SO……. the lib nut job was shoveling a spoon full of hypocrisy. BIG surprise!!

Paul Ryan, or the men he was sipping that wine with, obviously don’t represent the interests of the vast majority of Americans, who have repeatedly heard him referred to as “America’s accountant.”

Gosh, its not like he was spending a gazzillion dollars on a state dinner paid for by us tax payers or anything. Give the guy a braek. How much was a bottle of wine at the last state dinner? or even the last party that hehimself held at the WH?

What difference does it make to any political hack? oh yeah, he is a republican so he is gonna get bad press, it’s not like he travelled to Africa with a bunch (hundreds) of “friends” at a cost to the american people or anything.

Getreal.

how is that gun runner story going these day? Holder obstructing justice doesn’t get a headline here, but a bottle of red wine bought by a republican representative gets a headline.

so funny, so transparent, so boring.

this story is so funny

” …while his party seeks painful cuts to government programs for senior citizens…”

Always got the bullcrap talking points in the holster , huh ?

They shouild have thrown that crazy woman out of the restaurant . Ryan paid for his own wine . We paid for Nancy Pelosi ‘s :

“It reads like a dream order for some wild frat party: Maker’s Mark whiskey, Courvoisier cognac, Johnny Walker Red scotch, Grey Goose vodka, E&J brandy, Bailey’s Irish Crème, Bacardi Light rum, Jim Beam whiskey, Beefeater gin, Dewars scotch, Bombay Sapphire gin, Jack Daniels whiskey … and Corona beer.

But that single receipt makes up just part of the more than $101,000 taxpayers paid for “in-flight services” – including food and liquor, for House Speaker Nancy Pelosi’s trips on Air Force jets over the last two years. That’s almost $1,000 per week.”

http://www.ihatethemedia.com/nancy-pelosi-jet-fueled-by-alcohol-and-lots-of-it

We all know there would be 100 comments by now if Obama was caught drinking two bottles of $350 wine with two other people.

Snicker Barry – as if; there would be NO headline if Obama was caught drinking … Obama has been caught working with Holder to cover up his administarations participation in the gun running fast and furious caper; and Tommy is silent on that one; he is too busy digging up stories (or repeating what someone is telling him to write) about republicans. One on Ryan, one on Bachman (or was it two on bachman)? Nothing on Obama. so funny.

A liberal gets pissed at a conservative for ordering something more expensive for the menu than she did, while eating at the same bistro. lol too funny

well, the liberal isn’t arguing that we should privatize medicare

that’s kind of a key factor in the discussion

you can’t argue that it looks bad for ryan to be drinking REALLY expensive wine
while asking that those who are less well off should be sacrificing

unless, of course, you don’t give a sh*t about the poor. and judging from
ryan’s own self-admission that he’s a Galtian hero (read: ayn rand), that’s probably
the most likely assertion here….

Tommy, are you trying to fill that void left by World News?

9.2% Tommy.

At this point in Reagan’s recovery, unemployment had gone from 10% – 7%.

The Sweet Smell Of Defeat Is In The Air!

darladoon said:
well, the liberal isn’t arguing that we should privatize medicare that’s kind of a key factor in the discussion you can’t argue that it looks bad for ryan to be drinking REALLY expensive winewhile asking that those who are less well off should be sacrificing unless, of course, you don’t give a sh*t about the poor. and judging fromryan’s own self-admission that he’s a Galtian hero (read: ayn rand), that’s probablythe most likely assertion here….

Please, please, please don’t point out the fact in an argument to a conservative. It will only confuse them and make them angry.

You’ve been warned – govern yourself according.

Barry Bonds said:
Please, please, please don’t point out the fact in an argument to a conservative. It will only confuse them and make them angry. You’ve been warned – govern yourself according.

because if you have money, you should just be able to spend on yourself if you believe in more taxes lol

Better to drink wine than cheap malt liquor. Obama and the Democrats are spending money like they are downing FourLoco after FourLoco.

Is that a “dog whistle” of racism Tommy. Sounds like Feinburg is a reads liberal bloggers like Tommy, watches MSNBC, and believes those commercials showing Ryan pushing grandma’s off a cliff. People like Feinburg are getting more and more unhinged and it is only a matter of time before they kill someone.

cjd ohio 1 said:
because if you have money, you should just be able to spend on yourself if you believe in more taxes lol

huh?

ModerateMan said:
Better to drink wine than cheap malt liquor. Obama and the Democrats are spending money like they are downing FourLoco after FourLoco.

