Do you even wear clothes when you blog?

Who among us doesn't love NASCAR?

I guess I just don't fit anywhere. I spend my entertainment dollar on Toby Kieth and the Texas Ballet Theatre, so is my brow high or low?

[The song "Redneck Woman"] represented the one thing I truly cannot stand about modern conservatism: its defense of anything dumb, tacky, and second-rate, as long as it comes from "the people."

That is so fucking right on it hurts.

This guy is overreacting a bit (the article is really a defense of pretentiousness) but I can see his point. I am in my early thirties and can't understand why so many men my age can't dress their age. I'm unaware of any incident in history where wearing a suit killed someone. I'm no "metrocon"; I like football and boxing and firearms and Jack Daniels. But I also like good suits and nice restaurants, as well. They're not mutually exclusive pursuits.

Oh, no...the damn 'crunchy con' debate returns in another form. Personally I don't think personal tastes can be determined by political views. I enjoy a gourmet meal with a nice glass of wine at a good restaurant, but am also comfortable with pizza, buffalo wings and beer while watching football.

I have to admit - I'm not a huge fan of country music, and was surprised to see it was such a big deal here in Maine - the most popular music format here, actually.

I think we can all agree, however, that David Cross is a fucking jerk-off.

He is a yanker, but he is more right than wrong here. That aside, sometimes it's best to just STFU and let shit die.

I don't remember anybody saying NASCAR and sister-fucking was all that. What I remember is a lot of snobbery from the usual suspects, with all their noses turned up at Bush Country and jeesiosity and the like. And the inevitable backlash at that snobbery. You know they'd never say that shit to a redneck's face, just like Cross isn't likely to give up writing letters anytime soon.

"I don't remember anybody saying NASCAR and sister-fucking was all that."

There go my Saturday nights. . .

That letter would have a lot more 'punch' if Cross weren't personally such a douchebag. And the irony of his calling the Cable Guy's act "crass" threatens to make my head explode.

"I don't remember anybody saying NASCAR and sister-fucking was all that."

Nah, but there is some real anti-intellectualism and anti-culturalism (whatever) going on, some of it a necessary tonic, but a lot of it overkill.

And some of it decidedly pandering.

I don't doubt that Rush loves, loves football, or that Ann Coulter really does like to shoot guns. But it can't be that all these Ivy-educated northeastern types are really that into southern/midwestern/rural folk-culture.

I think there's a thin line between being anti-faux-intellectual and actually being anti-intellectual, anti-crap-modern-high-culture and anti-high-culture, and maybe it's best to keep from crossing that line.

Like I said, and I guess other people are saying too, it's an overstated piece, but it makes a good basic point.

And if it's overstated, well, no one wants to read something tepid.

"That letter would have a lot more 'punch' if Cross weren't personally such a douchebag. And the irony of his calling the Cable Guy's act "crass" threatens to make my head explode."

1, he is a douchebag, and 2, I don't really agree with the letter. I just thought it was an interesting side-note, and a good chance to link it.

I kinda love the feuding that goes on between comedians. They're among the most insecure and backbiting of entertainers... I mean, for no good reason, Cross knocks Dane Cook. They're really egotistical and hypersensitive, and they all think they're the funniest and everyone else's comedy is too derivative, or inauthentic, or pandering, or whatever.

Cross is one of those insecure lefties who think "intellectualism" and "sneering condescension" are the same thing. It's the kind of crap I hear from many an urban liberal towards anyone who lives somewhere without skyscrapers and 3 Starbucks on every block. There are some that fetishize the "common man", sure. But the "common man" built this country from scratch, and common doesn't mean stupid. Most of the commenters here are just regular people, and I find them far wittier and more insightful than most of the sophisticates over at National Review.

Well... there are certainly some witty and well-read people here, but give NRO its props, they can start rattling off quotes from Burke or Oakenshott or dozens of historians or conservative theorists.

I can't do that and I respect people who can.

Where to begin...

The author seems to be conflating the rise in popularity of conservatism with the rise in popularity of redneck culture. But a NASCAR race isn't exactly a meeting of the conservative illuminati. Most of the people who attend these races spend little time thinking about politics. These are people who like GWB and Bill Clinton. It would not be a good election strategy for Republicans to alienate these people, but that doesn't mean that all us conservatives now go line dancing and wear cowboy hats.

