Richard Rawlings Is Fast N' Loud N' Pouring Light

Sorry @Les This has to be done. Maybe many do not care, but you are wrong in saying that "everybody else" says "who cares?" I am one of the "everybody" and I care. And being willing to call BS on BS is a noble calling that prevents society from sliding further downhill than it otherwise would, yet it is a calling that few are willing to assume. One of the reasons I enjoy reading Jack's output is his willingness to call BS when it is clearly BS. If you don't like it, either provide some *convincing* proof, or just move on and don't complain just because it doesn't concern you.

@VolandoBajo Oh you done done it now. :) You care about the Cannonball run, bravo... bravo. Jolly good. It's still not that big a deal. As for calling BS on BS.. I guess that only counts when calling it on people you dislike and not one ones you admire.. for reasons? Saying Richard Rawlings faked his Cannonball Run record is an arguable point, if you actually care about it it's worthy of debate. Saying Richard Rawlings based his identity on the Cannonball run however is terribly disingenuous. The Cannonball run. maybe not Everybody Else doesn't care, that was an exaggeration (it's called 'Hyperbole' children) but it is very very niche. I'm sorry, but it just is. The vast majority of the public doesn't care, nor should they be expected to, and it's certainly nothing to hang one's public persona on as a lynchpin of how one defines oneself. Obviously, since Richard Rawlings doesn't; he defines himself by a love of obnoxious hotrods, girls in bikinis, low-quality beer and being best friends with the ambulatory life-support system of the most epic beard this side of ZZTop. the Cannonball run is just 'interesting background trivia, now where's my beer?' And if it is noble to call BS on BS, well then. Jack Baruth. You are an @$$hole. I don't know when this happened. I don't know if this was a slow subtle development. I don't know if back in the days of when I was a fan I was just making excuses or just not-noticing the surging tide of @$$holeness, but it's there. The Scion FR-S doesn't need more power, adding more would defeat the entire purpose of the car. The Honda Accord V-6 is faster than the Scion FR-S, this is true. This is also irrelevant. Chirping the front tires when leaving a Scion dealership to prove a point only proves the point that you're an @$$hole. Not everything in the world is about numbers-numbers-mathsmathsmaths. It's not all about accuracy to the one-onehundreth. It's not all about Hard Facts made by Hard Men (while hard). "Drifting ain't fast yo." Right, but it's fun, and it looks cool. You remember fun, don't you? "The Nurbergring's varying climates means the accuracy of lap-times blah-blah-blah-blah." Nobody cares. Seriously. Anyone out there who does care? You're a nobody. Calling BS on BS and calling a spade a spade. Nobody cares, it's just fluff. And if you're getting stuck-in arguing with the nobodies who take the BurgerKingRing lap-times seriously that doesn't make you smart, that drops you down to their level. Nobody Actually thinks the Stig is some god of motorsport, we just pretend he is because it's fun. Yes, fun. Pointing and doing the Nelson 'HA-ha' at Ben Collins has an off at a racetrack only makes you look like an @$$hole. Furiosa's initial fight with Mad Max was realistic. It's obvious anyone, male or female, with Charlize theron's build would be at a serious disadvantage in that fight even without being sans-appendage.. so that's why the whole fight Furiosa relies on sucker-punches and scrambling to get ahold of a weapon because she knows if Max gets a good hold on her the fight is over, and lo and behold it is. There is no 'Feminism' here, just a good movie. If you don't believe that the movie has a flamethrower guitar.. your argument is invalid. Aligning with the Red Pill crowd does not make you appear wise in the ways of the internet. It simply calls into question the actual number of sexual conquests implied to be under your belt. You don't own automotive enthusiasm. Those of us who love Top Gear, love Fast 'n Loud, love hanging the tail out on a track day and spoiling your one-onehundredth of a second lap-time and love cars that DON'T have all the 'more-equal' performance stats have just as much a right to love all those things as you have the right to love how much faster your Honda Accord is than the cars guys your dad's age lust after. And all of the above is pointless because You, Jack Baruth, are no better than me. The pricey shoes you buy, the guitars you collect, the lap-times you've knocked-out and all the ladies you've graced with fascinating nome-de-plumes don't make you better than me.. and neither does me calling you on your bullshit make me better than you. Thank you for your time, and for all the entertaining writing you've given me and everyone else over the years, and I wish you well. As for YOU VolandoBajo. 'Don't like it? Don't Read It' is the argument of teenagers defending their Steven Universe slash-fics, not the words used when grown folks is talkin'.

