Coming "clean" to help clean up the sport? Hilarious!

And so it has come to this?! After the total debacle and fiasco that the Lance Armstrong cycling legacy/doping scandal turned out to be, even after his own cringe-inducing fall from grace and forced exit from the sport, he wants more public attention on that front? Why can he not just slither away with the millions and let it go?

As reported on this blog on more than one occasion, the noose around Armstrong's neck got tighter and tighter, under the pressure of his nemesis, one Travis Tygart (USADA). It didn't matter that the US Justice Department dropped their attack on him, because this just spurred Tygart, the USADA and WADA to further pursue it from a sports ethics (and non-criminal) direction.

Then again, isn't lying under oath considered to be a federal crime in the US?! Well, a little thing like that (clearly) never bothered Armstrong, especially when it came to maintaining his superhero image. Anyway, as we all know by now, in the face of some of the most blatant accusations imaginable, including asserting that Armstrong was not only deeply involved in an incredibly sophisticated, professionalized doping scam, but that he was also the de facto "enforcer" of that program, well, Lance walked away.

Everyone who is not totally naive knew what that meant. It was actually painful to see some rather smart people that I know, defending him on Twitter after this all happened, and further pushing Armstrong's own claims of a "witch hunt" against him. Yet anyone who had seen the arrogance and defiance in almost any one of his filmed denials could not explain why he suddenly decided to walk, only after the accusations began to come with evidence on the side?

The subsequent stripping of his seven Tour de France wins and banning from competitive cycling for life should truly have been the end of the story. Notwithstanding the fact that, as I predicted, the Times newspaper of London and a sports agency in the US both began legal action to claim back millions of dollars of falsely obtained monies. Ironically, in the case of the Times newspaper, Armstrong had the chutzpah to obtain that money from them for "falsely" accusing him of heing a doper. This is how far he was entrenched in his own mythical persona - he would sue you for millions for claiming he used performance-enhancing drugs, even though he knew he did, but suing you was a perfect cover for it!

It was inevitable he would be back to the cameras again. You could have bet more millions on it. After shaming himself, his Livestrong Foundation, his supporters, his sponsors, the sport and even his family, to name but a few, he has decided to come "clean". As clean as he is capable of being, at any rate. Now it's the big tell-all to our Oprah (who else?!) following a meeting with Livestrong staff where he basically spilled the beans, more or less. He taped the interview with the big O on Monday and it will be screened on Thursday. 

You know? I cannot think of any reason for this confession now, other than more self-aggrandizement for the man. Maybe if I do some muted confession and apology, choke up a little, a tear here or there, all will be forgiven and I can come back again? This guy will do anything for his brand (including lying to millions while making  millions over many, many years) and there's nothing he won't do for his brand. So he is back asking for public interest and support one more time - a fact that I find to be astounding. And simultaneously nauseating. 

"Well, you know, Tiger Woods stood up and confessed, and now he's back! Even old Arnold came out of  his admissions looking like a newly grounded man; it worked for him too!" Firstly, I think the press conferences or interviews given by such celebrities following downfalls are totally ridiculous and are only considered appropriate in the US. All part of that Hollywood and celebrity lifestyle where the PR people think we need to hear excruciatingly embarrassing and painful excerpts from a private life, to somehow "forgive" them their sins. Yuck. 

Secondly, there is a huge difference between say, Tiger, and Lance. Tiger was sleeping around with various women, but he won all his golf games fair and square. He could say he was the best in the world at various moments, but not because he was using an illegal driver. He just had a messy private life is all. Tiger did not lie to various authorities or all of his many fans about how he won all those golf tournaments. Nor did he lie about that to federal authorities. 

Coming clean by Lance Armstrong now is a little bit of much too little, way too late. Everyone is cynical about why he is doing so, and we all do know that it is because (and only because) he got caught red-handed in the end, that he is admitting to anything. His old fans should remember that. He would still be lying to one and all today about it, if he had not had a big spike stuck into his wheels. Knocking him off his precious pedestal and face down onto his new crown of thorns. 

Now he intends to admit to millions of fans that he lied to them all for over a decade. To what end? Does he expect much forgiveness? Additionally, by so doing, he opens himself up once more to the US Justice Department pursuing him on perjury charges, among others. Furthermore, the second he admits it, all sorts of entities can legitimately sue him for millions. But you can see the PR and re-branding dream team behind all of this - Lance shells out a few million of his massive fortune to get rebuilt back into some kind of sympathetic figure. Uh-huh. It is as transparent as his cheating was, to many. 

I even heard a very nasty rumor that he was now also willing to testify against other riders who so far have eluded the doping spotlight, to assist in "helping to clean up the sport". That just about says it all to this writer, as to how far this guy will go to promote Lance Armstrong, to the detriment of whoever/whatever else gets in his way. I think authorities should refuse his offer and not give any more attention to this sick, sorry, sad story.

