Page 13 of 16 FirstFirst ... 3 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 LastLast
Results 301 to 325 of 381
  1. #301
    mtbr member
    Reputation: petersbike's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Posts
    156
    It is funny how alot of people minimize the significance of Lance Armstrong's actions. He allegedly used PEDs, threatened teammates, sued individuals for saying he used PEDs, sued companies for saying he used PEDs, openly lied to the public, cycling enthusiasts, and to those who supported Livestrong.
    Their rationalization of 'it is only bicycle racing' and 'get a grip' .' It wasn't Wall Street or something important, so the cheating is not that bad'. 'Everyone was doing it.'

    Thank your lucky stars it was just bike racing ; Otherwise he may have been likely to murder people to keep his secrets.

  2. #302
    Rogue Exterminator
    Reputation: kjlued's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Posts
    4,874
    Quote Originally Posted by petersbike View Post

    Thank your lucky stars it was just bike racing ; Otherwise he may have been likely to murder people to keep his secrets.
    Yeah, likely.

    I mean if millions of dollars, his company, sponships, and whole lively hood would have been involved, surely he would have killed somebody......oh wait, never mind.

  3. #303
    It's about showing up.
    Reputation: Berkeley Mike's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    11,511
    Quote Originally Posted by Fiskare View Post
    Along the lines of what Blueliner said........I learned that if LA had spoken first he could have outed the entire freakin peloton, and kept his Tour victories. So he who rats last is the only true scum? What a load of dung!

    But wait, I was going for levity, so....
    Many in the sport are better off because he held his ground and threw no one under the bus. It is a perverse sort of honor whether that was his intention or not.

    I've seen these guys (Tyler, Floyd) hold their ground and deny and then finally give in. It is a strange behavior; tough-minded men, right or wrong, in a tight spot going as far as they can.

    In my book such transgressions are venal, that is: It does not concern a "grave matter". At worst they are crooks instead of murderers, their cohort is undefined, and the mob bosses get off scot-free. Who actually was complicit and until what point? You don't see Postal stepping up to return any soiled money.

    More than anything it rankles and makes me think twice about casting the first stone. I'm sure this is going to sound strange but my heart goes out to these guys and to all they effected.
    I don't rattle.

  4. #304
    mtbr member
    Reputation: petersbike's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Posts
    156
    Quote Originally Posted by kjlued View Post
    Yeah, likely.

    I mean if millions of dollars, his company, sponships, and whole lively hood would have been involved, surely he would have killed somebody......oh wait, never mind.
    According to you 'wrong is wrong, except when it's okay'.

    Refer to fencepost.

  5. #305
    Rogue Exterminator
    Reputation: kjlued's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Posts
    4,874
    Quote Originally Posted by petersbike View Post
    According to you 'wrong is wrong, except when it's okay'.

    Refer to fencepost.
    Yup, that is exactly what I said.

    Refer to fence post.

  6. #306
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Fiskare's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Posts
    548
    Quote Originally Posted by Berkeley Mike View Post
    I'm sure this is going to sound strange but my heart goes out to these guys and to all they effected.
    Doesn't sound strange to me. Apparently the whole thing was dirty, and winning required getting into the mud with everyone else. I see no difference between Landis and Armstrong except that Armstrong went all in and Landis caved like a simpering pantywaist, and then took money under false pretenses from adoring fans.

    So yep, Armstrong is the most evil of them all....NOT!

  7. #307
    Rogue Exterminator
    Reputation: kjlued's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Posts
    4,874
    Quote Originally Posted by Berkeley Mike View Post
    Many in the sport are better off because he held his ground and threw no one under the bus. It is a perverse sort of honor whether that was his intention or not.

    I've seen these guys (Tyler, Floyd) hold their ground and deny and then finally give in. It is a strange behavior; tough-minded men, right or wrong, in a tight spot going as far as they can.

    In my book such transgressions are venal, that is: It does not concern a "grave matter". At worst they are crooks instead of murderers, their cohort is undefined, and the mob bosses get off scot-free. Who actually was complicit and until what point? You don't see Postal stepping up to return any soiled money.

