< Back to front pageText size +

Cyclodrama

Posted by Charles P. Pierce  May 21, 2010 11:34 AM

E-mail this article

Invalid E-mail address
Invalid E-mail address

Sending your article

Now comes Floyd Landis, to argue that his career, his subsequent lawsuits, his bold defense of his human rights, and one entire book on which he put his name, were all pretty much what my old journalism prof would call barefaced non-facts. Not only that but, Floyd argues, it is just because he was such an accomplished hogwash artist that we should believe what he's saying now about Lance Armstrong, and about pretty much everyone else who's ridden a bicycle since Butch Cassidy fell into the corral.

As I always point out, this is not my drug frenzy, but, even if it were, I'd need an offer of proof beyond the argumentum ad hogwash and, no, citing The Canseco Precedent is not it. The people who get their plumbing in a knot over this stuff are the people insisting on more, better, and more intrusive drug testing. You cannot do that, and then dismiss negative testing results just because you don't like them. And, in the absence of an admission and/or a positive test, you can't simply decide who's using and who's not based on who you like and who you don't.

 

tall cyclist.jpg

 

Thinks he's above the law.

  • E-mail
  • E-mail this article

    Invalid E-mail address
    Invalid E-mail address

    Sending your article

    Your article has been sent.