If Ric Flair's latest mariage troubles are depressingly predictable, then so to is the Washington Post failing to do a much better job than the Hartford Courant in their coverage of Linda McMahon's metamorphosis from WWE CEO to US Senate candidate.
Once again, the Washington Post largely dwelled on the "mean-spirited fiction" and "softcore porn" in past WWE storylines, which as Bix colorfully pointed out a few days ago misses the real point. I wouldn't be surprised if the price of such intimate access to Linda McMahon's campaign is that certain skeletons in the closet weren't brought up (like Chris Benoit, can't forget him can we Irv?). But what was even more dismaying was the failure to connect the dots that exposed Linda's lies when that conflicted sell out Bret Hart was too honest for his own good. Here are the two key excerpts of the article:
Linda on the rampant and deadly use of steroids in pro wrestling: "The thing of it is, there is no competitive advantage for using steroids -- it's not going to make you jump higher, run faster, hit the ball farther or anything like that."
"Steroids were muscle-builders and we wanted to look good," said Bret "The Hitman" Hart, who insisted the McMahons never encouraged wrestlers to use steroids. Asked if the couple ever discouraged the use of the performance-enhancing drugs, Hart responded, "I know that the guys who had a lot of muscles made a lot of money."
Hmm, if I didn't know better, wink wink, that sounds like there was a pretty strong financial incentive to build muscles and look good, and consequently a pretty strong competitive disadvantage to be clean and avoid the use of steroids. But it must just be me, because a wannabe politician and a wrestler on WWE's payroll would never lie to the media!