    More than anything it rankles and makes me think twice about casting the first stone. I'm sure this is going to sound strange but my heart goes out to these guys and to all they effected.
    Good post and no it does not sound strange at all.



    Quote Originally Posted by Fiskare View Post
    Doesn't sound strange to me. Apparently the whole thing was dirty, and winning required getting into the mud with everyone else. I see no difference between Landis and Armstrong except that Armstrong went all in and Landis caved like a simpering pantywaist, and then took money under false pretenses from adoring fans.

    So yep, Armstrong is the most evil of them all....NOT!


  8. #308
    mtbr member
    Reputation: petersbike's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Posts
    156
    Quote Originally Posted by kjlued View Post
    Well, I am sure I am one of those so called muppets lol

    I never stated I believed he was clean. In fact I said I believed he did it.
    I am pretty sure most the other "muppets" felt the same but I can't speak for them.
    I just wasn't going to throw him under the bus for his actions.
    I also did and still don't believe he owed a public apology.

    Now that there is proof, I still stand behind everything I said and understand why he did it, the fact that all the top guys were doing it, and the fact that he still beat all the other dopers. lol
    'wrong is wrong, except if it's okay'

  9. #309
    Cow Clicker
    Reputation: wmac's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2010
    Posts
    2,349
    Quote Originally Posted by kjlued View Post

    Since I don't agree and ask a simple question in which you still dance around, I am a troll? ok

    It's not that you don't agree, it's that your question is in the tone of trying to lead me into making a statement that you think you have a valid argument for, which you don't.

    First off I did watch it and I did get it.

    Then write something like, "Oh, wow, that is interesting. That helps me understand where you are coming from. The use of, multi-time best selling author and Duke University professor, Dan Airley's Ted talk to demonstrate how Lance's dishonesty has far reaching consequences puts this in perspective for me. I also understand that you never made the argument that all cheating is equal, but I'll make it just to drag this out because I refuse to admit I'm wrong, or have been wrong or will be wrong."

    However, it still boils down to saying all dishonesty is equal and in your long winded explanation you say the same thing.

    My response was "long winded" because I was hoping to explain my position to you in a clear and comprehensive way. At no time did the video or I make a claim that all dishonesty is equal. I used the video to demonstrate that seemingly minor, or seemingly less significant cheating, can have more negative consequences than the seemingly really big bad cheaters.

    I will agree, that you have some valid points about LA not being remorseful about what was done but instead about being caught. This is most likely true. If it was not, he would have come forward on his own. I am sure every single one of have done something in our life wrong and were caught for it. At first we may have only been remorseful because we got caught. Otherwise, I am sure we would have came forward on our before getting caught.

    I will agree that all dishonesty is wrong, however, I do not view it as all equal.

    If LA would have been doping in a field of clean athletes just because he couldn't make the grade, I view that to be more wrong then if he was staying clean, realized that all the top guys were doping and the only he would beat them was to dope.

    Do I still think it to be wrong? Yes
    Do I think it to be just as wrong? No
    Do I hold either to be as bad as what Bernie Madoff did?
    Hell no, as Bernie Madoff did what he did knowing it would destroy the lives of those he swindled.
    And your final statement sums up your position nicely. You don't know that Bernie Madoff didn't do what he did knowing it would destroy the lives of those he swindled any more than Lance Armstrong recognized he destroyed the lives of those racers who spent most of their youth and much of their young adult lives focused on the possibility of winning the Tour.

    Bernie Madoff "has become a 'hero' in prison, telling fellow inmates 'F--- my victims, I carried them for 20 years."

    He thought back then and still thinks today that he did them a favor and that they are ungrateful.

    Bernie Madoff's fraud was to the tune of $65 billion. Who knows how much Lance's fraud is valued at and combine all the other "little" cheaters' cheating in professional sports and it would surely surpass $65B.

    For you to continue to rationalize Lance's fraud as he had to do it and you understand, alluding to you would have done the same thing does hit on one of Airely's points in that the circumstances often dictates the outcome. Given the right circumstances, we would all cheat or be dishonest. The magnitude of the cheating or dishonesty is determined by the level of incentive to cheat.

