That name doesn't belong in something as pure as cycling.
Bwah!! Oh, now
that is a doozy. As
pure as cycling???
Let's run down the rapsheet shall we? Cycling is a sport where:
- current and former champions drop dead in hotel rooms or keel over when climbing mountains due to heart failure despite being young and in prime physical condition.
- entire teams are suspended from the premier event in the sport after they are found to be in posession of huge caches of performance enhancing drugs.
- riders found guilty of doping are back riding in the peloton in months.
- the governing body fails to take responsibility for the drug problems in the sport.
- outcomes of races are sometimes agreed upon by the riders in advance or even determined during the race by way of promises of cash payments.
-a million other damning things I can't think of right now.
Pure? Um, no!
Seems to me that teams should be grateful to have
any sponsor, let alone the largest retailer in the US. The only reputation that is at stake here is Walmart's reputation, not cycling's. Cycling's reputation is already irreparably damaged.
Walmart represents the worst in American mass-produced consumer culture (if you can even call it that). I for one would not want the highest profile US riders sponsored by the lowest of the low in trashy sell-out corporate sponsors.
Since you are all up on the high horse about international conglomerates, I suppose you should also be criticizing Lance Armstrong for being sponsored by Nike, a company that also represents "mass produced consumer culture". Clearly, Lance is a "trashy sell-out corporate" w-h-o-r-e! W-h-o-r-e, I say!!
Edited to add: Why the hell can't I say w-h-o-r-e without being censored? This site sucks!
