The Nino Brown of the Tour de France???

 

Alright, let’s set this up...so one of my favorite rappers, Joe Budden, made his third appearance on ESPN’s First Take on Wednesday and chimed in on everything from the Baltimore Ravens to Tiger Woods. However, it was his answer to moderator Cari Champion’s question about the legacy of Lance Armstrong after “admitting” to Oprah Winfrey that he used performance-enhancing drugs that raised an eyebrow: 

“Heroic. Still pretty iconic. $500 million is $500 million no matter which way you chop it up…and granted, I know it’s two separate issues—one cheating, and one just life—but I think there’s a greater picture. I’m not certain if he’s able to raise that money without the deceitfulness, without the lying…if he didn’t take the performance-enhancing drugs…to top it all off, everybody was taking ‘em.”

So Stephen A. Smith responded first:

“Now there are millions upon millions of people who donate their time, money and effort to fighting cancer…I’m not taking away what LIVESTRONG Foundation has done, and you do make a very valid point when you point out that…the fact that he was so popular, you had people pouring money into the LIVESTRONG Foundation. But that’s just the LIVESTRONG Foundation. Maybe they would’ve given it to somebody else in the same cause, in the same fight. Just not LIVESTRONG...and not only that, can we sit here and definitively say that Lance Armstrong didn’t benefit personally, monetarily and financially over cheating and winning the Tour de France titles? Of course not, the man definitely did. He pocketed a lot of that money for himself…he’s worth millions. I’m sorry, where do you get paid for winning the Tour de France? I’m not aware of millions upon millions of dollars in salary being earned from Tour de France.”

However, it was Skip Bayless who provided the most poignant statement of all:

“In the biggest picture, the end does not justify the means here. LIVESTRONG to me falls into the category of what the Bible calls ‘ill-gotten gains’. It was all fraudulent from the top down…and this LIVESTRONG for Lance Armstrong was a brilliant dodge because he used it as a cover for his PED use. He used it to build his credibility with gullible fans by saying, ‘Look at what I’m doing to help cure cancer,’ while behind the scenes, he’s attacking anyone who dared to accuse him of using PEDs…ultimately, we’ve all been touched by it…but in the end, the money would’ve gone in some other direction—the right direction to curing cancer instead of what became nefarious channels here thanks to Lance Armstrong…it’s hard for me to sit back and hear you say, ‘$500 million is $500 million,’ when in the end, it’s fraudulent."

Now Joe Budden later stated that he wasn’t defending Lance Armstrong’s character and was merely saying that he brought more awareness to cancer and “popularized” it. How-and-ever, my main issue doesn't have as much to do with the fact that Lance Armstrong finally admitted to using PEDs. (For the record, making this "breaking news" wasn't worth interrupting our regularly-scheduled programming like, say, the United States going to war. Even somebody living under a rock knew that.) I'm not as fervent in my disgust with his extensive cover-up as Stephen A. Smith, although I think going so far as to try to ruin someone's life because you're literally "ridin' dirty" is pretty flippin' evil. I take more issue with the sentiment that Lance Armstrong wouldn’t have been able to raise $500 million for cancer if he weren’t doped up to ride bikes around France.

First and foremost, Joe Budden's statement concerns me on a spiritual level. In Ephesians 3:20-21, it says, “Now to Him who is able to do exceedingly abundantly above all that we ask or think, according to the power that works in us, to Him be glory in the church by Christ Jesus to all generations, forever and ever.” Although it seems that Joe Budden believes in God based upon some of his music, I have no idea what Lance Armstrong's faith is. For all I know, he could be agnostic or an atheist, and that's his business if he is. I'm not here to put his or Joe Budden's faith on trial because none of us always pass the faith test with flying colors. However, I believe that the same God that healed Lance Armstrong could've granted him the strength to ride bicycles and win cycling competitions without taking one PED; inspire people around the world who have been affected by cancer; and raise awareness and financial support the right way as Skip Bayless suggested. It not only takes faith that there is a God "who is able to do exceedingly abundantly above all that we ask or think", but that He already has put something and someone inside of us who can take us to that above and beyond. Whether Lance Armstrong believes in God or not, taking PEDs to help him win seven consecutive Tour de France titles is an indictment of not only having little to no faith in God, but little to no faith in himself to overcome the circumstances--including defeating other cyclists who were doping. I understand why Joey said that he's "not certain" how much money Lance Armstrong would've been able to raise without cheating because it's difficult to be certain of any outcome, especially in a world full of cheaters. Nevertheless, Hebrews 11:1 says, "Now faith is the substance of things hoped for, the evidence of things not seen." If you truly hope that more people can be healed and inspired by your testimony and believe that can happen by doing the right thing, then God can and will make that happen in ways beyond our wildest imagination--even if we don't presently see how it can happen.