    In Lance's case, he was given a scenario like this, "if you had the chance to be rich and famous, but you had to cheat, but you would never get caught, would you do it?"

    He sold his sole to the devil and now he should live the rest of eternity in Hell.

    And before you argue this any more, let me let you know this is a little personal for me. One of my friends had the dream of winning The Tour. After several Tours, he concluded that he just couldn't keep up and gave up on his professional riding career.

    I'm not saying he could have been a contender, but that story is echoed across the world as so many really talented people were forced to make a decision to either give up their dreams or cheat.

    I've read most of your arguments and they are weak at best. Stop rationalizing and defending Lance Armstong's fraudulent behavior. He is a bad person with no integrity. The more you rationalize and defend his behavior, the more I believe you are a person of low moral integrity.
    No, YOU don't understand. You're making an ass of yourself for all of eternity.

  10. #310
    mtbr member
    Reputation: petersbike's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Posts
    156
    Quote Originally Posted by kjlued View Post
    Again, I don't think so many people think it is OK to cheat just understand why he did.
    It goes back to something I asked earlier.

    If you busted your ass your whole life to get to the top and realized that you kept falling short because the guys on top were doping, what would you do? Would you chose to stay clean knowing you would never beat the dopers and just fade away losing potentially millions of dollars or do you throw your hat in the ring, do what the guys that are beating you are doing and hope to not get caught.

    I believe most people here are good people and would like to believe that under all adversity they would always do the right thing no matter what the consequences are. However, I think that many of us if faced with that adversity would be surprised on what we would do to get on the top.
    'Wrong is wrong, except when it's okay'

  11. #311
    Rogue Exterminator
    Reputation: kjlued's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Posts
    4,874
    Quote Originally Posted by petersbike View Post
    'wrong is wrong, except if it's okay'
    So where in that quote do you get wrong is wrong unless it is ok?

    Because I understand why somebody does something it doesn't mean I think it is ok.

  12. #312
    Rogue Exterminator
    Reputation: kjlued's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Posts
    4,874
    Quote Originally Posted by wmac View Post

    I've read most of your arguments and they are weak at best. Stop rationalizing and defending Lance Armstong's fraudulent behavior. He is a bad person with no integrity. The more you rationalize and defend his behavior, the more I believe you are a person of low moral integrity.
    And you trying to compare LA to Bernie Madoff is valid?
    That is a weak argument at best.

    Personally, I could care less what you feel my moral integrity is.
    Personally I think you are overly judgemental and extremely long winded.

    Climb off your soapbox.

  13. #313
    Cow Clicker
    Reputation: wmac's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2010
    Posts
    2,349
    Quote Originally Posted by aedubber View Post
    To compare this to Madoff shows complete idiotic logic. How many of you are jobless now, lost your money, savings funds since LA is guilty? None.

    Okay so he came clean big deal? What effect does this have to anyone posting in here? What have you gained or lost that you simply can't function ?

    Wall Street is the heart of America, it can crush over 300 million people within seconds..LA =just another user that finally got busted with others, that's all.
    Idiotic logic? Lots of people do not have jobs and careers were destroyed as a result of Lance Armstrong's fraud. Lots of people got rich off of Lance Armstrong's fraud.

    I am not going to neg rep you because I disagree with you. I am neg repping you because you used the term "idiotic logic" to describe my comparison of Madoff, who carried out the largest fraud in his profession to Armstrong, who carried out the largest fraud in his profession.

    They are both sociopaths with no remorse.

    Your argument is abrasive. Are you abrasive? You don't think this isn't a big deal? You come across as someone who is often dishonest and rationalizes that dishonesty and has no remorse for your rationalized dishonesty.
    No, YOU don't understand. You're making an ass of yourself for all of eternity.

  14. #314
    mtbr member
    Reputation: petersbike's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Posts
    156
    Quote Originally Posted by kjlued View Post
    Sure, we all would.
    I mean lets face it, even the TDF on dope isn't "exciting" to watch.
    As far as excitement goes, the few more minutes it would take wouldn't make a difference.

    Does the fact that everyone doped at that level make it "ok"?
    No

    However, the fact that everyone at that level doped made it necessary to win.

