If he cared so much about about curing cancer why didn’t he devote all that effort and dedication and all the ingenuity that he put into cheating, into learning to be a research scientist and actually doing something directly to try to cure cancer? Hundreds of thousands of scientists around the globe dedicate their lives to trying to find a cure for cancer, putting at least as much effort into it as mister fucking Lance put into pedal pushing, and most of them never see a scintilla of the hero worship that this fraud got for riding a fucking bike. Instead of doing something real for a cancer cure, he squeezed the odd dollar here and there out of some of the sports fans he was conning into believing he was a superman, as an incidental effect of all the effort he put in pushing pedals up and down and hiding his mendacity.
Or why didn’t he go into business, into Wall Street, say? With all his fucking dedication and willpower, and low cunning, he might have been a big That way he could have made some real money that he could have donated cancer research, instead of squeezing it in dribs and drabs out of other people. (And if those donors really care about helping people with cancer, why the fuck do they need to see a guy riding a bike before they will give money?) Riding a bike in the hope of persuading people to give you donations is a ludicrously inefficient way of raising money for anything. If what you care about is actually curing cancer, there are many, many better, far more efficient ways of contributing to that goal. But this lying asshole did not care a damn about curing cancer. He was already cured. He just cared about the glory and the adulation he got from the idiot fans he had taken in. All the charity stuff was just one more layer of self aggrandizement, of getting the world to love and lick his lying ass.
Well, those people are shitty and horrible, for wanting money back from a cancer-fighting organization just because one guy turns out to have cheated at a sport. You should be more pissed off about those people than you are about Lance Stupid Armstrong, and if you weren’t so blinded by your athlete idolization, you would be.
The short answer is no, probably. The statute of limitations under US federal law is five years. If UCI can prove that Armstrong conspired to cover up his doping, maybe. They could get a judgment somewhere else, of course, but it’d be hard to get it domesticated here.
You know he worked hard even with the doping, right?
It’s not as if he just injected himself with this wonder drug, sad on his arse all day watching friends and the simpsons or whatever it was lazy people did in 2002 and sauntered off to win a tour de france every year.
He worked just as hard as all the other atheletes (who by the way were almost all doping as well). He just had a bit of help. Being a professional athelete is extremely difficult.
And yeah, I totally agree with the advice about not putting atheletes on a pedestal. Then you just look as silly as the OP.
Whoa. Lookitchoo swinging a big stick of assumption. I don’t cotton to athletes one bit and surely don’t idolize them.
My OP rants about a charlatan, a whore, a fraud. A trickster. He could be from any walk of life. The enormity of his scam and the leverage of guilt/ hope used on cancer survivors and families and friends of victims is the source of the outrage. I could give two shits if he’s a jock.
ETA: You too, Simple Linctus. No pedestals. No adoration. What an amusing way to give Lance a pass…
Good point but I think you also have to weigh that against the fact that he heartily upset one very disappointed Cartooniverse. And really, isn’t that what’s important here?
Could you flesh that out a bit? I don’t get it. Are you saying he gave false hope because he only came back from cancer because of drugs? That would be a weird thing to say.
Again, who was scammed, and what were they scammed out of?
You said:
What does this have to do with cheating at bike racing? If this was an issue with LiveStrong, that seems to be an entirely separate thing from Lance Armstrong’s doping or not doping. If LiveStrong took money and used it inappropriately, that would indeed be scammy. Do you have evidence of this? Were you upset about this before you heard about Lance Armstrong’s doping, or did you just decide that since Lance Armstrong used drugs, therefore the charity he started (but does not, I believe, personally administrate) must also somehow be shady? I don’t follow your logic.
Let us imagine that a highly decorated army veteran (Medal of Honor, Purple Heart, etc.) starts a very successful charity that helps other army veterans. He is charismatic, humble, loved and respected by all, and scores several lucrative product endorsements as a result of his status.
And then one day people discovered he had been lying to them for years and years: turns out he was never in the army at all.
However you feel about Armstrong, would you feel the same way about this fraudulent army veteran?
IMHO, Armstrong is guilty of massive fraud. Certainly fraud against sponsors like Nike, who gave him (not his charity) big money on the premise of his having won the TdF numerous times without cheating. And yes, to a lesser degree he defrauded people who donated to his charity based on his representation of what effective cancer treatment can do (“I lost one ball to cancer, and look at me, I was still able to become a world-class athlete”).
Did this hypothetical charity actually help other army veterans as it purported to do? Then I feel the same about this hypothetical charity as I feel about LiveStrong, namely that it seems like an above-board charity and nobody should feel bad about having donated money to it. As for the veteran, who cares? I think Lance Armstrong sounds like a douche who cheated at a sport. This hypothetical veteran is also a douche, who lied about his service. But both of them, in addition to being douches, put together a large charity that helped lots of people. The former does not negate the latter.
No one is saying people with a legitimate and legal beef with the guy shouldn’t pursue action against him. We’re simply saying you don’t need to act like Armstrong personally shat on your lawn.
They should if they thought any significant portion of their money was going to find a cure. LiveStrong predominantly spends its money on promoting itself, promoting Lance as an idealized cancer survivor / role model and promoting cancer awareness. They don’t do a whole heck of a lot direct donations for anything, especially toward research.
LiveStrong and Lance look to have been a novel marketing approach to keeping his name and image marketable and promotable long after his racing career was over. If it does a little good along the way, that is all most people need to legitimize it.
Tens of millions in donations, tens of millions in revenue from merchandise sales, and yet they are down to less than $6 million in direct grant aid. Out of more than $46 million in revenue.*
I don’t doubt they are doing some good, but they are lining a lot of pockets with donor money along the way. Heck Salaries alone exceed grant contributions.
My two questions are how does that rate of return on donations compare with other prominent charities and for how long has it been at that level of grants vs salaries. Because frankly, this seems irrelevant to doping and more about people not bothering to research the charities they’re donating to.
This is my point also. I don’t know a damn thing about LiveStrong. But if it was a good charity before Lance Armstrong was found to be doping, it still is. And if it wasn’t, it isn’t. I honestly do not get the whole, “But he was doping so now all those dollars donated to charity were SCAMMED instead of LEGITIMATELY COLLECTED FOR CHARITY.” It’s this weird retconning that seems to pretty much stem from people’s personal sense of outrage that Armstrong is a cheater rather than any legitimate concern about what the charity is doing or whatever.
