point?

I thought it was easy - you said States, which other States besides Texas where he lives did he get involved in their anti smoking legislation?

 

[Oldman]

I don't understand your point. He cares about anti smoking in Texas but not in California because he wasn't born there? Is that what you're saying?

California is a huge state which often takes the lead on issues like this. It's a good target for LiveStrong. The decision probably wasn't even taken by Armstrong btw - it's run by a board of members with its own executive.

Some people seem to think the charity should freeze all activities until this coherent investigation is over. That's not how charities work.



That's speculation but we do know?the initial reason was for this federal sponsor technicality.

Fixed a few things for you. The Feds may be freezing assets because of improprieties disclosed by Livestrong staff who wish to stay out of trouble.

It is a coherent investigation, though not likely understood by those that don't want to understand. Do you know that the investigation is specifically based on "federal sponsor technicality"? That sounds like a legal term not discussed here before and perhaps you could explain it. Since you KNOW 'n all.

 

[Benotti69]

an interesting line from a certain Sociopath currently doing time..

And so, sitting alone with his therapist, in the prison khakis he irons himself, he seeks reassurance. “Everybody on the outside kept claiming I was a sociopath,” Madoff told her one day. “I asked her, ‘Am I a sociopath?’ ” He waited expectantly, his eyelids squeezing open and shut, that famous tic. “She said, ‘You’re absolutely not a sociopath. You have morals. You have remorse.’ ” Madoff paused as he related this. His voice settled. He said to me, “I am a good person.”

yeah right, that why he's doing 150 years inside. i suppose they only lock up 'good people', that's why LA will be happy on the inside away from all the bad ones on the outside.

Bernard Madoff, the disgraced financier, has denied being a sociopath and claimed that his victims should carry much of the blame for his $65bn (£40bn) fraud.

wonder will that come out of from the pr of our own favourite sociopath saying that folks knew they were just buying yella bracelets and not curing people.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/business/2011/feb/28/bernard-madoff-remorse-not-a-sociopath

original article

http://nymag.com/news/features/berniemadoff-2011-3/

 

[DomesticDomestique]

I know this thread has moved on a bit from the Demand, Google issue of a few days ago but I had a question that I feel needs to be asked. I would have posted earlier but I was waiting for my account to be activated, long time listener, first-time poster.

Anyway, are we really suggesting that Google is devoting all this time to shutting down a huge chunk of the Lance profit machine, while at the same time altering search terms and search results to help positively manipulate public perception of him and his accusers? While it seems that there is significant evidence of some sort of tampering on Google's part... "betsy andreu divorce," the bikezilla blog, etc. I find it hard to believe that they are so actively trying to damage Lance's business, while promoting his public image at the same time.

Can one of you explain this better for me?