Comments on: Ask The Insiders Wednesday #27

By: NASCAR Link Roundup for June 11, 2009 « Restrictor Plated: NASCAR Blog and Sprint Cup Twitter

Thu, 11 Jun 2009 16:44:42 +0000

[...] NASCAR Insiders: Ask The Insiders Wednesday 27 Finally, I really can’t recommend The NASCAR Insiders enough. And I really can’t recommend their “Ask the Insiders” segment that they do each week. You should be following them, if you aren’t already. [...]

By: windowlicker

windowlicker — Thu, 11 Jun 2009 13:53:56 +0000

I forgot about Speed’s painted piggies. Yet another example of NASCAR’s metrosexuality.

By: Ross

Ross — Thu, 11 Jun 2009 01:27:36 +0000

T.C.: Funny because we thought that about the octane and were wondering why the Texaco was marketing this “racing fuel”. I think it’s just a gimmick actually.

Now then….what’s up with the guyliner?

By: T.C.

T.C. — Thu, 11 Jun 2009 00:24:45 +0000

Just a quick heads up, I incorrectly answered question #19 from Ross and windowlicker. The leaded gas we used in the past was 110 octane, but the newer unleaded fuel from Sunoco is only 98 octane. Thanks to our email tipster for that correction, and I apologize for the wrong answer. Besides, what do I know about fuel, I’m a changer!

By: marc

marc — Wed, 10 Jun 2009 20:49:35 +0000

Neon, Is the ref to “swayed influence” directed at me, if so why?

By: marc

marc — Wed, 10 Jun 2009 20:47:55 +0000

windowlicker – With Scott Speed perfectly willing to paint his toe-nails it’s possible he may be best able to remark on the use of “gayliner.”

But I could, and most likely be, far off base.

A note to Amanda, while I agree with all the advice given I would also suggest you start a blog or other online presence to build-up a record of accomplishment and example of your writing skill and knowledge of the sport.

By: Andrew

Andrew — Wed, 10 Jun 2009 20:04:48 +0000

#3 – Check out iRacing, it’s got most of the key features

By: windowlicker

windowlicker — Wed, 10 Jun 2009 17:44:51 +0000

knobcreekfan: I do remember that Vickers spot & thought it was absolutely brilliant! The way Vickers just sat there & gave “straight” answers to Colbert’s reeeediculous questions. I can’t believe Vickers didn’t catch on & start being a wise ass. He totally played into Colbert’s hands & it was one of the best interviews they ever did on that show.

But you know what? Vickers & Garnier both looked silly way before that spot aired the way Garnier was marketing him. They deserved exactly what they got.

By: knobcreekfan

knobcreekfan — Wed, 10 Jun 2009 16:34:13 +0000

windowlicker – do you remember a few years ago when Vickers was sponsored by Garnier? They set up an interview with Stephen Colbert (who at the time was still on the Daily Show). Colbert’s segment was titled “The Gayification of NASCAR.” It was about how NASCAR was turning gay and it was Vickers fault.

I felt sorry for Vickers.

Clearly, the PR folks for Garnier did a horrible job of determining what the story angle Colbert was going to take. They also should have known that whatever the story line was to be, it was going to be silly & sarcastic. And since it was going to be silly & sarcastic, they should have given Vickers a heads-up and how to have fun with Colbert…or declined the show.

Vickers was trying to deliver the serious message points that the Garnier media trainers surely told him to deliver. Colbert just kept at it. Vickers ended up looking silly. Garnier looked silly.

By: Stacy

Stacy — Wed, 10 Jun 2009 16:24:51 +0000

Wow…there were some very interesting questions, and answers of course, this week. Thank you to all who participated.
Can’t wait to find out the “guyliner” question…HaHa!
Stacy