|
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#11
|
|||
|
|||
Lance Armstrong's stance should be . . .
In article ,
"Steve Freides" wrote: Frederick the Great wrote: I care because it's about time sombody in this world took a stand against the insanity of bureaucracies raising the bar and then retroactively calling somebody affected by that bar raising a 'doper.' Where does it end. How about all the folks who got stopped by the police and checked for drunk driving but blew under the control limit of .08%. The world is full of beaurocratic wrongs. Consider the people who live not far from me who have yet, thanks to our governmental agencies, not received any of the promised disaster aid. Let it go, Steve. I have let it go - that was my point and so should we all. Not while you respond to a message on the topic of Lance Armstrong and drugs. But wait! There's more!! In response to somebody who made telling points against USADA and UCI you said to let it go. That is tantamount to telling someone who addresses the whole matter rationally and with solid arguments to be quiet. Looks like you find his arguments too strong to bear with equanimity. Tell us: Are you in favor of the sanctions imposed upon Lance Armstrong? The USADA did not let it go. The only party you can get to let it go is yourself. But first answer the question of your view on the sanctions imposed upon Lance Armstrong. -- Old Fritz |
Ads |
#12
|
|||
|
|||
Lance Armstrong's stance should be . . .
Frederick the Great wrote:
Let it go, Steve. I have let it go - that was my point and so should we all. Not while you respond to a message on the topic of Lance Armstrong and drugs. But wait! There's more!! In response to somebody who made telling points against USADA and UCI you said to let it go. That is tantamount to telling someone who addresses the whole matter rationally and with solid arguments to be quiet. Looks like you find his arguments too strong to bear with equanimity. Tell us: Are you in favor of the sanctions imposed upon Lance Armstrong? The USADA did not let it go. The only party you can get to let it go is yourself. But first answer the question of your view on the sanctions imposed upon Lance Armstrong. I don't care enough to have an opinion. As I said, this is old news to me, and I don't understand why a person must have an opinion on every subject. This is a complex subject that I'm very glad I'm not in the middle of. I've got enough of my own life to be concerned with; while I'm not and never have been a competitive cyclist, I do compete in other sports well enough to earn titles and records - thank goodness for age and weight classes! I take my own training seriously - between my professional, my amatuer-but-serious sports career, my wife and children, my other hobbies, well, I just don't spend my life contemplating whether or not one well-known cyclist from a few years ago has been treated justly or not. It's like worrying about whether a particular baseball player gets into the Hall of Fame - sorry but it's old news to me and I'd rather spend my "sports fan energy," if you will, on who's going to play for the Yankees in 2013 than worry about whether Mike Piazza actually did or didn't do drugs. -S- |
#13
|
|||
|
|||
Lance Armstrong's stance should be . . .
In article ,
"Steve Freides" wrote: Frederick the Great wrote: Let it go, Steve. I have let it go - that was my point and so should we all. Not while you respond to a message on the topic of Lance Armstrong and drugs. But wait! There's more!! In response to somebody who made telling points against USADA and UCI you said to let it go. That is tantamount to telling someone who addresses the whole matter rationally and with solid arguments to be quiet. Looks like you find his arguments too strong to bear with equanimity. Tell us: Are you in favor of the sanctions imposed upon Lance Armstrong? The USADA did not let it go. The only party you can get to let it go is yourself. But first answer the question of your view on the sanctions imposed upon Lance Armstrong. I don't care enough to have an opinion. As I said, this is old news to me, and I don't understand why a person must have an opinion on every subject. This is a complex subject that I'm very glad I'm not in the middle of. I've got enough of my own life to be concerned with; while I'm not and never have been a competitive cyclist, I do compete in other sports well enough to earn titles and records - thank goodness for age and weight classes! I take my own training seriously - between my professional, my amatuer-but-serious sports career, my wife and children, my other hobbies, well, I just don't spend my life contemplating whether or not one well-known cyclist from a few years ago has been treated justly or not. It's like worrying about whether a particular baseball player gets into the Hall of Fame - sorry but it's old news to me and I'd rather spend my "sports fan energy," if you will, on who's going to play for the Yankees in 2013 than worry about whether Mike Piazza actually did or didn't do drugs. Yet you continue to respond to the matter. When will you stop? I have no plans to stop discussing it. -- Old Fritz |
#14
|
|||
|
|||
Lance Armstrong's stance should be . . .
Frederick the Great wrote:
In article , "Steve Freides" wrote: Frederick the Great wrote: Let it go, Steve. I have let it go - that was my point and so should we all. Not while you respond to a message on the topic of Lance Armstrong and drugs. But wait! There's more!! In response to somebody who made telling points against USADA and UCI you said to let it go. That is tantamount to telling someone who addresses the whole matter rationally and with solid arguments to be quiet. Looks like you find his arguments too strong to bear with equanimity. Tell us: Are you in favor of the sanctions imposed upon Lance Armstrong? The USADA did not let it go. The only party you can get to let it go is yourself. But first answer the question of your view on the sanctions imposed upon Lance Armstrong. I don't care enough to have an opinion. As I said, this is old news to me, and I don't understand why a person must have an opinion on every subject. This is a complex subject that I'm very glad I'm not in the middle of. I've got enough of my own life to be concerned with; while I'm not and never have been a competitive cyclist, I do compete in other sports well enough to earn titles and records - thank goodness for age and weight classes! I take my own training seriously - between my professional, my amatuer-but-serious sports career, my wife and children, my other hobbies, well, I just don't spend my life contemplating whether or not one well-known cyclist from a few years ago has been treated justly or not. It's like worrying about whether a particular baseball player gets into the Hall of Fame - sorry but it's old news to me and I'd rather spend my "sports fan energy," if you will, on who's going to play for the Yankees in 2013 than worry about whether Mike Piazza actually did or didn't do drugs. Yet you continue to respond to the matter. When will you stop? I have no plans to stop discussing it. Consider this the corner bar and we're having a beer after a ride. If either of us doesn't like the conversation, we're free to move to another table or walk out the door. Such is Usenet. I'll stop sometime, maybe now. You continue to respond to me responding, too - when will you stop, eh? -S- |
#15
|
|||
|
|||
Lance Armstrong's stance should be . . .