Is that a “dog whistle” of racism Tommy. Sounds like Feinburg is a reads liberal bloggers like Tommy, watches MSNBC, and believes those commercials showing Ryan pushing grandma’s off a cliff. People like Feinburg are getting more and more unhinged and it is only a matter of time before they kill someone.

so what spending should obama cut right now?

please, detail a list of cuts you should think he should make.

and also, please argue why tax increases shouldn’t also be part of a deficit-reduction
package.

darladoon said:
well, the liberal isn’t arguing that we should privatize medicare that’s kind of a key factor in the discussion you can’t argue that it looks bad for ryan to be drinking REALLY expensive winewhile asking that those who are less well off should be sacrificing unless, of course, you don’t give a sh*t about the poor. and judging fromryan’s own self-admission that he’s a Galtian hero (read: ayn rand), that’s probablythe most likely assertion here….

Barry Bonds said:
Please, please, please don’t point out the fact in an argument to a conservative. It will only confuse them and make them angry. You’ve been warned – govern yourself according.

darladoon said:
huh?

false premise

cjd ohio 1 said:
false premise

premise being?

TfT said:
Gosh, its not like he was spending a gazzillion dollars on a state dinner paid for by us tax payers or anything. Give the guy a braek. How much was a bottle of wine at the last state dinner? or even the last party that hehimself held at the WH?

What difference does it make to any political hack? oh yeah, he is a republican so he is gonna get bad press, it’s not like he travelled to Africa with a bunch (hundreds) of “friends” at a cost to the american people or anything.

Getreal.

how is that gun runner story going these day? Holder obstructing justice doesn’t get a headline here, but a bottle of red wine bought by a republican representative gets a headline.

so funny, so transparent, so boring.

Yes, Tommy, how much in STIMULUS DOLLARS were used for Project Gunrunner? Was it $57 or $59 MILLION over two stimulus bills?

oh, i understand, ryan isn’t actually “privatizing” medicare, right?

or is that he’s not a Randian?

or he’s not asking that senior citizens and poor people “stomach” cuts?

right.

darladoon said:
so what spending should obama cut right now? please, detail a list of cuts you should think he should make. and also, please argue why tax increases shouldn’t also be part of a deficit-reductionpackage.

I actually gave money to a Senator who has provided a detailed list of cuts, has argued against tax increases, against going to war needlessly, and against the Patriot Act/Guantanomo Bay. This man’s plan actually closely follows my own ideology. His name is Rand Paul.

darladoon said:
premise being?

one standard for conservatives, one for liberals, people can spend their own money how they want, no matter politics

darladoon said:
and also, please argue why tax increases shouldn’t also be part of a deficit-reduction
package.

Because unemployment is @ a statistically rigged 9.2% (read 16% counting 99+’ers and disenfranchised)
Because revenue isn’t the problem, and any watered down increase (jet tax, wine tax, liberty tax) will net virtually nothing in revenue, but will move more jobs and assets overseas.
Because tax increases always trickle down.
Because innovation and investment comes from the people who possess the wealth. It doesn’t spontaneously come into existence because of labor
Because we aren’t engaged in major public works on infrastructure that would actually improve the country, we’re just spending on enslaving voting blocks with entitlements.

TC,

Were taxpayer dollars used to pay for the wine? Or are you suggesting a standard that anyone who supports cuts in Federal spending should not pay over a certain amount for a bottle of wine?

What’s the limit TC that one should spend on a bottle of wine? For someone that believes in cuts to fed spending?

How do you know that he didn’t make cuts in their wine spending? Maybe they paid $450 per bottle before and now cutting? How do you now? What’s your standard?

ModerateMan said:
I actually gave money to a Senator who has provided a detailed list of cuts, has argued against tax increases, against going to war needlessly, and against the Patriot Act/Guantanomo Bay. This man’s plan actually closely follows my own ideology. His name is Rand Paul.

why don’t you list those cuts for us?

and can you explain the logic behind not increasing taxes?

thank you.

Officer: Have you been consuming any alcoholic beverages this evening Ms Feinberg?

Ms Feinberg: I’ve had a couple of glasses of wine a couple of hours ago officer!

Officer: Please step out of the car, watch the end of my pen. Without moving your head, follow the tip as I move it.

Ms Feinberg: “Stop, you are moving it too fast you A**Hole.”

Officer: Please turn around and place your hands behind your back, you are under arrest for driving while intoxicated.

Ms Feinberg: I am not drunk…I am only “emboldened!”

Officer: Please watch your head as you get in the back of my patrol car.

Next time Tommy, don’t believe the story of a drunk!

RazorsEdge said:
TC,

Were taxpayer dollars used to pay for the wine? Or are you suggesting a standard that anyone who supports cuts in Federal spending should not pay over a certain amount for a bottle of wine?