Alright, so maybe the spiritual level is too deep for some folks. Maybe some folks just flat-out aren't Christians. Cool...I came prepared with another angle. Consider the neighborhood drug dealer who often blankets his criminal activities with "good deeds", i.e., feeding folks, lining some pockets, sponsoring basketball tournaments, putting kids through school, and anything else that falls into the "taking care of the hood" category. Sounds good, right? Problem is while they make sure that many in their communities are taken care of, they also peddle poison to many of those same people. They help to tear apart many of the same families that they "support". They assist in creating liars, cheaters, robbers, and even murderers--not to mention that they commit many of the same crimes as the users. I know, a lot of people aren't afforded the same chances, and if all you know is getting over to get by in a destructive manner, it's difficult to do anything constructive. Even worse, it's hard to believe in God or anything honest when even many pastors are breaking bread with the Nino Browns of their communities. Indeed you have the group of people who would rather die a clean poor than live a dirty rich. Conversely, others in more dire straits will take the "dirty money"--even if they know what senseless blood was shed or what life was ruined to get it. That money could pay the rent, keep on the lights, buy some Pampers, put some food on the table, or make sure their kids have some decent shoes on their feet. To them, $500 million truly is $500 million because they simply see it as money at the end of the business day. That makes the Nino Browns of the world their heroes.

So is Lance Armstrong like a real life Nino Brown for the cycling world? Quite possibly. Granted, the main person that he hurt with "poison" was himself. Who knows how long he was doping, and considering that he suffered from testicular cancer and how many PEDs affect the testicles, who knows if his PED use triggered his cancer. However, under oath, he vehemently denied any accusation of his wrongdoing...much like a drug dealer. When the feds came knocking at the doors of people, wanted testimony about his PED use and threatened to come after them if they didn't tell them what they wanted to know, he went "snitches get stitches" on 'em and threatened their quality of life...much like a drug dealer. More important, he raised money through deceitful means, but took care of numerous people in the process...much like a drug dealer. (One can speculate that he pocketed a good amount of that money that he raised for the LIVESTRONG Foundation because cycling doesn't pay that well...much like a drug dealer because a 9-to-5 isn't paying as much or as quickly.) While there are many folks who had absolutely no idea that he was doping while raising that $500 million, there's a section of society who had a gut feeling that he was but couldn't care less. He was helping the cause, and that's all that mattered. $500 million becomes just that...$500 million. That $500 million may have helped someone to get screened who either has limitations to their health insurance or doesn't have any at all. That $500 million may have provided breakthrough medications that weren't previously or readily available. That $500 million may have very well saved the life of someone one of us knows. That person might say, "So what if Lance Armstrong was juiced up? I might not be here if he weren't." When people tend to be more concerned with tangible results in lieu of the avenues taken to get those results, it's hard to sell folks on the ideal. Therefore, Lance Armstrong becomes the "hero" for a legion of people who will defend anyone who has helped them out in their most downtrodden state and given them any sense of hope despite that person's infractions. Yup...he's Nino alright.

So "$500 million is $500 million no matter which way you chop it up," huh? I agree...if you don't know the back story to that $500 million. If somebody blindly handed me $500 million right now, I'd strongly think about taking the money, changing my identity IMM-MEED-CHET-LEE and running away to an extremely remote island. (Keywords though: strongly think about. Been there, done that. We'll leave it at that.) However, if I know that it was dishonestly acquired, then you couldn't pay me enough to even look at it. Bottom line, $500 honest million should never be confused with $500 fraudulent million, but it depends on who you ask. Although I excuse nothing that he's done, I don't want to vilify Lance Armstrong as if he's the worst person ever. Saying that he's Nino Brown is not as much saying hello to the bad guy as it's saying that he probably felt that there was no other way to get to the top than to do a little extra like everyone else. No matter how scripted or planned out his admissions with Oprah Winfrey may have appeared, he came out and admitted what most of us already knew. If I sat here and crucified him for his transgressions, then I'd open myself to scrutiny for my own. Nevertheless, I believe that God would've been able to manifest His glory through someone like Lance Armstrong to raise the same amount of awareness to and financial support for cancer--if not more--because that's the God that I serve and that's all the certainty that I need. As much as LIVESTRONG has helped so many people worldwide, it's hard for me to support a "foundation" built on deception. Sounds like a house of cards in a tsunami to me. Then again, maybe it's like Mrs. Scribbler said in our discussion of the situation: "What the enemy intends for bad, God can turn it into good so that He's glorified." I'll buy that way before I buy any insinuation that the only way that a cyclist or someone from the hood can get money and change lives for the better is through "ill-gotten gains". Even Pookie would question buying that bag of stepped-on BS.