The furious DNA sample debate and the hiring of Ivan Basso by the Discovery Channel Pro Cycling team are inciting and exciting all the bloggers, posters and letter-writers, as well as the media. Everybody has a definite opinion and, of course, they are Right. Just ask them...

Maybe I have a little different take on this, but I am offering my thoughts - right or wrong - it’s all a matter of opinion. I am thinking of all professional cyclists on the UCI or Pro Tour teams, or teams anywhere that are hired, work for a salary, and have contracts. These people, these riders - women and men - are Employees. Right? They work for a company, a business organization, and for sponsors. Right?

So, tell me, how many companies here in the US could get away with requiring all their Employees to give blood samples for DNA testing and to keep for future use? How about in Great Britain, or Italy, Spain, Belgium or France - shall I go on listing countries where employees have acknowledged rights?

Can you imagine what Hell would break loose if General Motors, or Bristol-Meyers Squibb, or Yahoo, or Ebay, or Citigroup, or Hewlett-Packard, or Verizon - or name any of the Fortune 500 companies, (or any company big or small) would make an agreement between themselves that, as a condition of employment, they would require blood samples from each employee to use as they see fit at some future time?

Or what if the big unions in this country with members who are teachers, teamsters, farm workers, retail clerks, television and radio artists, health workers, journalists, AFL-CIO - the list is humongous - would all agree that, as a condition of membership, their members would be required to submit blood samples for future use?

Can you imagine the uproar in the media about human rights and worker’s rights? The American Civil Liberties Union would be deluged with calls - there would be strikes and work stoppages, marches in the streets, and lawsuits up the ying-yang. Elected officials would jump into the fray to speak out for our rights and the press would have a hey-day. It would make Watergate and Enron look wimpy...

Every damn one if us would be absolutely outraged and absolutely refuse to give blood samples for DNA testing and storage. Yeah, I know that companies can require drug testing, and you pee in a bottle. Required blood drawals and blood storage is quite another thing. Hell No, we wouldn’t buy that for a moment. Who, in their right mind, would obediently line up and stick out their arm? Would you? I sure as Hell would not...

So why is it different with riders on Pro Cycling teams? Why should those guys line up and give their blood to “prove that they are innocent” from current or future gossip, rumors and allegations? What a bunch of crap that is! Number One to be required to give blood, and Number Two to prove that you are innocent. And what a bunch of crap to then assume that a rider is guilty because he refuses a DNA test...

Don’t these professional cyclists (human beings) have the same human rights as the rest of us? If some rumor goes around your office, how do you prove that you are innocent? Should you be required to do that as a condition of staying employed or being hired? Should you be required to give a blood sample?

Yeah, I read all the comments from team managers who are so upset and pissed-off that Ivan Basso got hired by Discovery Channel without giving a blood sample to prove that he is innocent. Might I be so bitchy as to suspect that these same team managers are really pissed-off that they didn’t have the euros or the balls to hire Ivan Basso themselves? All those team managers who are now seeing their chance for the top spot on the podium go down the drain with the Basso/Discovery powerhouse in the line-up.

You know what I say to all of them? Quitcherbitchin, shut up and ride....