His points seem more relevant as a criticism of popular culture than as a criticism of conservatism's embrace of it. Popular culture has always been trashy. Hell, I'm sure there were people back in the day who thought the author's favored activity of swing dancing was trashy. But as conservatism has gained in popularity, there's no doubt that it has picked up some less than sophisticated aspects of popular culture. That's to be expected.

And besides, there's a certain brand of leftism that thinks it's sophisticated to write plays about talking vaginas and to smear feces on religious symbols and call it "art," so at least on the conservative side, we know that our trashy elements are indeed trashy.

Yeah, Ace, but can they quote "Asian Street Hookers part 4"? I'd wager no. So screw 'em.

I've never heard the comedy of either of these people, but I read the letter, and only laughed at the Cable Guy quotes. I've never much considered myself a redneck (kind of hard to be an artsy Wiccan, and a redneck), but that pretentious guy's comedy just sucked.

I think Metrocon's political leanings and sexual orientation are both at question here.

What is beyond question, however, is that Metrocon is an insufferable little snot who should be waterboarded in a tub of Yahoo while being forced to listen 24-hours a-day to Tammy Wynette's "Stand by Your Man" at high volume.

The author seems to be conflating the rise in popularity of conservatism with the rise in popularity of redneck culture.

No, I don't think he's doing that. I think he's conflating -- quite rightly, as they are conflated -- an establishment conservative embrace of political populism with a sometimes phony and pandering establishment conservative embrace of cultural populism.

It's not the hugest trend out there, and it's not really a threat to our Republic or anything, but I think that is going on.

And there's nothing wrong with folk culture. Lefties delight in every sort of folk culture in the world, except that in their own country, because they need to scorn that to prove their superiority.

But-- not that many people are doing otherwise, but... that which is tacky and dumb should be acknowledged as such, even if it's fun.

He's off-base about the WWE (which he calls the WWF), of course. Most people do not believe it's real. Essentially, it's a travelling stunt-show. People go to Universal Studios to see stunt-shows; they don't think the Indian Jones stunt show is "real." And yet he thinks that every yahoo-hollerin' Okie shitkicker that goes to see a WWE event thinks it's real.

I don't think they do. If he had any knowlege at all about this, he'd know that the WWE, for legal reasons, I assume, has for some time repeatedly admitted it's all fake.

So how could people believe it's real? They don't. They just like seeing big guys with outrageous personas growl silly threats at each other and then perform some quite-decent stunts for ten or fifteen minutes.

I defer to you guys who have your fingers on the pulse of modern culture. This fresh, more potent anti-intellectualism is news to me and I spend a fair amount of time among hillbillies. What I do see is resentment and an almost stubborn embrace of shit like NASCAR simply because the elite look down upon it.

Imagine Andy Griffith busting off a chili fart in an elevator at the Time Warner building and giggling about it. That's about the level of anti-intellectualism I see around me. But again, I defer to you guys with your hifalutin' plasma TV's and your insomnia.

What I do see is resentment and an almost stubborn embrace of shit like NASCAR simply because the elite look down upon it.

I agree, and I can't say I blame them. I'm from the South, and I don't really like NASCAR or country music. But every time I hear someone run them down while fawning over French films or Broadway musicals, I start to think that car racing ain't that bad. I would rather sit through a monster truck pull than "Chicago" any day.

Maybe someone should tell metrocon that Walmart sells polo at its discount counter. He should upgrade his choice of colognes. I picture him like one of the people who praised the artwork of a monkey because they thought it was really the work of a master. He gave it all away though when he admitted he was once a socialist. Its my opinion that the self righteousness that you have as a socialist can never really be fully purged.

Another leftist genius that doesn't understand economics.
How does the poor pay for the tax breaks for the rich when they don't pay that much in taxes?
If you don't pay that much in taxes, why should you expect more money than you pay in as a refund?
Wonder how many chinese kids were whipped to make that funky hat of his.

I think he's conflating -- quite rightly, as they are conflated -- an establishment conservative embrace of political populism with a sometimes phony and pandering establishment conservative embrace of cultural populism.

