Linda McMahon on Drugs
After the debate, a McMahon campaign spokesman challenged Blumenthal's assertion that McMahon had improperly tipped off a doctor about the steroids probe, saying, "WWE did not want to be associated with the doctor, and as is typically the case when a company wants to break any association with someone or dismiss someone, WWE provided cause. The doctor was not 'tipped off" to anything. And that memo that Dick Blumenthal invoked was entered into evidence at trial by prosecutors who made the exact same argument Blumenthal did. Twelve jurors unanimously rejected that argument, and WWE was totally exonerated without so much as calling a single witness."
She acknowledged that her campaign has considered making a public presentation on steroids. But McMahon typically steers the topic of steroids to one of her campaign talking points: professional wrestling is entertainment, not sport. Its performers have no incentive to use steroids, she said. Her answer ignores the obvious commercial value of her wrestlers bulking up for their theatrical appeal. Or that past steroid use by WWE wrestlers is not disputed. "There is not an incentive to use steroids in WWE. A performer's popularity in WWE is not relative to size," she said. "It is the charisma. It is the story line. It's the connection with the audience."
|Other candidates on Drugs:||Linda McMahon on other issues:|
Retiring as of Jan. 2013:
Senate elections Nov. 2012:
CA:Feinstein(D) vs.Emken(R) vs.Lightfoot(L)
DE:Carper(D) vs.Wade(R) vs.Pires(I)
HI:Hirono(D) vs.Lingle(R) vs.
MD:Cardin(D) vs.Bongino(R) vs.Sobhani(I)
ME:King(I) vs.Dill(D) vs.Summers(R)
MI:Stabenow(D) vs.Hoekstra(R) vs.Boman(L)
NJ:Menendez(D) vs.Kyrillos(R) vs.Diakos(I)
NY:Gillibrand(D) vs.Long(R) vs.Noren(I) vs.Clark(G)
TX:Cruz(R) vs.Sadler(D) vs.Roland(L) vs.
Senate Votes (analysis)