You all probably recall the big hype a few months ago about Lance possibly entering politics, and the hand-wringing on both sides of the isle as high up as John Kerry himself that Mr. Armstrong might go to the wrong side.  The hand-wringing was justified; he clearly has the potential to transform whichever party he joins. Recall 50 million yellow wristbands worn by donation-prone likely voters then compare this to the 122 million Americans who voted in '04 (a high-turnout election).  I don't think America has a bigger hero than Lance Armstrong right now.  In fact I don't think anyone comes anywhere close.  I vaguely recall seeing some poll somewhere that gave him God-like numbers.  

Well, while using the stumbleupon extension of firefox just a minute ago I was taken to lancearmstrong.com and the top story read "11/29 Lance Alert: Tell Congress no cancer cuts!"  

"Whatever" I thought, he's been saying that for forever.  Then I clicked the link and found a few lines to warm any Democrat's heart. Visions of yellow and blue campaign stickers will dance in your head:

[Bolded emphasis all mine]
From: Lance Armstrong

To: You

I need your help.

At a time when cancer affects more and more Americans, Congress is poised to vote on a proposal that could slow down the fight against this killer disease. For the first time in more than a decade, we may see cuts in cancer research funding.

I hope those Lance Armstrong junkies are doing their math when they read that.

As a cancer survivor, I am a living, breathing example of the impact of cancer research funding. It is clear that increased Federal funding -- not budget cuts -- is vital to making progress against the disease.

What?  I thought the free market handled things like this best. "Increased Federal funding" sure isn't a phrase I've heard any Republicans use in a long time (except for abstinence-only education which is proven to be ineffective if not counter-effective).

1) Email your Congressional delegation and urge them to vote NO on any budget-cutting proposal that impacts life-saving research.

Note the broad and ambiguous definition of cuts he requires a "no" vote for. He's not exactly showing a concern for cutting government to the size that "it can be drowned in a bathtub"

Considering further evidence, I feel safe in saying that Ladies and Gentlemen, Lance Armstrong is a Democrat.

So, he's clearly got an interest in politics (although also clearly doesn't want to run anytime soon).  But what to make of his choice of the Governorship as opposed to a Senate seat?  Cancer funding is obviously his main concern and couldn't he do more about that in the Senate?  Is he just angling straight up to the Presidency right away?

Originally posted to Bodot on Fri Dec 02, 2005 at 05:03 PM PST.

Your Email has been sent.