It seems to be that he's upset with the embrace of redneck culture and political populism, both real and phony. In fact, I think the real embrace bothers him much more than the phony. Perhaps I read it wrong, but he seems rather unconcerned with whether or not this affection is indeed real or phony. Either way, he doesn't like it. He states:

It represented the one thing I truly cannot stand about modern conservatism: its defense of anything dumb, tacky, and second-rate, as long as it comes from "the people." The common man is deified by the right.

He thinks NASCAR is idiotic and no one should like it; not simply that conservatives shouldn't pretend to like it for the sake of pandering to a certain demographic, but that there should be no demographic to begin with.

I have no love for political populism, either, but I do want to win elections on occasion. And I do think there's a difference between embracing something and not denigrating it, and conservatives have on occasion emphasized the former more strongly than the latter, so I do think he has a point. But, on the other hand, I suppose we could buy expensive suits and hang around exclusive men's clubs drinking cognac and smoking fine cigars while we discuss politics with a few like-minded souls. Who cares about elections, so long as we keep the riff-raff out, right?

We conservatives like to scoff at lefties for their "noble savage" fixation — the way they go all misty-eyed and paternalistic at the thought of the poor helpless victims of capitalism, racism, colonialism, etc. etc.

Well, I think I can see some similar strain of condescension in my own outlook. What the heroic worker was to an old-line Marxist, what the suffering Negro was to civil-rights marchers, what the unfulfilled housewife is to Hillary Clinton, the Vietnamese peasant to Jane Fonda, the Palestinian rioter to Edward Said, so the red-state conservative with his Bible, his hunting rifle and his sodomy laws is to me. He is authentic, in a way I am not.

http://www.nationalreview.com/derbyshire/derbyshire050803.asp

First things first: Nascar sucks, and is despised by anyone with a 50+ automotive IQ.

But to the point - what's more pathetic: a Kentucky mulletoid with a cinderblock Camaro in front of his doublewide, or a snively white urban Chomskytard artiste comique with a subway stop in front of his 500 sq.ft. shithole loft in Williamsburg? The redneck probably has a big screen TV and a couple of wooded acres for his dogs to shit in. After stacking up his dog-eared copies of Howard Zinn and faux-ironic trucker hats, the typical urban Moby has barely enough space to contain his own sense of self-importance.

But to the point - what's more pathetic: a Kentucky mulletoid with a cinderblock Camaro in front of his doublewide, or a snively white urban Chomskytard artiste comique with a subway stop in front of his 500 sq.ft. shithole loft in Williamsburg?

Well now, that all depends.

What year is the Camaro?

But every time I hear someone run them down while fawning over French films or Broadway musicals, I start to think that car racing ain't that bad.

I think that's what bothers me most about this article. Who gets to decide what's sophisticated? I love classical music, but I think most musicals are complete and utter garbage. The music is trite and catchy, not unlike your typical pop song. Musicals are to classical music what Britney Spears is to modern music. To me, going to a musical is about as sophisticated as going to a WWE event. But it seems that many people see it differently. I've found that musicals are most popular among people who know little about music.

And wearing expensive suits is sophisticated? I suppose, if you can afford it, but isn't there something just a little bit unsophisticated about being that concerned about impressing others through materialistic means?

If this guy likes wearing fancy clothes and listening to classical music, fine, more power to him. But why should others get involved in things they don't like just to appear sophisticated in his eyes? One of the reasons I became a conservative in the first place was that I hated having these things dictated to me from above. For example, I went to poetry readings in college because that's what I was "supposed" to do. I f'n hate poetry. And with the exception of a few women here and there, and I hardly know anyone who doesn't.

I'd rather hang out with people who go to NASCAR or WWE events because they truly enjoy them than people who go to poetry readings and musicals even though they hate them.

In the David Cross piece that Ace linked, Cross throws a "sic" in when he quotes Larry the Cable Guy using the word "there" in place of "their." Then two paragraphs later Cross writes that Israel is "the towel heads sworn enemy." Need I "sic"?

The metrocon was pretty much channeling my own thoughts on this subject, but I’ll throw in a couple more points:

Nobody defines their cultural tastes in a social vacuum. Alongside your perfectly sincere likes and dislikes, there’s always a desire to impress your friends, to be accepted by your social crowd, and generally be considered cool by the people whose opinions matter to you. That’s not pretension; that’s just human. And it’s equally true whether you listen to Sondheim or that “Redneck Woman” dreck.