    I would bet money that lance not doping would have beaten every non doper.
    Lance not doping probably would have also beaten several of the dopers.

    So, what do you do if you busted your ass your whole life to win only to find out you won't win and nobody will know who you are because all the top people are doping.
    It is easy for all of us to say we will fight the good fight and not sully the results because we are not in that position. However, I would bet the majority of us that say we would never do what Lance did would do exactly what Lance did if presented the opportunity.

    If Lance would not have doped up, nobody would know his name at all.
    Instead the name of the next doper would be on our tongues.

    BTW, just out of curiosity who here could name the 2nd place winner of every year from 1999 to 2005? Unless you are seriously in to watching cycling I bet most people couldn't name the five 2nd place guys. I would even bet the majority of people could not name the guy that got 2nd place 3x's in those years even though he doped too.
    Yet, Lance Armstrongs name would still be the first to come to mind of the majority of people in the world when it comes to cycling.

    nuff said
    'wrong is wrong, except if it's okay'

  15. #315
    Rogue Exterminator
    Reputation: kjlued's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Posts
    4,874
    Quote Originally Posted by petersbike View Post
    'wrong is wrong, except if it's okay'
    WOW, are you really that that ignorant when it comes to reading comprehension?

    You just posted a quote that proves I said exactly the opposite of what you are trying to claim I said. Thanks for proving me right.

    Go back and reread the quote, it should be easy to find as it is separated from the rest of what I wrote.

  16. #316
    mtbr member
    Reputation: petersbike's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Posts
    156
    Quote Originally Posted by kjlued View Post
    Well said.

    I don't think anyone is saying it is ok because everyone is doing it.
    We are just saying we understand the nature of the beast.

    It is real easy to point fingers and call somebody a scumbag and say you would never do something but when millions of dollars are waved in your face, I am sure a lot of those attitudes will change.

    Say you won't and believe you won't if it makes you feel better but in reality everyone has a price they would be willing to pay to be on top.
    You should have wrote:

    'Say kjlued won't and believe kjlued won't if it makes kjlued feel better but in reality kjlued has a price kjlued would be willing to pay to be on top.

  17. #317
    Rogue Exterminator
    Reputation: kjlued's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Posts
    4,874
    Here let me help you

    Quote Originally Posted by kjlued View Post
    Sure, we all would.
    I mean lets face it, even the TDF on dope isn't "exciting" to watch.
    As far as excitement goes, the few more minutes it would take wouldn't make a difference.

    Does the fact that everyone doped at that level make it "ok"?
    No


    However, the fact that everyone at that level doped made it necessary to win.

    I would bet money that lance not doping would have beaten every non doper.
    Lance not doping probably would have also beaten several of the dopers.

    So, what do you do if you busted your ass your whole life to win only to find out you won't win and nobody will know who you are because all the top people are doping.
    It is easy for all of us to say we will fight the good fight and not sully the results because we are not in that position. However, I would bet the majority of us that say we would never do what Lance did would do exactly what Lance did if presented the opportunity.

    If Lance would not have doped up, nobody would know his name at all.
    Instead the name of the next doper would be on our tongues.

    BTW, just out of curiosity who here could name the 2nd place winner of every year from 1999 to 2005? Unless you are seriously in to watching cycling I bet most people couldn't name the five 2nd place guys. I would even bet the majority of people could not name the guy that got 2nd place 3x's in those years even though he doped too.
    Yet, Lance Armstrongs name would still be the first to come to mind of the majority of people in the world when it comes to cycling.

    nuff said

  18. #318
    Rogue Exterminator
    Reputation: kjlued's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Posts
    4,874
    Quote Originally Posted by petersbike View Post
    You should have wrote:

    'Say kjlued won't and believe kjlued won't if it makes kjlued feel better but in reality kjlued has a price kjlued would be willing to pay to be on top.
    Good one[/sarcasm]

  19. #319
    mtbr member
    Reputation: petersbike's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Posts
    156
    Quote Originally Posted by kjlued View Post
    WOW, are you really that that ignorant when it comes to reading comprehension?

    You just posted a quote that proves I said exactly the opposite of what you are trying to claim I said. Thanks for proving me right.

