"alien" <nofenders@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote in message
news:3tudnS5duqQT31LanZ2dnUVZ_vShnZ2d@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
>
> "." <.@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote in message
news:hCzzj.16764$097.1745@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > <schla66@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote in message
> >
news:e0c994f8-b82c-4095-8d39-4a96f47940ca@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> >> On Mar 4, 12:56 pm, "armpit" <armarmpit...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:
> >>
> >> >
> >> > > On Mar 4, 9:15 am, "armpit" <armarmpit...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:
> >> >
> >>
> >> > Like CCWS & IRL aren't spec series? At least in Nascar most teams
build
> >> > their own cars & engines.
> >> >
> >>
> >> missing the point. CART wasn't a spec series until IRL showed up
with
> >> their alledged two chassis, two engine non turbo combo that was
> >> supposed ***LOWER*** costs and ***RAISE*** amaerican participation.
> >> sure did that, didn't it?
> >
> > Let's see, last year the IRL had Americans Michael Andretti,
> > Marco Andretti, John Andretti, Danica Patrick, Al Unser Jr,
> > Buddy Rice, Buddy Lazier, Alex Barron, Davey Hamilton,
> > Richie Hearn, Jaques Lazier, Scott Sharp, Ed Carpenter,
> > AJ Foyt IV, Jeff Simmons, Sarah Fisher, Jon Herb...
> >
> > Do remind us all again as to the numbers of American (again
> > meaning US citizens) drivers that participated in any Chump
> > Car event (parade) last year.
> >
> >
>
>
> Chimp, are we making up the rules as we go along? Champ Car / CART
never
> once stated that they only wanted Americans. That was a part of the
> "vision". remember? And of that impressive list of IRL participants how
> many were once off Indy 500 field fillers and how many were full time
> IRLers. I really don't know and I'm not going to look but a lot of
those
> names don't look like regulars. Of the 17 names there it looks like
only
5
> or 6 are full time IRL drivers. What was the "vision" again? 1/3
> Americans? No wait, I just heard Tony say on national TV that the IRL
is
an
> international series. It's so confusing.
>
> alien
>
Hey goof, what part of the OPs " ***RAISE*** amaerican
participation " that I was clearly responding to, so easily and
uttertly escaped your admittedly quite modest (at best, and
yes, I'm being overly kind) attention and comprehension?
In any case, methinks you "doth protest too much".
But you're right not to check facts as those of your ilk are
only destined to even further compound their already
innumerable errors by any such additional attempts.
|