There’s also a natural human tendency to think that anyone who doesn’t share your tastes is basically some kind of a fuckhead. That’s okay, as long as you don’t use your own tastes as a club to beat other people over the head. But metrocon’s right: there’s a widespread view that NASCAR and nachos is somehow more authentic than opera and Brie, and people (not just conservatives) are more likely to put you down for being refined than for being vulgar. On a typical TV show, who more’s likely to wind up getting humiliated, Frasier Crane or his dad?

I don’t actually hate NASCAR and country music. Well, I do, kind of, but I know that’s more like my hatred of raisin bagels than my hatred of islamofascism. I doubt there is such a thing as conservative or liberal culture. To the extent that people say there is, and then conflate conservative culture with redneck culture, they’re not doing themselves or conservatism any favors.

the WWE, for legal reasons, I assume, has for some time repeatedly admitted it's all fake

Wrestling is "fake" only in the sense that Lord of the Rings is "fake." It's theatre.

My concern is this: How many East Coast liberals think that Brokeback Mountain is real?

After stacking up his dog-eared copies of Howard Zinn and faux-ironic trucker hats, the typical urban Moby has barely enough space to contain his own sense of self-importance

Son of a bitch, I wish I had written that.

Are we talking about sophistication or class?

Most people who really hate NASCAR (as opposed to those who just don't care for it) despise the sport becasue of the class of people who enjoy it. They are largely the less educated working class afterall.

In terms of sophistication, NASCAR is far more complex--strategically and technically than say, lacross. Yet the latter, because of the financial and social obsticles to participation is considered a classier sport.

The truth is that most people want to be able to look down on others. Sometimes this takes the form of disparaging your own culture/people/country so that you can feel superior.

It is a phenomena that is neither classy nor sophisticated.

[As for me, I do not care for NASCAR. It seems boring, but then so did baseball before I understoon the sport. ]

Red Jode said:
In terms of sophistication, NASCAR is far more complex--strategically and technically than say, lacross. Yet the latter, because of the financial and social obsticles to participation is considered a classier sport.

Financial and social obstacles to participate in lacrosse as a fan, perhaps, but I doubt that a set of lacrosse equipment is as costly as even a "starter level" race car.

First things first: Nascar sucks, and is despised by anyone with a 50+ automotive IQ.

Well, maybe NASCAR, which I actually think is the automotive equivalent of WWE. But never forget what spawned the sport - hundreds of redneck moonshiners with open dates on their white-lightinin'-runnin' schedules who wanted to keep their rat rods in top condition and show off their abilities as mechanical savants.

A Coupe of Justice in Every Garage!

Howard Stern's interview with Carrot Top revealed a lot about the snobbery and jealousy among comedians.

NASCAR doesn't suck. Soccer sucks. The WNBA sucks. NASCAR doesn't suck.

I just want to know when Islam became a race? What kind of cars do they run? And how come if you don't like them you are a racist, but it is not racist to not like NASCAR? Them liberals don't make no sense at all.

I've found that musicals are most popular among people who know little about music. - Jason

Well, there are musicals and musicals. Cats is so unbelievably bad people assumed it had to be a work of genius; The Music Man, on the other hand, is quite tuneful. I've found that people who think all musicals are schlock probably haven't gone back past Andrew Lloyd Webber and may not be familiar with Cole Porter, Irving Berlin, Harold Arlen, Jerome Kern, and the Gershwins.

If I ever meet up with Mr. Metrocon, I'm going kick his ass. I tell ya what.

BLS

Perhaps Lacrosse was a poor choice. Maybe I should have said Water Polo or Running the Foxes!

But I grew up in the South, viewing Lacrosse is something that is only played by extinct Indian Tribes and by rich kids at Prep Schools.

True it is also played in my new home area (D.C.) by kids in leagues, but there seems to be a bit of a "middle-to-upper class kids" sport--something the white boys can play without being run off the field/court by better black kids (football and basketball) or Hispanic kids (soccer). So I see a bit of a cultural Tag associated with Lacrosse.

Well Ace, it's obvious you've never been pico-managed, you lucky SOB.

Git-R-Done basically means "We are now operating beyond the pale of established procedures and rules, the only concern is achieving the goal. If caught, the secretary will disavow all knowledge of your actions."

Usually it is only spoken between 1800 and 0500 and on weekends and holidays.

I've found that people who think all musicals are schlock probably haven't gone back past Andrew Lloyd Webber and may not be familiar with Cole Porter, Irving Berlin, Harold Arlen, Jerome Kern, and the Gershwins.

True, but I was mostly referring to the newer, and hence more popular ones. There's bound to be some good music within any genre. But we have rock singers like Paul Stanley and Gary Cherone playing the leads in musicals now. And that's supposed to be a selling point.

But, truth be told, I don't have much interest in musicals, new or old. I'd much prefer to listen to Beethoven, Chopin, Debussy, etc. if I have an option.

I've found that musicals are most popular among people who know little about music. - Jason

And I've found Nascar is most popular with people who know little about cars. A pseudo "sport" relentless marketed as the next NFL for automotively-challenged jocksniffers, complete with "playoffs," rooting for "teams," "front office controversies," ad nauseum.

Real car culture is about technology, engineering, and art, and has nothing to do with ESPN Sports Center. It's about participating, not spectating. Technologically, Nascar is a joke -- cast iron OHV V-8s, single (restricted) 4 bbl carbs. By comparison, An 8000 HP NHRA fueler is an F-22A figher jet and a Ferrari F-1 car is a warp-speed intergalactic cruiser.

Aesthetically? The pre-Nascar hillbillies developed the "moonshiner runner" look (dogdish caps on a black 40 Ford deluxe sedan) but otherwise Nascar has contributed nothing to the artistic canon of American hotroddery. The masters -- Westergard, Barris, Hines, Watson, Roth -- came out of the SoCal dry lakes-street-dragstrip school. None of the important American car subcultures -- lowriders, pro streeters, hot rodders, tuners, 4-wheelers -- have any connection to stock car racing.

Well people will always find a way to try to make themselves look better than others. And politicians will pander to any group. No real surprises there.

And NASCAR really isn't that bad. It's an excuse to drink all day and watch things go fast and blow up. Simplistic, but surprisingly enjoyable.

Chickenpot , Chickenpot, Chickenpot PIEEEE

Lefties delight in every sort of folk culture in the world, except that in their own country, because they need to scorn that to prove their superiority.

Or if they do throw kudos to our folk culture it is as Thoreau Walden types, who enjoy nature, or roots music from a distance, even as it surrounds them. They only see it as an allegory, or platform for diatribe.

Larry the Cable Guy mocks the Redneck with a wink of understanding. David Cross just comes across as an elitist snob

The way out of this whole redneck vs. sophisticate tangle is to simply carry around a little of both. I grew up in small-town Maine, which covers the redneck part, and yet my mother was a proofreader with a degree in English literature who liked classical music.

The result? I drive a tricked out '70s-style conversion van with a Delacroix painting airbrushed on the side that's got "Ein Deutsches Requiem" blasting from the radio as pull in to to liquor store to buy Allen's Coffee Brandy.

Variety, as they say, is the spice of life.

I was with you until the "underrated Days of Thunder". If you think that the NASCAR version of Top Gun is underrated, sorry man, I can't take anything else you say seriously.

David Cross very well may be "a fucking jerkoff", but this is pretty funny stuff:

I also believe that in the right setting that, as unfortunate as it may be, retarded people can be a near constant source of entertainment (fact!).

Although I must say it's much funnier when they're extremely stupid without crossing into "retarded" territory. Here's one example that I didn't personally see, but a friend related to me right after seeing it: My friend hung out with a group of people that had this younger guy that kind of tagged along all the time. The younger guy was constantly trying to get everyone to think he was as cool as they were, and he really seemed to think he was succeeding. One day they had a party, and he started breakdancing, and they all gathered around him and started cheering him on--mockingly, but he didn't realize that and thought he was really scoring some points. So someone yelled that he should strip, and the crowd started chanting "strip, strip, strip!"...and the moron DID IT! He peeled off every inch of clothes he had on him and continuing wildly dancing while buck naked! Everyone there about died laughing while Mr. Clueless probably thought they were laughing with him.

They were lauging with me damn it! It was cool and they were into it!

You don't know man! You don't know! You don't.....

Awwww............

[The song "Redneck Woman"] represented the one thing I truly cannot stand about modern conservatism: its defense of anything dumb, tacky, and second-rate, as long as it comes from "the people."

That is so fucking right on it hurts.

