Originally Posted by
JasonEvans
I hope you do not mind, pfrduke, but I have created a new thread for this discussion. It is a fascinating topic and that link presented an interesting argument.
Since I (somewhat inadvertently - and no, I didn't mind) started this thread, I feel like I ought to weigh in. From a prosecutorial standpoint, my feelings on this are the same as on Clemens - there are better things for the DOJ to be doing.
From a "do we want to know the truth" standpoint, though, my answer is yes. Americans have a great capacity, I think, to handle disappointing revelations from those they had idolized and move past them. I don't think this is such a unique scenario that it would bring about different results. Cancer research and funding is way bigger than Lance Armstrong and Livestrong, and will continue unabated regardless of whether one of its poster children is revealed to be more medical than miracle. And from the perspective of individuals battling cancer, I really don't think that many are relying on Lance Armstrong as the source of their strength for fighting the disease, and at the very least not to the point where revelations about Armstrong's doping would cause them to give up their fight.
So, in the end, I don't see much harm in the truth coming out, and believe it's always better for people to know the true measure of a man (and to know if someone's been blatantly lying to them for 5-10 years).
Just be you. You is enough. - K, 4/5/10, 0:13.8 to play, 60-59 Duke.
You're all jealous hypocrites. - Titus on Laettner
You see those guys? Animals. They're animals. - SIU Coach Chris Lowery, on Duke