Political influence to protect dopers

[Anonymous]

Perhaps, from a man's perspective.

From my perspective it explains a lot about the hubris of men such as Lance. The psychology of success and failure does help to explain a great deal, as Travis Tygart himself seems to suggest.

Garbage. The topic is (purchased) political influence. Feel free to post psychobabble in the appropriate thread.

 

[LauraLyn]

. . . . I'm guessing this kind of pay to play is so common that those involved are not all that concerned with plausible deniability anymore.

So this is not "psychobabble," but an article in The New York Times discussing an expert on the topic of why men fail is "psychobabble." I guess you have them all beat [except on spelling].

Of course, this is the thread you are posting the garbage in.

Garbage. The topic is (purchased) political influence. Feel free to post psychobabble in the appropriate thread.

Perhaps this can help you better understand the real psychology of Lance Armstrong and political influence:

http://www.guardian.co.uk/science/brain-flapping/2012/aug/24/prince-harry-lance-armstrong-psychology

 

[the big ring]

I wonder if the psychobabble increase in this thread is proportional to the perceived need to muddy the waters because we were getting somewhere. So the bot got kicked into action.

I mentioned the Planned Parenthood donation of Armstrong and how the very next day Birotte dropped the case. Immediately after mentioning that, the bot started posting drivel.

There's been no response from Feinstein or Boxer yet. And no counter from anywhere backing USADA - and there's been plenty of time to do so.

As I was doing some research on all these connections and whatnot, I found an interesting wiki type site.

http://www.corporationwiki.com/

It is interesting to plug in different names and coporations and see the connections. Barton Knaggs in particular, as an example, calls up a vast network of people. Like a very much watered down dimspace poster.

http://www.corporationwiki.com/graphs/roamer.aspx?id=35303218
http://www.corporationwiki.com/Texas/Austin/bart-knaggs/37725265.aspx
http://www.corporationwiki.com/Texas/Austin/bart-knaggs/101193329.aspx

This Barton Knaggs has more fingers in pies than a pieman with 20 fingers.

The scariest sounding corps to my way of thinking are the "Livestrong army of <insert state of your choice>" - very reminiscent of Scientology and the like.

Livestrong Army of Virginia, anyone?

http://www.corporationwiki.com/Texas/Austin/livestrong-army-of-virginia/81504707.aspx

 

[the big ring]

http://atuva.student.virginia.edu/organization/livestrongarmy/documentlibrary

Article II: PURPOSE
- The Lance Armstrong Foundation (LAF) is committed to supporting the cancer fight and offering concrete ways for survivors to help make cancer a national priority. Join us and other cancer groups to end the suffering caused by cancer.
As part of our national work, the LAF is organizing local LIVESTRONG Armies across the country. A local LIVESTRONG Army is a dynamic group of people who unite to make cancer a priority in their community, at the state level and across the country. Local LIVESTRONG armies can include:
- Grow the LIVESTRONG Army to demonstrate public support for making cancer a national priority and to gain the power necessary to effect change
- Raise public awareness about the need for cancer to be a national priority
- Raise money or initiate projects that fund or address cancer issues
- Demand leadership accountability on making cancer a national priority
- Advocate for the LAF's national policy agenda
- Advocate for issues of local concern”

Is it just me or does this sounds kinda political?

And what's with "making cancer a priority in the community"? That sounds so wrong. I prefer things that are worded positively, so I guess I reveal a bias here.

Far more prefer to see "cancer cured" or "making support for cancer affected people a priority in the community".

 

[Tinman]

I found a little more info on this... tl;dr:

Janury 31: Komen for the Cure drop Planned Parenthood funding for breast cancer screening & education (~$680k)
February 3rd: LAF donates $100k to PP, matching Mayor Bloomberg's
February 3rd: Komen reinstates funding to PP
February 4th: Birotte drops LA federal case

Big Ring I read your post and tried to search back on Birotte, struggled to find the link. Please re-state the obvious to you but not to me, what is the link between Birotte and PP/LAF donations on cancer screening?

I suspect this is important indeed, but for a novice like me I need it spelled out.

Thanks.

 

[the big ring]

Big Ring I read your post and tried to search back on Birotte, struggled to find the link. Please re-state the obvious to you but not to me, what is the link between Birotte and PP/LAF donations on cancer screening?

I suspect this is important indeed, but for a novice me I need more obvious links.

Thanks.

Feinstein is a CA Democrat. She recommended Birotte for the CA DA position to the president. Obama (democrat) nominated Birotte for the DA position. Komen pulling out of the PP funding was a politically motivated action (anti-abortion, essentially). CA tends to be pro-abortion.

Here's a description of the impact: http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/cal...lanned-parenthood-california-legislators.html

California Democratic lawmakers are joining the bandwagon of abortion rights advocates who are bashing the Susan G. Komen for the Cure foundation's yanking of funding from Planned Parenthood after the cancer nonprofit was targeted by anti-abortion groups.

Lance steps in and makes a good-will gesture. The next day, Birotte drops the Fed case with no explanation.

Curiously, STOPP claim there are studies that the contraceptive pill leads to breast cancer. So LAF supporing PP seems kinda dumb. Even if it is for breast cancer screening.

2 weeks after the case was dropped, look who was ponying up $1.5M in contributions to Californian law initiatives:
http://blog.livestrong.org/2012/02/...-5-million-in-support-of-californias-prop-29/

Today we announce our largest ever donation to support a state ballot initiative- California’s Proposition 29. We’re supporting for the life-saving initiative with a $1.5 million dollar gift so they can get the word out and urge Californians to VOTE YES on Prop 29. These gifts add to the nearly $1 million already given by ACS CAN and the California Division of the American Cancer Society, and $250,000 donated by the American Lung Association in California, bringing the campaign’s total giving effort to more than $4 million dollars.

$1.5M for cigarette price increase proposition 29 awareness.


6 months later, 23 US California state senators send a letter to Feinstein and Boxer to please beat up the USADA.

 

[twisted pairs]

So this is not "psychobabble," but an article in The New York Times discussing an expert on the topic of why men fail is "psychobabble." I guess you have them all beat [except on spelling].

blah ... blah ... blah

Please stop posting. You add no value here.

 

[Tinman]

Feinstein is a CA Democrat. She recommended Birotte for the CA DA position to the president. Obama (democrat) nominated Birotte for the DA position. Komen pulling out of the PP funding was a politically motivated action (anti-abortion, essentially). CA tends to be pro-abortion.

Here's a description of the impact: http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/cal...lanned-parenthood-california-legislators.html


Lance steps in and makes a good-will gesture. The next day, Birotte drops the Fed case with no explanation.

Curiously, STOPP claim there are studies that the contraceptive pill leads to breast cancer. So LAF supporing PP seems kinda dumb. Even if it is for breast cancer screening.

2 weeks after the case was dropped, look who was ponying up $1.5M in contributions to Californian law initiatives:
http://blog.livestrong.org/2012/02/...-5-million-in-support-of-californias-prop-29/



$1.5M for cigarette price increase proposition 29 awareness.


6 months later, 23 US California state senators send a letter to Feinstein and Boxer to please beat up the USADA.

Thanks a million, will be interesting for various folk I suspect, not only me.

Speculated Conclusion: USA District Attorney decides to drop the Fed case against Armstrong to pay back Armstrong for his Livestrong donation to further his CA political cause. Following this, Livestrong provides additional politically motivated funding to build further anti USADA lobby via CA senators.

I wonder how our "Livestrong CEO" can "live strong", being asked to do **** like this all day, real cancer patient research this stuff. It's always fascinated me how Lance refers to Doug as "Livestrong CEO" in his communications, obviously a very replaceable chap if he doesn't deliver the goods...

 

[LauraLyn]

Interesting article on the politics of doping in sports:

http://www.harmreductionjournal.com/content/9/1/33

"These wars on drugs and on doping share various features, such as similarities between policies based on zero-tolerance, repression and surveillance, black markets controlled by organized crime, attempts to shape internationally harmonized legal frameworks, ideology and political convenience anchored in media-fuelled moral outrages."

"The case [Claudia Pechstein] also highlights the difficulties for the CAS to rule in such complicated cases, because of the entangling of scientific, legal, economical, political and personal interests."

 

[LauraLyn]

. . . . Speculated Conclusion: USA District Attorney decides to drop the Fed case against Armstrong to pay back Armstrong for his Livestrong donation to further his CA political cause. Following this, Livestrong provides additional politically motivated funding to build further anti USADA lobby via CA senators.

I wonder how our "Livestrong CEO" can "live strong", being asked to do **** like this all day, real cancer patient research this stuff. It's always fascinated me how Lance refers to Doug as "Livestrong CEO" in his communications, obviously a very replaceable chap if he doesn't deliver the goods...

