but not in this context. The video doesn’t show Kimmage asking his question, but if Armstrong’s quotation/paraphrasing of it is accurate, then I must agree with Chris, it is nothing short of loutish. On all levels – the guy was being aggressive for the sake of being aggressive, and he clearly knew what he was doing: no one with Kimmage’s knowledge and experience calls Armstrong a “returning cancer” without being in full cognizance of exactly what he’s doing. This to me is the worst and most cowardly kind of baiting. (I agree, in the main, with what you say about metaphors…but metaphors can’t also be something one hides behind – “it was only a metaphor” – as would clearly be the case here.)

Re: Armstrong’s bullying: like you, I dislike this side of Armstrong. I just don’t see it in this video. He says that probably no one will want to talk to Kimmage if he’s talking in that way…but to my mind that’s just a statement of fact. Armstrong is clearly angry, but everyone has the right to be angry if the situation warrants it. I’m not Armstrong’s biggest fan but I can’t help but side with him here.

You know what? I think I spoke too soon in my comments above. I found some other footage of the Kimmage-Armstrong exchange (here) in which we hear both Kimmage’s question, and his response to Armstrong’s response… In fact his question sounds very fair – what Lance is referring to (forgive my ignorance on this) is Kimmage’s story from when Armstrong announced his comeback, months ago; that’s the story in which the “cancer” comments were made. I think I’d read about this but forgotten it…in any case, one could argue that Armstrong is up to his old tricks by referring to that article – he basically uses it as a pretext to really lay into Kimmage. Hence Kimmage’s anger – if you think Lance is pissed, wait til you hear Kimmage’s comments from when Lance stops speaking (unfortunately these are cut short somewhat in the video above; I’m sure they can be found somewhere else).

Anyways I don’t mean to drone on, other than to say that, having watched the longer video, I’d definitely have less reason to disagree with you. I’m still not sure exactly what I think – it’s pretty complex – but Armstrong definitely doesn’t come off quite as well in the longer video, in my opinion.

For those who are interested, here’s an interview with Kimmage from the day after the exchange. Still nothing up by him at the Times of London website that I was able to find.

Should people be allowed to used use it eventhough Lance might consider it hurtful? – absolutely. Should we be surprised or resent when someone is upset when we use the metaphor? – absolutely not.

Kimmage obviously left himself open to this kind of response from Lance when he made that comment. In my book it’s clever rhetoric from Lance, He not only expresses his own indignation but he implies that all people, cancervictims especially, share this indignation. Whatever else Kimmage has to say is then of little consequense.

I think it’s quite apparent that that speech was prepared for the day he met Kimmage. He fires it off and then pauses and goes on to answer the actual question. I’m not saying it wasn’t heartfelt, I’m just saying Lance is no PR-novice. What’s a bit problematic is that since the first pressconferences he has dumped Catlin and the big words about being available for everyone who had questions apparently no longer apply. Seriously, didn’t he know that these where the exact things that where going to follow from his return?

but the fact is where there is smoke, there is usually fire.

When every single rider, that beat you, or was on the TdF podium with you has subsequently been busted for doping, it is really hard to believe at face value, that they were obtained on bread and water.

Just look at the differences between the Blue Train and Astana. Only once was Lance left on his own, normally the Train (intact) would deliver their key passenger to within a few kilometers of the finish line, after 5 monstrous climbs.

But not so Astana? I wonder why. And not only me, Chris Horner (whom I love) also asked the same question a while ago.

You mean getting caught red-handed with the goods, then I agree.

He’s more like a pop star who, as a condition of their parole, warns students about the dangers of drunk driving.