@Les, your judgment call that JB only calls BS on people he doesn't like is nothing more or less than your opinion, to which you are entitled. But you offer no supporting facts as to what you consider BS that JB went light on because of favoritism. So I find your opinion nothing more than that. Your statement that Rawlings' Cannonball Run "record" was arguable says it all...it is not clearly documented, and hence one may reasonably dismiss the claim for lack of solid supporting evidence, hence suspect. I'm glad that on your last take, you attempted to educate children as to the difference between a blanket statement and hyperbole, a point that was nowhere mentioned when you first made the statement. And absent the usual internet conventions such as a winking emoticon to indicate that you didn't literally mean "Every one", it does not make me a child to answer what was presented as an absolute with a valid means of rebuttal. And all the other supposed defining claims to fames that Rawlings sports amount to little more than an attempt at being an elder statesman/figurehead leader of the PBR cap branch of hipsters. That branch, to me, is both an unearned comparison to the original concept of hipsters (see, for example, Norman Mailer's 'The White Negro' for a definition of the original hipster movement). And the closest he ever comes to including nurturing outrageous facial hair as a sign of alleged hipsterdom, may well be a mention of spade goatees, though it has been long enough that I don't remember, and no longer have my copy. But it is a half a world from there to underweight young guys in Williamsburg wearing skinny jeans and an oh-so-ironic Mack Truck baseball cap and drinking a PBR in through his handlebar mustache. You are certainly entitled to your opinion of Jack Baruth, though I see no basis in reality for your animosity. A bit of projection, perhaps, or sticking up for Rawlings by firing back at the source of criticism, perhaps? The point that Jack was making about drifting was that it did not give one any sense of the capabilities of a car at speed. Getting laid is fun too, but it doesn't enhance your ability to discern the characteristics of a car at speed, which to my recollection, was JB's central point when he made his statement about drifting. And one again, regarding Nurburgring times, and the factors that affect them, and the attempt to quantify those effects: yes, it is too detailed, perhaps even a bit pointy-headed, for the daily driver who only cares if his car can get out of its own way at a stop light, but for those who want to know how the world's top cars, or even several alleged "best in class" machines stack up, Nurburgring times give better indication that standing quarter or zero-sixty times do. And there is a higher density of people with engineering and other quant type backgrounds here than on most blogs, so it makes sense that at least some of us might care about the factors that contribute to differences, and the amount of difference those factors make. I admit that even with a minor in math from a known math school, I don't really care that much about times at the Ring. But I don't think that caring to understand that level of detail makes other readers narrow-minded fanatics, in the way that stamp collectors are often assumed to be. I do not concede that Hollywood has not looked at the fact that having a strong woman character in the Mad Max sequel might enhance their box office, and hence caved into feminism as a crass attempt at more profits. It doesn't seem farfetched at all to me, and if you do, you have a much higher view of Hollywood integrity and ethics than I do, though I doubt we will ever agree on that. But I do think that your implying that Hollywood would not stoop to that places you in the minority of the adult public. As to your snarky attempt at a putdown by trashing my statement that if you didn't like Jack's writing, you didn't have to read it (just as I don't waste time on Rawlings' clearly contrived persona)...that was nothing more than a statement of fact, coupled with an implied question as to why you read Jack's work so closely as to be able to trash it in both fine detail and technicolor. And adults do not attempt to appear more mature, or more logical debaters, by trying to classify anyone who says that they can just not read something they don't like (instead of keeping a running scorecard) as being at the level of a child, only reveals YOUR childish attempt to manufacture and argument and claim a win, where you have accomplished no such thing. I still say that if you consider JB to be a pompous ass, why do enjoy wallowing through it and launching vitriolic counterattacks? Is that part of what you feel you need to do in order to keep your new American hipster credentials up-to-date; look down your nose with an obvious disdain at anyone who takes real achievements and real differences seriously, instead of just bellying up to the bar with the boys (I find it hard to envision them as men), and settling in to enjoy a cable show on drifting, or big tits and big blocks? Sorry, but my pointing out that you had an alternative to doing what you considered wasting time on Jack's subjects was merely a statement of fact, in the face of your repeated reading of what you claim