    Go back and reread the quote, it should be easy to find as it is separated from the rest of what I wrote.
    I know when I read your post I said to myself "goldmine". This guy kjlued has no integrity. He offers up this idea that doping is not okay but then justifies doping and cheating and also relates that everyone would do it and that everryone has a price . Seems to me that kjlued has a price and just cannot admit that he believes that cheating is okay at some price , or to preserve millions or to be remembered as a cycling champion.

  20. #320
    Rogue Exterminator
    Reputation: kjlued's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Posts
    4,874
    Quote Originally Posted by petersbike View Post
    I know when I read your post I said to myself "goldmine". This guy kjlued has no integrity. He offers up this idea that doping is not okay but then justifies doping and cheating and also relates that everyone would do it and that everryone has a price . Seems to me that kjlued has a price and just cannot admit that he believes that cheating is okay at some price , or to preserve millions or to be remembered as a cycling champion.
    Yeah, and when I read your posts on insisting I said something that I did not and continually dropping quotes that don't say what you are trying say I said, I think "idiot".
    This guy peter can't comprehend what he reads and then when I prove it, he then throws a red herring out there and tries insulting my integrity.

  21. #321
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Fiskare's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Posts
    548
    Quote Originally Posted by aedubber View Post
    What effect does this have to anyone posting in here? .
    Point taken, but I do know a few cancer survivors who are deep into Livestrong, both as a recipient of their offerings, and in support of the cause. One riding buddy of mine, and really a good friend too, loves to tell a story about riding with Lance at Ride for the Roses. It's his story, so I won't tell it, but it's a great memory for my friend. And that's all I have to say about that.

  22. #322
    Cow Clicker
    Reputation: wmac's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2010
    Posts
    2,349
    There's a difference between "I understand" in the Dan Airely sense and the "I understand" because you would do the same thing if you were presented the same opportunity because you rationalize that EVERYBODY would have done the same thing when presented the same opportunity.

    You are wrong. I'm overly judgmental and extremey long winded because I am disgusted by people, like you and aedubber, who rationalize dishonesty.
    No, YOU don't understand. You're making an ass of yourself for all of eternity.

  23. #323
    RideDirt
    Reputation: aedubber's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2011
    Posts
    2,237
    Wmac suk my dik ..thanks judge away loser

  24. #324
    mtbr member
    Reputation: petersbike's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Posts
    156
    Quote Originally Posted by kjlued View Post
    Yeah, and when I read your posts on insisting I said something that I did not and continually dropping quotes that don't say what you are trying say I said, I think "idiot".
    This guy peter can't comprehend what he reads and then when I prove it, he then throws a red herring out there and tries insulting my integrity.
    Just calling your BS out. Most of your posts allude to the idea that you believe that cheating is okay if it is done for the right reason(s).When you say that everyone has their price you are saying that it is okay at that point. At this amount of money it is okay for kjlued to cheat.

    Just don't include everyone else in your personal decisions.

  25. #325
    Rogue Exterminator
    Reputation: kjlued's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Posts
    4,874
    Quote Originally Posted by wmac View Post
    There's a difference between "I understand" in the Dan Airely sense and the "I understand" because you would do the same thing if you were presented the same opportunity because you rationalize that EVERYBODY would have done the same thing when presented the same opportunity.

    You are wrong. I'm overly judgmental and extremey long winded because I am disgusted by people, like you and aedubber, who rationalize dishonesty.
    That's cool because I get disgusted on how judgmental people can be and how quickly they like to cast stones. Usually they speak out so vigorously because they see something in them they that don't like. Maybe it is that you don't like the fact that you yourself are not 100% honest all the time.

    You say I am rationalizing dishonesty, but yet I have not done that.
    Rationalizing it would be saying that it is ok to do it because everyone else does it.
    As Peter so generously quoted for me, I said it was not ok and that I simply understand.
    I also acknowledge the fact that everyone including myself has been dishonest.
    This does not rationalize dishonesty by saying it is ok, I just choose not to cast stones at others because they make mistakes.

Page 13 of 16 FirstFirst ... 3 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •