lying

Lance Armstrong and Un-Lying

Plenty has been written about why lying is a bad strategy. Now Lance Armstrong is demonstrating that the process of un-lying is fraught with challenges, too.

Armstrong's admission to doping in an interview with Oprah Winfrey this week confirmed what all but the blind loyalists already knew after the U.S. Anti-Doping Agency (USADA) dossier was published last year. Even though Armstrong appeared to answer questions straightforwardly, many observers felt he held back information.

In the leaks before the Winfrey interview, the Armstrong camp tested the idea of trading a public confession for a chance to resume his professional career as a triathlete. USADA officials didn't seem wowed by the scripted and heavily hyped interview and said his status won't change until he shows up in a courtroom for interrogation.

Unraveling a career of lies is tricky business, as Armstrong is learning. He can regret being a bad-ass, but he cannot easily shirk the reputation. His Winfrey interview, if anything, confirmed it.

Armstrong showed no trace of regret when he asked if he thought his doping was cheating. He dismissively admitted he had been a bully. He referred to his doping "cocktail" almost as if he was discussing being a responsible drinker at social events.