What’s the limit TC that one should spend on a bottle of wine? For someone that believes in cuts to fed spending?

How do you know that he didn’t make cuts in their wine spending? Maybe they paid $450 per bottle before and now cutting? How do you now? What’s your standard?

looks like you got sucked into defending ryan.

not good.

i personally don’t care if ryan drinks expensive wine, but i’m not gonna deny that it
makes him look really bad.

Looks like you got sucked into thinking I was defending Ryan? I’m talking about public/private citizens drinking wine. How others judge.

Not good for you to assume motives!

cjd ohio 1 said:
one standard for conservatives, one for liberals, people can spend their own money how they want, no matter politics

wait a second, one woman confronts a rep who is cutting medicare, while drinking
really expensive wine, and suddenly this is an example of “conservatives being held
to an extreme standard” and “are the victim”?

give me a break!

darladoon said:
so what spending should obama cut right now?

please, detail a list of cuts you should think he should make.

and also, please argue why tax increases shouldn’t also be part of a deficit-reduction
package.

Go argue with yourself drala. Your tale is trite and lame and you keep peddling it.

Remember red wine is good for the heart and Ryan is trying to save the government money on his medical bill.
Perhaps some doofus will follow him into the drugstore and make sure he’s only getting generic prescriptions!

The woman was drunk – and acted like an idiot. Nothing new and different for the left.

darladoon said:
wait a second, one woman confronts a rep who is cutting medicare, while drinkingreally expensive wine, and suddenly this is an example of “conservatives being heldto an extreme standard” and “are the victim”? give me a break!

and what business was it to the woman, how ryan spends his own money?

http://www.redstate.com/erick/2011/07/08/possibly-drunk-rutgers-economist-susan-feinberg-whines-to-susan-crabtree-who-is-hard-up-for-a-story/

What happens when a whiney drunk liberal economist runs to a whiney lefty former journalist hard up for a story of something on something to salvage her reputation? You get salacious nonsense like this from Talking Points Memo.

Horror of horrors, a possibly drunk and possibly crazy left-wing economist Rutgers named Susan Feinberg, and her husband who she probably calls her partner, saw Representative Paul Ryan and two other economists drink a $300 bottle of wine.

And all the lefty economist got was whine.

So she whined to Susan Crabtree, a former reporter turned lefty hacktivist, to write up a whine list lamenting Paul Ryan and friends daring to use . . . wait for it . . . no seriously, wait for it . . .THEIR OWN DAMN MONEY to buy the wine.

TillieGlockenspiel said:
So she whined to Susan Crabtree, a former reporter turned lefty hacktivist, to write up a whine list lamenting Paul Ryan and friends daring to use . . . wait for it . . . no seriously, wait for it . . .THEIR OWN DAMN MONEY to buy the wine.

And bloggers like the one who threw this hit piece together couldn’t get it posted fast enough…

Ryan should have had one of his friends step on her head, they’re good at doing that.

The liberal blowhards of Mediaite are doing their job well today. The sad state of the jobs report are almost lost to the “Older Entries”. Glad to see Ryan stimulating the economy on his dime and not mine.

And along comes “tedderman” making shit up…

I can say with certitude that I am going to get “emboldened” tonight!!!

seek said:
Go argue with yourself drala. Your tale is trite and lame and you keep peddling it.

Remember red wine is good for the heart and Ryan is trying to save the government money on his medical bill.
Perhaps some doofus will follow him into the drugstore and make sure he’s only getting generic prescriptions!

The woman was drunk – and acted like an idiot. Nothing new and different for the left.

brilliant analysis. can’t even, you know, read back through the thread and discover i could
care less about ryan drinking expensive wine, i just said it looked obviously bad, because
he’s asking poor people to sacrifice, while he’s having a great time.

and i would love it if you could explain to me how ONE WOMAN’s encounter with ryan
sums up a “liberal” attitude about such things, especially when fox news makes a daily
habit of criticizing obama’s vacations, or the fact that mrs. obama wears expensive shoes…

hey seek, to quote fletch, why don’t you go to the gym and pump yourself?

gar said:
The liberal blowhards of Mediaite are doing their job well today. The sad state of the jobs report are almost lost to the “Older Entries”. Glad to see Ryan stimulating the economy on his dime and not mine.

so only the “liberal” media cares about non-issues?

casey anthony has seen wall-to-wall coverage.

how is that specifically “liberal” and not simply “sensational”?

waiting for your awesome response….

Is Paul Ryan so naive that he does not think such spending habits will be held against him?
Rookie move on Rep. Ryan’s part. Not ready for prime time.
$350 is a lot of money in Nature Freak’s world.
The Sans-culottes look better every day.
I have been saying this for months, hubris will be partially responsible for Ryan’s downfall.
Many Republicans, especially in private, are not too fond of Ryan. Ryan will help push states such as Florida and Pennsylvania into the Democratic column come 2012.

Thank you Tommy Christopher for this story.

yeah, you guys are right, al gore and all the money he spends on a giant house using all that energy, and nancy pelosi spending all that money on booze, and government planes ………looks real bad

darladoon said:
so only the “liberal” media cares about non-issues?

casey anthony has seen wall-to-wall coverage.

how is that specifically “liberal” and not simply “sensational”?

waiting for your awesome response….

As a Floridian, it is obvious the Casey Anthony trial was neither Democratic or Republican, Conservative or Liberal.
There are those here at Mediaite who would attempt to classify rocks, trees, and clouds by political affiliation.

How dare Ryan drink a glass of wine from a bottle he bought with his own money! Doesn’t he know all members of Congress can only eat ramen noodles they boiled in rainwater collected in a pot they bought for no more than 25 cents at a garage sale and heated over a no higher than 40 watt light bulb?

cjd ohio 1 said:
yeah, you guys are right, al gore and all the money he spends on a giant house using all that energy, and nancy pelosi spending all that money on booze, and government planes ………looks real bad

I do not like it when Republicans do it.
I do not like it when Democrats do it.
Both sides need a reality check. Lower and middle class Americans are hurting. At least the Democratic party on occasion tries to help. Republicans enjoy seeing the bottom 80 percent become poorer and poorer.
Many Republicans hate evolution but love social Darwinism. Economic survival of the fittest.

There will be a breaking point.

Nature Freak said:
At least the Democratic party on occasion tries to help.

Like helping people in the inner city huh? Dems hold them down by not allowing them quality education & having big daddy gov. be the father to 80% of newborn blacks. these two steps ensure a cycle of poverty (but ensures plenty of votes for Dem politicians.)

Next thing you know this monster Ryan will buy a new car or something and then i’ll have really had it!!

darladoon said:
so only the “liberal” media cares about non-issues? casey anthony has seen wall-to-wall coverage. how is that specifically “liberal” and not simply “sensational”? waiting for your awesome response….

I was talking about the writers here at Mediaite. Bunch of useless articles to bury the real news. Sorry to disappoint but there are more important issues to argue about than Paul Ryan and a bottle of wine. There are 15 articles ahead of the jobs report and other than the Buffet article which is about jobs, 11 had less than 15 comments. 3 less than 25. That’s called burying the real news.

Is this an Onion story?

gar said:
I was talking about the writers here at Mediaite. Bunch of useless articles to bury the real news. Sorry to disappoint but there are more important issues to argue about than Paul Ryan and a bottle of wine. There are 15 articles ahead of the jobs report and other than the Buffet article which is about jobs, 11 had less than 15 comments. 3 less than 25. That’s called burying the real news.

Thank you again, Tommy Christopher. This is a worthy news story.

This story will go viral on the internet. What a rookie move on Paul Ryan’s part.

“She quickly did the math and figured out that the $700 in wine the trio consumed over the course of 90 minutes amounted to more than the entire weekly income of a couple making minimum wage.”

If you are an adult married couple making minimum wage in D.C. then your life is pretty much a failure.

dont worry ryan , old fools like pelosi and gore do the same shit

Imagine the GOP outrage if Obama were seen having a $350 bottle of wine at dinner, even if he paid $700 for it.

Oh my, look what was in Tommy’s TPM source in addition to finding out Paul Ryan drank one glass of wine that he didn’t order or knew how much it cost, the loony lib had a half a bottle, but she wasn’t drunk, heh. Like what do you get when you mix rage with wine….a Susan Feinberg and a nothing story:

TPM caught up with Ryan after a vote outside of the Speaker’s lobby. In further explaining his side of the story, Ryan said he only had one glass of wine out of the two bottles but decided when it came time to pay the bill that he should pay for one of the bottles of wine out of an abundance of caution. He even produced the receipt for the meal, which you can view here. The receipt shows a charge to Ryan’s credit card for $472 — $392 for his meal and the bottle of wine and a generous $80 tip.

“I didn’t order – they ordered,” Ryan told TPM. “I had one glass, uh, with my water, and when [Feinberg] was talking about how expensive it was, I didn’t even know [the price].”

Ryan said his two “friends” are economists, not lobbyists, but would not give their names to TPM. He said one of the men is an economist “he reads a lot” and the two have conversed before so he invited him to Washington so they could meet.

“I read a lot about this economist. I’ve enjoyed what he’s written. I wanted to pick his
brain … so that’s what we did,” Ryan explained.

When asked more directly whether he thought it was appropriate to be ordering $350 wine while pushing for cuts to benefits for seniors and the poor, Ryan conceded that it’s “stupid” to pay that much for a bottle of wine and said he wouldn’t do so again.

Here’s a partial transcript of the interview.

TPM: …she was saying, is it appropriate for you guys to be ordering that kind of wine $350 dollars-a-bottle?
Ryan: “A.) I didn’t order it. B.) I had no idea what it would cost, and C.) …I bought one of these bottles even though I drank a glass, and I always pull my own weight for my meals.”

TPM: That was very smart. … But do you think it’s appropriate now that you know how much the wine cost to be drinking [such expensive wine] when you’re advocating cuts for seniors?

Ryan: “I think it’s stupid to pick up that much for a bottle of wine under any circumstance.”

TPM: But you had to pay for it…

Ryan: “Yeah, I was like this is ridiculous. Who buys wine that expensive? It surprised me, and I think it’s stupid under any circumstance to pay anything close to 100 dollars for a bottle of wine.

TPM: So you wouldn’t do it again?

Ryan: “Well, of course not, because I think it’s too much money to pay for wine. Yeah, I don’t really know what exactly it cost. It was expensive. But um, 250 maybe it was 250, I don’t really remember.”

nature meet darla – you two are made for each other.

Publius219 said:
Imagine the GOP outrage if Obama were seen having a $350 bottle of wine at dinner, even if he paid $700 for it.

yeah, because we known for decades now the white house serves wine from a box at dinners

The headline should have been honest and read “Drunk Democratic Economist flunks elementary etiquette rules”

cjd ohio 1 said:
yeah, because we known for decades now the white house serves wine from a box at dinners

publius seems to forget that Obama does have expensive wine and very expensive beef and we get to pay for it!
Ryan spends his own money in efforts to bolster the economy and what does he get for his thoughtfulness? lol

Nature Freak said:
Thank you again, Tommy Christopher. This is a worthy news story.

This story will go viral on the internet. What a rookie move on Paul Ryan’s part.

Um…it went viral much earlier in the day.

The question was about the rather silly $100 ethics rule (at this point can anyone see the Ethics Committee taking this seriously?) for “gifts”.

Only people who haven’t seen a wine list in a decent restaurant recently would decry spending $350 on a Grand Cru Burgundy (even an Echezaux) from seven years ago.

This is why she’s an associate professor of economics and will never get tenure. If you know someone in the trade ask them about a Grand Cru Burgundy that is only now coming into its own for $350 and they will laugh their butt off over her outrage.

Let them eat cake, I mean drink wine!

America needs more people like the late Studs Terkel. The poor and working class, no matter their race or ethnicity, are now totally marginalized in America. This is not good. There will be ramifications, possibly of an ugly sort.

Walt Whitman
To Working Men
http://www.readbookonline.net/readOnLine/26645/

In my opinion, Walt Whitman is possibly the greatest American poet. Walt had a vision of America which is timeless. Walt Whitman will still matter 200 years from now.

Paul Ryan probably hates Walt Whitman.
Paul Ryan’s family construction firm taught him little about others.

Nature Red, and Tooth, and Claw. This is the modern Republican way.

You say the damnedest things Freak.
Paul Ryan’s family construction firm taught him little about others?

Probably taught him how to use a saw and do labor. What else did you want him to learn on a construction site?
How to cook?

It’s rather disingenuous on your behalf to state that Paul Ryan probably hates Whitman. You have no idea. You like Whitman so what? What has that got to do with the price of tea in China?

A silly leftist attempt to make someone appear less than you picture yourself. Somehow you equate your love of Whitman as elevating your status (in your own eyes). Rather silly and baseless wouldn’t you say?

Did not understand your last sentence. What is the modern Republican way? Why is it better/worse than the modern Democrat way? Who is the judge? What are his/her qualifications to judge? Could go on forever to show that a biased view of opposing positions does not equate with a correct view of the opposing position.

Publius219 said:
Imagine the GOP outrage if Obama were seen having a $350 bottle of wine at dinner, even if he paid $700 for it.

Wait, he paid or we paid? I don’t give a damn if he paid. If I paid for it, that’s another matter. I don’t give a damn what people have for dinner if they bought it. I have no interest. If I paid for it, because I’m required to, I have an interest.

Really, all I can say here is bwaaaaahahahahahahah!!!!

Royal family, President Barack Obama & First Lady Michelle Obama dine on Echezeaux Grand Cru 1990 wine, which retails in U.S. for $1,000 to $1,700.

Ryan only had the 2004! What a piker!

seek said:
You say the damnedest things Freak.
Paul Ryan’s family construction firm taught him little about others?

Probably taught him how to use a saw and do labor. What else did you want him to learn on a construction site?
How to cook?

It’s rather disingenuous on your behalf to state that Paul Ryan probably hates Whitman. You have no idea. You like Whitman so what? What has that got to do with the price of tea in China?

A silly leftist attempt to make someone appear less than you picture yourself. Somehow you equate your love of Whitman as elevating your status (in your own eyes). Rather silly and baseless wouldn’t you say?

Did not understand your last sentence. What is the modern Republican way? Why is it better/worse than the modern Democrat way? Who is the judge? What are his/her qualifications to judge? Could go on forever to show that a biased view of opposing positions does not equate with a correct view of the opposing position.

Seek, everything is interconnected.
We do not live in a vacuum.
History is relevant. Whitman is relevant. The American psyche does exist.

Considering Ryan’s family construction firm, I would hope it allowed him to be exposed to others who are not of a upper middle class background.
I am 40 years old. I observe the world around me. The Republican party has changed for the worse. I also am well read, thank you. I guess this makes me an anachronism.

To you Seek, the tea party craziness may be a good thing. You are entitled to your opinion. So am I.

Seek, I suspect you dislike my avatar tonight. His son Justin, I do find interesting.
Canadian politics need to be paid better attention to.

Optics are only relevant to teabaggers when it’s the liberals under a microscope.

Personally I believe it is unimportant how either side spend their personal money but my whole ego is dependent on my side always being right and the other being wrong.

BFD said:
Optics are only relevant to teabaggers when it’s the liberals under a microscope.

Personally I believe it is unimportant how either side spend their personal money but my whole ego ISN’T dependent on my side always being right and the other being wrong.

Seek, do not entirely disregard the mystics among us.

If nothing, they are thermometers.

What is interesting to me about this story is not so much Ryan and his buddies bought 700 dollars worth of wine. What interests me about guys like Ryan and others is that they constantly come on TV and other media and proclaim how bad government is and how it should be made smaller, yet work for this same government they despise and reap the benefits of doing so. The day he comes on TV and states that he has cut his staff by 50% and his salary by 30% and will no longer be taking a government pension with 3% cola increases even if he only puts in 8 years as a congressman and gives up all the other perks he gets from being in office is the day I will take him seriously. Its not just him it is all of them. They are all playing us for fools.

Nature Freak said:
Seek, do not entirely disregard the mystics among us.

If nothing, they are thermometers.

And Barometers.

I do not use random pieces of poetry and prose here. Everything has meaning. Still, Walt Whitman is a genius.
The fact you respond to my posts, seek, is cool.
What religious practice do you observe, Seek? I am curious.

Good night Seek. Sweet dreams.

See these guys are going after the state pension and retirement plans our federal govt is 14 trillion in debt and this is what our congressman get. Haven’t heard one tea party republican scream cut my benefits!

Amid furor over state pensions, Congress gets much bigger ones

Sign up for email newsletters now!
Never miss a McClatchy story
Register
Log in
Follow us on Twitter
Follow us on Facebook
Add us to your iPhone or G1
MORE ON THIS STORY
Story | Business fights Obama’s fix for sick corporate pensions
Story | Why employee pensions aren’t bankrupting states
Story | Illinois pensions devotes 15% of budget to retirement systems
On the Web | More McClatchy coverage of the nation’s economic pain
By Kevin G. Hall | McClatchy Newspapers

WASHINGTON — Some members of Congress haven’t been shy about criticizing underfunded state and local pension plans, even though they themselves enjoy much heftier retirement packages than most private-sector employees and state workers do.

Budget battles in New Jersey, Illinois, Wisconsin and Ohio have captured headlines of late as lawmakers struggle over how to pay retirement benefits for state and local government workers. Some Washington lawmakers have added fuel to the flaming national debate.

In a recent speech to South Carolina Republicans, for example, Rep. Michele Bachmann, R-Minn., said “we’ve got to get real about what we can and cannot afford” in state pensions.

From the other pole of debate, Ohio Democratic Sen. Sherrod Brown linked opponents of public sector unions to Nazi Germany.

For all the theater, members of Congress, regardless of party, aren’t saying much about their own retirement plans, which are much more generous than those held by most Americans. In fairness, the nation’s lawmakers hold responsibilities more comparable to top corporate executives than to average workers, but there’s no available data on CEOs’ retirement packages, which typically feature forms of compensation other than pensions, such as stock options.

Lawmakers also pay less into their pensions, and get a better match from taxpayers, than most state employees do across the nation.