...college rugby? Good lord, man, I'm not sure there is a more vulgar sport than college rugby, and I speak from experience as a former player . College rugby post game parties involve drinking, exceedingly vulgar rugby songs, the poor dumb whore who agrees to be the "rugby queen", more drinking, some fist fighting, some "I love you, man" post fight male bonding, followed by the vomitting, and house trashing.

And, I'll save you the horrors of the "flaming asshole" and the "elephant walk."

In short, NASCAR is down right civilized compared to college rugby. BTW, go to the Bristol night race sometime. The infield is littered with $100,000-$1,000,000 motor homes and custom buses with helecopters ferrying folks in and out. It might not be as snottily Eurotrash elite as F1, but don't fool yourself into believing there isn't serious money in NASCAR.

...ohh, and NASCAR does have the best American race car drivers. Even guys like Boris Said can't stay away from it. Jeff Gordon has continually done very well in the Nation's Cup. He even finished 2nd this year.

I'm not a fan, but its hard to argue against the success of NASCAR and the drivers it develops.

OK, first, "Redneck Woman" is an awesome song. I suspect most of the people knocking it haven't really listened to it. And these are probably the same people that sneered at Letterman for criticizing O'Reilly without watching his show a single time.

Second, I am a fan of the WWE (well, I try to be, but it really seems to be going downhill the last several years), so I thought I'd comment on some of the the WWE comments.

Ace wrote:

He's off-base about the WWE (which he calls the WWF), of course. Most people do not believe it's real. Essentially, it's a travelling stunt-show. People go to Universal Studios to see stunt-shows; they don't think the Indian Jones stunt show is "real." And yet he thinks that every yahoo-hollerin' Okie shitkicker that goes to see a WWE event thinks it's real.

That's a lot to derive from this:

They are the ones who watch the WWF -- a "sport" even apes laugh at...

Yes, that's all he said. I think apes could understand that its fans don't believe it's real and still laugh at it, right?

But I do agree with your general point that it's moronic that people think "fan of pro wrestling" means "someone that thinks pro wrestling is real". I've actually had some fun tearing into people who assume that I think it is real when they find out I enjoy (well, enjoyed) watching it. Don't ask me why people assume this, but you can really rip them to shreds for making such a stupid assumption, and they really have no defense.

I don't think they do. If he had any knowlege at all about this, he'd know that the WWE, for legal reasons, I assume, has for some time repeatedly admitted it's all fake.

It goes back further than people realize. In the early 1990s they officially admitted in sworn testimony that all the matches were staged in order to get out of ridiculous state sanctioning fees (can you believe that state athletic commisions were actually willing to go along with pretending that it was real so they could collect their fee?). But even before that whenever asked Vince McMahon would say something like, "I don't care if people think it's real or not as long as they're entertained." Now it doesn't take a rocket scientist to read between the lines there, does it? After all, nobody heading a real sport would say something like that.

So how could people believe it's real? They don't. They just like seeing big guys with outrageous personas growl silly threats at each other and then perform some quite-decent stunts for ten or fifteen minutes.

In the old days they used a more realistic style and so some people--maybe 1/3 the audience--believed it was real. But never the majority. Also, back then nobody knew what real fighting with pro-wrestling rules (almost anything goes) would look like. Now, with mixed martial arts (Ultimate Fighting Championship, etc.), you'd have to be retarded to believe pro wrestling is real.

But you know what's funny? When I was younger and older people found out I watched it they would 1. assume I believed it was real and make fun of me and 2. proceed to tell me how it was legitimate competition when they were younger. Well, no, it has been almost all staged since the early 1900s. Kind of amusing to be knocked for something I didn't believe and then to find out it was something the accuser actually believed.

Phinn wrote:

Wrestling is "fake" only in the sense that Lord of the Rings is "fake." It's theatre.

Well...today, yes. Through the 1970s, no. Back then the promoters did all claim it was real. I think when the person is claiming it's real then, if it's not, it's legitimate to call it fake. For example, many "reality" TV shows these days are quite fake, but I wouldn't call any sitcoms "fake".

iowahawk wrote:

After stacking up his dog-eared copies of Howard Zinn and faux-ironic trucker hats, the typical urban Moby has barely enough space to contain his own sense of self-importance.

Ha ha ha, a true classic line there.