|
Post by DannyA on Feb 21, 2013 0:56:39 GMT -5
Yep. He's out of pro sports for life. But the purpose of his Oprah interview was a chance to get back in. Now he's blown that. Hubris. Ego. Dickishness.
And avoiding to have to answer harder questions than the relative softballs Oprah tossed him.
|
|
|
Post by Darren on Feb 21, 2013 2:10:03 GMT -5
None of this makes any sense. The guy's got a serious screw loose.
|
|
|
Post by nycbiscuit on Apr 23, 2013 21:08:10 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by henchman on Apr 23, 2013 21:21:36 GMT -5
Awesome!!!!
|
|
|
Post by DannyA on Apr 24, 2013 0:31:06 GMT -5
His house of cards tumbles down.
Liar. Cheat. Bully. Criminal. Doper. Felon.
Yet some still admire his "spirit."
|
|
|
Post by boots on Apr 24, 2013 10:37:08 GMT -5
His "spirit"?
Or his blatant narcissism?
We tend to confuse the two in this country and reward those who behave badly, failing to call them out.
This guy made a mockery of everything he said he held dear.
Con man.
|
|
|
Post by Duck on May 1, 2013 20:24:30 GMT -5
I think the idea of people who sponsored him in the past suing for their money back is silly. They benefitted from their association with him during the term of the contract. That's what they paid the money for.
I wonder if Hertz ever tried to sue OJ Simpson to get their money back?
|
|
|
Post by nycbiscuit on May 1, 2013 21:52:58 GMT -5
"The people" suing him would be the taxpaying public.
|
|
|
Post by Hazza on May 1, 2013 22:11:39 GMT -5
But how much did the USPS make off of him? I'm not disagreeing with you, but Duck has a good point.
|
|
|
Post by DannyA on May 2, 2013 8:34:10 GMT -5
Not enough apparently. And I, like most people, had no idea tax dollars were supporting his team.
|
|
|
Post by Duck on May 2, 2013 9:26:53 GMT -5
I think there are some misimpressions here about the exact nature of the USPS's funding.
|
|
|
Post by DannyA on May 2, 2013 9:42:48 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by boots on May 2, 2013 9:54:12 GMT -5
Seeing as several people on this board, who I believe to be well read and "aware", didn't know that Lance Armstrong was sponsored at this level by the USPS, would lead me to question the study that was commissioned to show that the USPS reaped tangible rewards from this sponsorship in the millions.
Pfft, we all know about "studies".
|
|
|
Post by Duck on May 2, 2013 10:47:02 GMT -5
What in that article leads you to believe that U.S. tax dollars supported Armstrong or the cycling team?
|
|
|
Post by Duck on May 2, 2013 10:53:52 GMT -5
Seeing as several people on this board, who I believe to be well read and "aware", didn't know that Lance Armstrong was sponsored at this level by the USPS, would lead me to question the study that was commissioned to show that the USPS reaped tangible rewards from this sponsorship in the millions. Pfft, we all know about "studies". By the same token, that line of thought pretty much dismisses the case that they were damaged in any way by the association, as they claim. It's silly to me to hear them argue that they were damaged by their association with the premier name in cycling 10 or more years ago and now they are putting considerable effort into reminding everyone of their association with Armstrong. Are they going to sue themselves next?
|
|