“They still reserve to themselves a more generous formula than rank-and-file members of the federal government,” said Peter Sepp, executive vice president of the National Taxpayers Union, which long has charged that U.S. lawmakers’ retirement benefits are too generous.

Since 1984, members of Congress have enjoyed both a defined-benefit plan and a defined-contribution plan. The defined-benefit plan gives them a fixed pension in retirement that’s scaled to their number of years in office.

By McClatchy’s calculation, 13 sitting senators and 31 members of the House of Representatives — about 8 percent of the Congress — have served at least 25 years and accrued annual pensions worth at least $50,000. By comparison, for average U.S. former workers 65 or older who receive private pension payments, the median annual amount is $8,016, according to the nonpartisan Employee Benefits Research Institute.

As long as they’ve served five years, lawmakers can collect their pensions starting at age 62; if they’ve served 20 years, they can collect them at age 50; and if they’ve served 25 years, they can collect them no matter how old they are. Their annual pension annuities cannot exceed 80 percent of their final salaries.

Only 30 percent of active workers in the country had defined-benefit plans last year like the one available to lawmakers, according to the Employee Benefits Research Institute.

Lawmakers also can contribute up to $16,500 every year to a 401(k) retirement plan on a tax-deferred basis, or about 9.5 percent of their pay. Taxpayers match them up to the first 5 percent of a congressman’s or senator’s salary, which has been $174,000 since 2009.

Federal lawmakers contribute 1.3 percent of their salaries — $2,262 this year — into that retirement plan. By comparison, the midpoint for defined-benefit pension contributions from state workers — whom some critics have painted as fat cats living off the taxpayer — is 5 percent.

That’s not the only advantage Congress enjoys. The accrual rate, a calculation used to determine the rate at which a beneficiary accrues full retirement benefits, is much more generous for federal lawmakers than for most Americans.

Most pension plans have a rate of about 1.3 percent to 1.5 percent, according to Labor Department and academic data. Federal employees have an accrual rate of 1 percent for their pensions. However, members of Congress enjoy an accrual rate of 1.7 percent. That means they will retire with greater retirement benefits than those who have defined-benefit plans with lower accrual rates.

“Extremely generous plans, it might be 2 percent,” said Dale Smith, president of Pension Plan Professionals Inc. in Jacksonville, Fla. His company administers about 360 pension plans in six states for private companies and nonprofit organizations.

By private-sector standards, it’s unusual that lawmakers get both a defined-benefit plan and a 401(k) retirement match.

“That’s much more generous than what you would normally find in the private sector,” said Smith, a veteran pension administrator with more than 40 years of experience.

The taxpayer match of up to 5 percent of a lawmaker’s pay is the same as what’s offered to federal government workers.

Data from Fidelity Investments, the largest pension investment fund, showed that private-sector workers in 2010 on average set aside 8.2 percent of their pay for their 401(k) plans managed by Fidelity, and that employers on average provided 6 percent matches. This suggests that lawmakers are matched by the taxpayer at about the same rate that employers match their workers. But their fixed pensions give them a considerable boost on top of that.

Like the average American worker, lawmakers elected after 1984 have 6.2 percent of their pay deducted to pay Social Security taxes.

If congressional pensions seem more generous than private-sector ones, it’s intentional. They were designed in an era when there was no revolving door between Congress and the trade associations, law firms and lobbying shops that today offer ex-lawmakers big paydays. In the post-World War II era, generous retirement benefits for lawmakers were intended to attract people into politics who could have made more money in the private sector.

“I would say it’s in part a vestige” of a bygone era, said Burdett Loomis, a political scientist and expert on Congress at the University of Kansas. “There was an assumption that a lot of these people, particularly the longer-serving ones, were forgoing a substantial amount of income to stay in the public sector. That was justified on a public-policy basis.

“My guess is that most ordinary citizens wouldn’t view this as legitimate, but I think if you do want to attract people over the long term, it’s not unreasonable. If you value a citizen legislature, turnover, then it becomes more problematic.”

The current congressional pension system dates to 1984′s creation of the Federal Employees’ Retirement System. Lawmakers elected that year or later automatically qualify for the FERS pension.

A Jan. 7 report by the Congressional Research Service said that 455 retired members of Congress were receiving federal pensions based at least in part on congressional service. About 275 of them retired under the pre-1984 system and received annual pensions of $69,012. Another 180 members retired with congressional service under both the old system and/or the newer FERS; their average annual pension in 2009 was $40,140.

McClatchy has determined that 28 active House members who have served since before 1984 are eligible for the older, more generous pensions. Another 130 House members have served fewer than three terms and aren’t yet vested in their congressional pensions. The House has 435 members, but two seats are currently vacant.

