Mid-Life Cycling

Mid-Life Cycling

28 April 2016

Lance Or The Donald?

A few weeks ago, in a comment on one of my posts, a reader mentioned "he who must not be named", or something to that effect. 

That commenter was referring to Lance Armstrong.



This morning, I got into my first conversation with someone I've seen around the neighborhood for years.  We were in a Dunkin' Donuts. (shh...Don't tell anyone!)  I was sitting at a two-seat table; the only remaining seat was across from mine. "Mind if I sit here?"

"Why should I?"

So we got to talking about one thing and another, including music.  She thinks hip-hop is just awful.  It isn't my style, I explained, but I understand why some, especially the young have taken to it.  

"Why?  It's so mean and nasty."

"Exactly.  People are scared, anxious, confused--and angry.  And a lot of their anger comes from feeling that they have no control."

"But why would people choose something like that to express it?"

"The same reason why people vote for Donald Trump..."

She stopped me. "You simply must not say that man's name!"

RTX1GZCO



I'm sure she's not the only one who's reacted that way to hearing about The Donald, just as my commentor probably isn't the first person to say that the one who's been stripped of seven Tour de France titles must not be named.

That got me to wondering:  Who's more unmentionable:  Lance or Donald?  Who would score lower in a public opinion poll?




10 comments:

  1. The answer to your questions in order are Lance and Lance. That being said I'll always believe Armstrong was unfairly singled out. If there were a foolproof way to check I am convinced you would find the top 30 or so finishers in any TdF are doped to the gills. Certainly every teams' GC man. In 2006 when Floyd Landis was stripped of his title it was given to Oscar Pereiro. When I heard this I laughed outright because I'm quite sure Oscar was doping as hard as Floyd he was just more careful with his masking agents. At that level of the sport there's too much time and money invested in a rider not to dope because you know the other guys are doing it. Even if a rider wants to run clean he doesn't dare. Sorry I'm off on a bigass tangent here aren't I. As for that asshat Trump if he becomes president I may consider emigration to France. At least there the government is terrified of the people not like here where we are becoming more and more terrified of our government.

    ReplyDelete
  2. IMHO Lance is the lesser of the unmentionables.

    Mr. L is like a gladiator who cheated, had a containor of blood under his armor that he would break at an appropiate moment to show how he fought on even if wounded to gain the sympathy of the audience. This actually happened at times in Imperial Rome.

    The other person however, if he becomes president, will be (keeping the Roman analogues) a Caligula with access to nuclear weapons. This is MUCH more serious. The first sounds like something of a joke. The second is a very real threat to democracy and world peace. Take this seriously people.

    I did emigrate to a nice European country after Watergate and have lived a peaceful life ever since. But I stay an US citizen and will cast a vote to HRC.

    Leo

    ReplyDelete
  3. Phillip and Leo--I agree with both of your assessments. Lance is almost certainly the less consequential of the two and, perhaps, just happened to get singled out. And, yes, if Trump is elected, I just might move to France.

    ReplyDelete
  4. I'll call it a toss up. They're both unmentionable In their own ways. But I frequently refer to Armstrong that way because his name was literally removed from the official list of TdF winners, and not even replaced with any other name. Just seven years of blanks.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I've often thought to myself the reason they never replaced his name is because in their heart of hearts they knew the ones below him on the roster were no more worthy than Lance.

      Delete
    2. This comment has been removed by the author.

      Delete
  5. Brooks--Good point about Lance. That makes him literally unmentionable, doesn't it?

    ReplyDelete
  6. Lance, at least, survived cancer, and his comeback was truly inspiring, until we found out what a cheater he was. I remember wanting to believe his "I've never tested positive" claims for the longest time. I doubt his reputation would have suffered if he had retired from competitive cycling after one TdF win. It's clear that Trump, that Orange-haired TV Clown (Oh! Sorry, Bozo I didn't mean you!) hasn't really thought much about the issues he would have to deal with if, heaven forbid, he were to be elected. He's way out of his league.

    ReplyDelete
  7. MT--His comeback was indeed inspiring, which is the reason I (and other people) were willing to give him the benefit of the doubt. Even if he is indeed guilty of everything to which he's confessed and of which he's accused, he's still done more worthwhile things than "that Orange-haired TV clown"!

    ReplyDelete
  8. Phillip-I agree. And the ones who finished behind him were probably no more drug-free than your average rock star.

    ReplyDelete