kurtinsc said:I certainly can't blame the charity for using the connection to increase their fund raising.
While I agree with almost 100% of what you're saying, it's this part that I have a little trouble with.
I think the statement "can't blame the charity for using the connection" is somewhat disingenuous. The "connection" is such that Lance Armstrong and the LAF are, for all intents and purposes, while separate entities, virtually inseparable. It's more like an indelible bond.
To use your scenario, let's assume in some alternate reality that the LAF did, in fact actually consider using Cadel Evans (or even George Hincapie). Lance Armstrong is the named founder of LAF, he sits on it's board, and he has long been the sole public face of the LAF. It's like using Fords in a Chevy commercial, or trying to use a fat person to promote Jenny Craig (oh sorry, they tried that
"Hey Lance, we're thinking about going with Alberto in our new print ads. He already has that whole Astana yellow thing going so it'd be a perfect fit. How does that work for you?"
To my mind, to say you "can't blame the charity for using the connection" suggests that they are simply making a logical choice with regard to their spokesperson, when in fact they really have no choice. As long as companies that hitch their wagon to the LAF need a spokesman, Lance will have a job.
Of course in my mind, it's entirely up to them who they use, just as it is entirely up to me who I chose to donate money to, as well as how thouroughly I research my chosen charities.