The best thing that can happen to him right now is for him to be relegated back to cycling irrelevance and for us all to stop talking about him. This story never keeps on giving but the message gets more sour-tasting each and every update. - Kevin Mc

[Update - I just heard that the Justice Department has refused Armstrong's offer to testify and additionally turned their nose up at an offer of $5M from Armstrong, calling the offer "inadequate". Not least as it is surely "blood" money to persuade them to leave him alone now that he has confessed, at last. In my book, they simply had to refuse.]

From lunar glow yellow to moon-induced green?!

I recently blogged on the phenomenal space jump taken by Felix Baumgartner back in October, 2012, and today another earth-shattering space achievement comes back to the fore. Pictured above are astronauts Neil Armstrong, Michael Collins and Buzz (Edwin) Aldrin of the still famous Apollo 11 mission that landed on the moon in 1969.

The item of note today is not so much the memory of that momentous event in world history, but rather the words heard about a quarter of a million miles away all around the Earth as man made history by landing on the moon. In describing the very first human step onto the lunar surface, Armstrong made what remains as emotively historic a line today as it did back then:

"That's one small step for (a) man, one giant leap for mankind."

I use the parentheses around the "a" because here on Earth it was transmitted as "one small step for man", which actually resonates better given what comes after it. I heard some rumors that this "a" was taken out on the recommendation of his brother or another, but it appears that it was actually due to a radio glitch during the transmission, and the "a" was actually spoken. Given the similar loss of clarity in what Felix Baumgartner said as he was about to jump from space, I can believe that it was a transmission glitch.

But why are we discussing this at all, I can hear the millions (okay, a few thousand ;) ask?! Well, Buzz Aldrin left this world in August of last year at age 82, and subsequently there is new controversy over the supposed spontaneity of Aldrin's famous words. Aldrin maintained to his death that his iconic words were summoned in the moment, and came from the inspirational step that he was about to take. 

As far as I am aware, no one ever really questioned this, and why would they? He was the man who took the risks to make that step, and whether he wrote those words in his head two weeks before or on the step ladder down to the lunar surface is not worth worrying about. He was the first man on the moon and he chose words that reflected the depth and impact his lunar footprints would   represent to basically everyone on the Earth.  

But today, his lifelong attestation on the veracity of his statements about that legendary statement is being questioned, wait for it - by his own brother! Quite why his own brother would feel compelled to somehow change a magic piece of popular culture history, or in some way to question the integrity of his much more famous brother is absolutely beyond me. 

You know? Sometimes we do not need to know the entire truth about everything in life. Some things are best left private, or to our imagination. The timing of Dean Aldrin's claim that his brother showed him the quote two weeks before leaving for Cape Canaveral is also extremely questionable in my opinion. Why would he wait until his brother had died to make this claim? How come he never mentioned this when interviewed for Buzz Aldrin's biography in 2002? 

It sort of reeks of some kind of resentment between big brother and little brother, with one having reached the heights, and the other having hidden some desire to pull him down a peg or two. I can imagine that Buzz Aldrin may well have exhibited a degree of arrogance over his success and I can even remember seeing one or two interviews where he was far from shy and retiring. But still. 

I am pretty certain that neither historians nor the general public truly care when precisely the famous Aldrin words were composed. What is not in contention is that firstly, Aldrin did in fact write the words, and secondly, he did in fact utter them when placing human feet onto virgin lunar soil. This is history now and some brand new recollection in 2013 (about a moment in 1969 from a brother who seems to want his moment in the spotlight) can't possibly rewrite Buzz Aldrin's words, achievements or legacy. 

"If you believe, they put a man on the moon....", well, conspiracy theorists aside, no matter what his brother is attempting to achieve, Buzz Aldrin made us believe it and that's the end of this story!

Kevin Mc

More fiscal cliffs, or the Cliffs of Moher - you decide!

After what was both an exhilarating and exhausting presidential election race in late 2011, ever since we have been bombarded by never-ending exasperation surrounding the dreaded fiscal cliff. Much as I would rather be discussing the exponentially more appealing Cliffs of Moher (above), I feel we have no choice but to dig a little into the fiscal cliff fiasco, but we can do so with a beautiful image as a form of pleasant distraction!

And so the so-called "government" in the US has come to a "deal" to avert the fiscal cliff, for now, thereby averting driving the entire nation into a spiralling financial vortex headed towards the fiscal End of Days itself. Well, whoop-di-doo. If anyone expects any back slapping or chilled champagne they can forget it - this bunch of (theoretically) grown-up schoolboys (sorry, but most of the major players are men!) are the face of one of the most playground-like dysfunctional excuses for a Congress that we may ever have seen.