Your speculated conclusion makes sense. But I think it is even simpler. The Feds dropped the case because they were not prepared to take it to a jury in the current "Armstrong atmosphere" among the general public. Even today it would be too risky. They handed off to USADA, and they are waiting in the wings.

Really nothing "wonders" me about LiveStrong and cancer - except that people give money to it and support it.

 

[Tinman]

Interesting article on the politics of doping in sports:

http://www.harmreductionjournal.com/content/9/1/33

But how does doping in sports affect LA's position with Livestrong's cancer research funding?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chatterbot

 

[LauraLyn]

But how does doping in sports affect LA's position with Livestrong's cancer research funding?

http://fundraisingcoach.com/2012/08/24/3-ways-the-lance-armstrong-foundation-can-survive/

Turing machine correction to your url. [I still think it won't work.]

 

[Tinman]

Turing machine correction to your url. [I still think it won't work.]

smart, accurate, and damned fast...

 

[silverrocket]

But how does doping in sports affect LA's position with Livestrong's cancer research funding?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chatterbot

This is fascinating. It really does seem like we have our very own chatterbot in the forum, and it will be interesting to see if the posts are aimed at clogging or disrupting the thread, random deflections of threads away from topics the chatterbot's "master" would rather not have discussed, or if there are actual clues in the direction the chatterbot is attempting to deflect conversation towards.

 

[Tinman]

This is fascinating. It really does seem like we have our very own chatterbot in the forum, and it will be interesting to see if the posts are aimed at clogging or disrupting the thread, random deflections of threads away from topics the chatterbot's "master" would rather not have discussed, or if there are actual clues in the direction the chatterbot is attempting to deflect conversation towards.

Mate it's starting to keep me awake at night. Between the fascination around the building LA/UCI story, as well as this bot/LL thing I am getting less sleep daily. Your suggestions will not allow me any sleep at all, I've tried to make some sense of it over the last week, struggling to be honest. Anyone got any bot-trap ideas? LL?

 

[trailrunner]

Perhaps, from a man's perspective.

Don't invoke the gender card. It's off topic.

 

[Tinman]

This is fascinating. It really does seem like we have our very own chatterbot in the forum

Still don't think so. Check link with the latest chatterbots and what they can do, nowhere near LL's level of sophistication.

http://www.chatterboxchallenge.com/

 

[Cycle Chic]

Still don't think so. Check link with the latest chatterbots and what they can do, nowhere near LL's level of sophistication.

http://www.chatterboxchallenge.com/

Tinman having a conversation with himself - oops I meant Laura Lyn - one and the same huh

 

[Microchip]

smart, accurate, and damned fast...

Maybe "it" is "Watson". It beat the contestants in Jeopardy.

 

[Anonymous]

So this is not "psychobabble," but an article in The New York Times discussing an expert on the topic of why men fail is "psychobabble." I guess you have them all beat [except on spelling].

Of course, this is the thread you are posting the garbage in.



Perhaps this can help you better understand the real psychology of Lance Armstrong and political influence:

http://www.guardian.co.uk/science/brain-flapping/2012/aug/24/prince-harry-lance-armstrong-psychology

Perhaps you can stay on topic. Maybe you can explain how the NY Times article has anything to do with this thread. You deem it interesting? So what.

 

[Anonymous]

Interesting article on the politics of doping in sports:

http://www.harmreductionjournal.com/content/9/1/33

Is this on topic?

 

[Anonymous]

This is fascinating. It really does seem like we have our very own chatterbot in the forum, and it will be interesting to see if the posts are aimed at clogging or disrupting the thread, random deflections of threads away from topics the chatterbot's "master" would rather not have discussed, or if there are actual clues in the direction the chatterbot is attempting to deflect conversation towards.

What's even more interesting is the mods seem not to mind/care.

 

[thirteen]

What's even more interesting is the mods seem not to mind/care.

i think "it" may be beyond their capability.

sad, really.

 

[Bala Verde]

Deleted off topic posts; please continue the conversation on politics/political influence and LA doping.

 

[the big ring]

I wonder how our "Livestrong CEO" can "live strong", being asked to do **** like this all day, real cancer patient research this stuff. It's always fascinated me how Lance refers to Doug as "Livestrong CEO" in his communications, obviously a very replaceable chap if he doesn't deliver the goods...

Our?

"being asked to do **** like this all day, [instead of?] real cancer patient research this stuff."? <--- this sentence makes no sense.

They haven't been cancer research for years.