to be uninteresting. It was not an attempt to win an argument, make a point, or put you down. Just a statement that your actions seem to contradict your words, and that my suggested alternative might suit your temperament better. You seemed to be obsessed with dwelling on the insignificance of JB's writing, rather than considering that you have no objective reason to spend so much time reading him, other than perhaps a subconscious inferiority complex, or a desire to maintain or gain status at your local "new hipster" watering hole. Your attempt at casting my simple observation (about your time budget seeming to disagree with what you claim is worthwhile), as being the mark of a child, is itself a clear indication of your childish simplicity, given the fact that you grasp at logical straws in an attempt to make yourself look like the BMOC (the Big Man on Cars, in this context.) And as a closing point, I have not ever seen Jack make a comment that his choice in shoes makes him a better man than others, just that it is his chosen style. We all get to make those choices. Jack does choose to discuss his life as a cornerstone for talking and writing about life in general, and that includes his personal life with others. And I see no signs of inconsistency or chronic bragging about either his capabilities (on or off the track) or his equipment that would cause me to conclude that he includes this material as a way to appear superior. Those days of having multiple women in my life to discuss are behind me now, but only because I have found the love of my life, and am older and settling down now. But when I was a younger man, and was in search of both variety in relationships and pure conquests, I knew many other guys who were capable of doing the same, and did so. It is not so much bragging, to me, as a man approaching the middle of his life, and wanting to re-examine the path he is on, in part by examining where that has led him recently. And the use of pseudonyms (witty or not) is a gentlemanly alternative to providing thinly veiled references tied to women's real names. I had nicknames for many women I knew, nicknames I didn't bandy about freely, but did use in the company of my best male friends, as a kind of shorthand. And I will bet you have done the same. You just may not have put them down on paper. But since Jack writes about his life, he needs some point of reference for those people, and the nicknames is a good point of departure. If you choose to think that that is childish behavior, I will plead guilty as charged, but it is not proof of bragging...just proof of not being as selective in my female companionship in my youth, as I became as I grew older. So in the end, if you don't want to have it suggested that you might benefit by spending less time on writing you don't enjoy, then continue to read what you don't enjoy, and continue to toss out constant criticism of the same. Just don't expect some of the others of us to refrain from calling BS on that sort of diving into what you dislike and then complaining about how it wastes your time and annoys your "hipster good ole boy" sensibilities of PBR, drifting and I suppose a heightened (in your mind) sensitivity to the feelings of women. That is not the argument style of a child...it is a simple statement of the obvious, that you spend a lot of time looking at what you claim to dislike, and it seems like the world would be better both for you and others if you focussed more on what you do like, and less on what you don't. BTW, I find nothing commendable about pretending to be a man of the masses by virtue of having outrageous facial hair and swilling cheap beer. But someone must be doing those things, so at the risk of being mistaken as a child by you in your childish analysis, keep on enjoying them, as well as figurehead personas who claim to do the same, but when you move into a territory where people (at least some of them) DO care about split seconds in lap times, handling "at speed" and not just at limits of adhesion of tires, and also DO care about hearing the musings of another man, especially one who is a talented writer and wordsmith, and who can and does drive near the limits of auto performance. And who is also examining his life and his relationship to others. In closing, might I dare suggest that you might find the writing style of Jalopnik or the Daily Kanban more to your tastes, if indeed you aren't already associated with one of them in some form or another. The B&B here will not be swayed by your argument that track variables' effect on lap times is insignificant, or that drifting produces driving skill and improved auto evaluations. And most of those who don't have much use for Jack's recounting his personal life simply skip over that part and read his automotive output. But there are venues for your viewpoint. It just doesn't match up well with the interests and viewpoints of the majority here, I'm willing to wager. See you around, I'm sure, as I'm sure you will find as much fault with my response as you do with Jack's writing. But try to have a nice day, perhaps spending an entire one only reading what you do like, instead of delving deeply into all that you find wrong here, and especially in the writings of JB. We will all likely be better off if you do.