To say that various Republicans are unhappy with the way things turned out would be an understatement. Some are saying that the Republican party itself is on the verge of a civil war; they are a party as divided and directionless as many can remember them being, fighting now among themselves, as well as with the Democrats. House speaker John Boehner has been accused of putting his own job before either his party or the people who voted for him. 

When the speaker draws criticism from within, but in a public fashion, it is a sign of considerable unrest and lack of harmony among some of the major players. Republican congressman Peter King (NY) ripped into Boehner in a shocking speech on the house floor on Wednesday, calling him "dismissive" and denouncing his "cavalier attitude" towards the crisis still ongoing in the northeastern states following Sandy. Boehner had walked off the floor the previous night with no warning, stating he would return to address the impending bill for $60B of aid, but he then left the building. It seemed as if he had walked straight off his very own cliff, and could not or would not take anymore. 

New Jersey governor Chris Christie, who had been criticized for being too touchy-feely friendly with Obama during his Sandy tour and pre-election campaign, also ripped into Boehner and the Republican leadership. He accused them of playing politics while delaying the bill for aid, and even displayed a remarkable level of mistrust with the lot of them:

"There is no reason for me at the moment to believe anything they tell me because they've been telling me stuff for weeks and they haven't delivered,"  he said recently.

That this comes from a man believed to have presidential aspirations as a Republican candidate himself underlines the divisions rife among a party that seemingly has lost its leadership and direction. Christie, like King, is furious with the delay in passing this bill. As it happens, they will vote on the first $9B of aid this Friday, with a second vote for the outstanding $51B of aid to be held on January 15th.

John Boehner himself, no doubt feeling enormous pressure, ran into Senate majority leader Harry Reid who had described Boehner as a "dictator"the day before, and with no introduction reportedly told Reid to "Go f*** yourself!" in front of witnesses -twice! Total high school nonsense, only they're way better paid and have bigger cars. 

Senate Republican leader Mitch McConnell, who is known to be a hardliner, stated that while the deal on the fiscal cliff is far from perfect, he felt they had to do something to prevent further hardship on the great majority of Americans. But he did point out that while Obama has gotten his desired tax on the rich, the real problem facing the country is out of control spending, which Obama has refused to address. For sure, more fire and brimstone is coming. 

A brand new Congress comes into power today, and God only knows what newly elected members face, coming into this playground brawl while they are still trying on their school uniforms. For the rest, it's the same old: gun control, immigration, the debt limit, sequestration, Sandy, and so on. Given how little they have managed to achieve recently, I wouldn't hold out much hope.

One thing is clear: Congress is not inspiring anyone in 2013, and if the House is supposed to be some type of example of "leadership" to a nation's youth, never mind their parents, then God help us all. They ought to be ashamed of themselves, and for their lack of real achievement and inability to work as a team, well, like the rest of us, they should be eligible for dismissal. How come Joe Public gets evaluated on a quarterly basis and warned to improve on this or change that, due to an inability to "get along" in the workplace, while these clowns get to relive high school on huge salaries while answering to basically no one?! It is a disgrace!

I cannot help but restate that this all stems from a lack of real leadership, at the very top. Just like when a football team of diverse personalities/talents fails, or a multifaceted tech company crumbles, the coach or CEO is the one who shoulders the blame. Obama may be many things, but as we have discussed before, a stellar leader of Congress or further of a nation, he isn't. He merely seems weary.

Quite naturally, he wasn't in the Oval Office when the fiscal cliff deal hit his desk for signing - he is sunning himself in Hawaii, of course. But panic not, we are assured that he will sign by "autopen". Phew, another crisis averted! Why he is not in town as major bills hit his desk and a new Congress is sworn in is beyond me. None of us are on holiday anymore, so why is he?!

The bottom line? Frankly, I truly cannot see it any other way than de facto, these next four years are going to be more or less an extended vacation in US politics. Obama's is on a cosy four year business-as-usual vacay, but keeping the Democratic seat warm in the White House, until a significantly better new candidate and truly inspirational prospective leader (who can deliver) emerges. Ergo, 2013-2016 is going to be of more interest with regards to who is going to emerge and the subsequent race for the nomination, than for anything this guy is going to achieve. He has lost the House, totally, inside four years, and I don't see any chance in Hell of that being turned around, especially given that in political lifespans, he is already on the way out. 

My guess? Keep a very, very close eye on Hilary Clinton because if she runs, she might just upstage the man who beat her in a vicious fight in 2008 as he became the first black President. She has become so popular across the board as a dedicated Secretary of State that she could well become the first female President in history - if that also means that charismatic ol' Bill Clinton goes back to the White House for his "retirement" years, well I think that  might just be the cherry on the cake!

Hmm, speaking of cherries, I do have a particularly tempting warm black cherry and walnut muffin waiting for me, so off I go! ;) - Kevin Mc