I think Armstrong, is a shallow, maniacal, egotesticle, excuse for a
human being...  kidding.

Regardless of his intentions, though, the good publicity and image
generated by him and his foundation deflects attention from the
L'Equipe article and lingering doping controversy.  It also feeds
ammunition to those with the impression that someone who suffered so
much and helps so many could not possibly dope.  And, that is a good
thing.  Instead of stooping down to the level of the bloodthirsty
press: disparaging and suing them, as he has done in the past, he
simply has placed himself above them.

--Matt K.

On 6/2/06, Haskell, Patrick <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
> C'mon I'm here throwing red meat in the water and that's the sort of
> meager nibble I get.  Geez.  You sound more like a chemically mellowed
> product of the 60s than a child of them.
> Regardless, I can't see how you're in a position to know LA's motives
> any more than I am.  Given that he already has fortune and fame aplenty,
> it's hard for me to question his motives from afar.  Poeple who talk to
> him in private speak of his passion and his quiet and very personal
> efforts to help individuals he meets who suffer from cancer.  Seems
> pretty presumptuous to cast aspersions on his charity work without
> evidence to support your contentions.
> - Patrick

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
SkiVt-L is brought to you by the University of Vermont.

To unsubscribe, visit