Josh Hamilton's Addiction wrote:
To the tiny few Armstrong defenders that are still out there,
I think LR is misconstruing people who think the overt rants against Lance Armstrong are slightly unprofessional, and obviously overboard, with "defenders." I doubt anyone here defends Armstrong as innocent, but nobody outside of Letsrun's staff has gone so tangentially awry on these boards, flaming the already debased cyclist.[/quote]
Yes, exactly this. Also, I agree with you on the unprofessional rants. The text accompanying today's QOD:
"A pathetic Lance Armstrong as he stormed out of a secret meeting last month with USADA head Travis Tygart after Tygart refused to buy Lance's sob excuses to get his triathlon ban overturned. So Lance stormed out and sought Oprah to try to get redemption via the public's sympathy. The man, who still flies on private jets and vacations in Hawaii, apparently wants to do triathlons as he views it as his only way to make dough."
I come to this site all the time, but this kind of writing often bothers me. I dislike Lance. I think he is an ass. But the language here comes off as a bit juvenile. You can be harshly critical without it.