"Steve Freides" wrote:
Frederick the Great wrote: In article , "Steve Freides" wrote: Frederick the Great wrote: Let it go, Steve. I have let it go - that was my point and so should we all. Not while you respond to a message on the topic of Lance Armstrong and drugs. But wait! There's more!! In response to somebody who made telling points against USADA and UCI you said to let it go. That is tantamount to telling someone who addresses the whole matter rationally and with solid arguments to be quiet. Looks like you find his arguments too strong to bear with equanimity. Tell us: Are you in favor of the sanctions imposed upon Lance Armstrong? The USADA did not let it go. The only party you can get to let it go is yourself. But first answer the question of your view on the sanctions imposed upon Lance Armstrong. I don't care enough to have an opinion. As I said, this is old news to me, and I don't understand why a person must have an opinion on every subject. This is a complex subject that I'm very glad I'm not in the middle of. I've got enough of my own life to be concerned with; while I'm not and never have been a competitive cyclist, I do compete in other sports well enough to earn titles and records - thank goodness for age and weight classes! I take my own training seriously - between my professional, my amatuer-but-serious sports career, my wife and children, my other hobbies, well, I just don't spend my life contemplating whether or not one well-known cyclist from a few years ago has been treated justly or not. It's like worrying about whether a particular baseball player gets into the Hall of Fame - sorry but it's old news to me and I'd rather spend my "sports fan energy," if you will, on who's going to play for the Yankees in 2013 than worry about whether Mike Piazza actually did or didn't do drugs. Yet you continue to respond to the matter. When will you stop? I have no plans to stop discussing it. Consider this the corner bar and we're having a beer after a ride. If either of us doesn't like the conversation, we're free to move to another table or walk out the door. Such is Usenet. I'll stop sometime, maybe now. You continue to respond to me responding, too - when will you stop, eh? I answered that. You cannot let go because people continue to find fault with the actions of the USADA and the UCI and that bothers you---you want them to be quiet about it. You may have your smirky back; I'm not having it. Otherwise I'm donating it to the Salvation Army. -- Michael Press |
#16
|
|||
|
|||
Lance Armstrong's stance should be . . .
Frederick the Great wrote:
Michael Press wrote: I answered that. You cannot let go because people continue to find fault with the actions of the USADA and the UCI and that bothers you---you want them to be quiet about it. You may have your smirky back; I'm not having it. Otherwise I'm donating it to the Salvation Army. Can't decide who you wanna be today huh? |
#17
|
|||
|
|||
Lance Armstrong's stance should be . . .
In article om,
atriage wrote: Frederick the Great wrote: Michael Press wrote: I answered that. You cannot let go because people continue to find fault with the actions of the USADA and the UCI and that bothers you---you want them to be quiet about it. You may have your smirky back; I'm not having it. Otherwise I'm donating it to the Salvation Army. Can't decide who you wanna be today huh? You cannot handle any of us, bullyboy. -- Old Fritz |
#18
|
|||
|
|||
Lance Armstrong's stance should be . . .
On 14/01/2013 01:29, Frederick the Great wrote:
In raweb.com, wrote: Frederick the Great wrote: Michael Press wrote: I answered that. You cannot let go because people continue to find fault with the actions of the USADA and the UCI and that bothers you---you want them to be quiet about it. You may have your smirky back; I'm not having it. Otherwise I'm donating it to the Salvation Army. Can't decide who you wanna be today huh? You cannot handle any of us, bullyboy. Posting in the same thread as two people makes you feel like you have weight of numbers on your side huh? How utterly pathetic. It just shows how little confidence you have in even the most rudimentary points you are [barely] capable of making. |
#19
|
|||
|
|||
Lance Armstrong's stance should be . . .
In article om,
atriage wrote: On 14/01/2013 01:29, Frederick the Great wrote: In raweb.com, wrote: Frederick the Great wrote: Michael Press wrote: I answered that. You cannot let go because people continue to find fault with the actions of the USADA and the UCI and that bothers you---you want them to be quiet about it. You may have your smirky back; I'm not having it. Otherwise I'm donating it to the Salvation Army. Can't decide who you wanna be today huh? You cannot handle any of us, bullyboy. Posting in the same thread as two people makes you feel like you have weight of numbers on your side huh? How utterly pathetic. It just shows how little confidence you have in even the most rudimentary points you are [barely] capable of making. You cannot answer any of them rudimentary or sketchy. -- Old Fritz |
|
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Lance Armstrong's Hunter | Brad Anders | Racing | 10 | June 8th 10 08:04 PM |
Lance Armstrong's Hunter | Andy Coggan | Racing | 0 | June 8th 10 03:24 PM |
Lance Armstrong's Hunter | i, fred[_4_] | Racing | 0 | June 8th 10 04:50 AM |
lance armstrong's gearing | [email protected] | Racing | 3 | July 13th 05 09:38 PM |
Lance Armstrong's chemotherapy | [email protected] | General | 40 | July 7th 05 03:44 PM |