In the Senate, 41 out of 100 senators aren’t yet vested to receive their congressional pensions. Nine senators have served since before 1984′s new pension system began. Exactly half the Senate is vesting in FERS pensions.

CALCULATING YOUR LAWMAKERS’ PENSIONS:

If they’ve already served five years, but started after 1984, they qualify for the Federal Employees’ Retirement System. Take the average of their highest three consecutive years of pay — which for the last three years has been $174,000 — and multiply that by the accrual rate of 0.017. Take this sum and multiply it by the number of years they’ve served to get their annual pensions.

If they started after 1984 and have more than 20 years in office, then for every year past those 20 years do a separate calculation of multiplying $174,000 by an accrual rate of 0.01, then multiply this sum by the number of years beyond 20 years in office.

If a congressman served 25 years, the equation would be $174,000 x 0.01 x 5, for an additional pension payment of $8,700. When the two sums are added — $41,412 + $8.700 — a lawmaker serving 25 years can expect an annual pension of $50,112.

Most lawmakers serve about 12 years, so if they retired today they’d be entitled to pensions of about $35,496.

Read more: http://www.mcclatchydc.com/2011/03/14/110396/amid-furor-over-state-pensions.html#ixzz1RaLxSO7H

THIS IS FOR YOU, REPRESENTATIVE PAUL RYAN (R) WISCONSIN:
Easy Money :
Nick Cave and The Bad Seeds
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Crs13JJ87gA

It’s difficult. It’s very tough.
I said to the man who’d been sleeping rough
To sit within a fragrant breeze
All among the nodding trees
That hang heavy with the stuff

He threw his arms around my neck
He brushed the tear from my cheek
And held my soft white hand
He was an understanding man
He did not even barely hardly speak

Easy money
Rain it down on the wife and the kids
Rain it down on the house where we live
Rain until you got nothing left to give
And rain that ever-loving stuff down on me

All the things for which my heart yearns
Gives joy in diminishing returns
He kissed me on the mouth
His hands they headed south
And my cheek it burned

Money, man, it is a bitch
The poor, they spoil it for the rich
With my face pressed in the clover
I wondered when this would be over
And at home we are all so guilty-sad

Easy money
Pour it down the open drain
Pour it all through my veins
Pour it down, yeah, let it rain
And pour that ever-loving stuff down on me

Now, I’m sitting pretty down on the bank
Life shuffles past at a low interest rate
In the money-coloured meadows
And all the interesting shadows
They leap up, then dissipate

Easy money
Easy money
Easy money
Rain it down on the wife and the kids
Rain it down on the house where we live
Rain it down until you got nothing left to give
And rain that ever-loving stuff down on me.

insideguy said:
See these guys are going after the state pension and retirement plans our federal govt is 14 trillion in debt and this is what our congressman get. Haven’t heard one tea party republican scream cut my benefits!

Insideguy, that is because Tea Party Republicans are better than the average American. Tea Party Republicans are far superior to most of us peons. They love us and have our better interests at heart. Tea Party people are benevolent and stern. Insideguy, you are a traitor for even questioning the Tea party.

Praise the Tea Party!
Tea Party über alles!

Insideguy, that is because Tea Party Republicans are better than the average American. Tea Party Republicans are far superior to most of us peons. They love us and have our best interest at heart. Tea Party people are benevolent and stern. Insideguy, you are a traitor for even questioning the Tea party.

Praise the Tea Party!
Tea Party über alles!
Let us have a Tea Party cultural revolution!

But hey Ryan is doing the bidding for his Banksters!! Ayn Rand would be so proud, but she wouldn’t like that he is attending church on Sundays.

Pablo said:
Wait, he paid or we paid? I don’t give a damn if he paid. If I paid for it, that’s another matter. I don’t give a damn what people have for dinner if they bought it. I have no interest. If I paid for it, because I’m required to, I have an interest.

Really, all I can say here is bwaaaaahahahahahahah!!!!

Ryan only had the 2004! What a piker!

And we all know if the hinterlandgazette.com says it, it must be true. Even the article linked says neither he nor we paid for it, but instead the British royal family. So what was your point again?

Pablo said:
Wait, he paid or we paid? I don’t give a damn if he paid. If I paid for it, that’s another matter. I don’t give a damn what people have for dinner if they bought it. I have no interest. If I paid for it, because I’m required to, I have an interest.

If Ms. Feinberg had simply snapped her pics, and that was then end of it, the story would be a brief for some of the gossip blogs and probably work its way into one of the late night monologues, but it sounds like she made a scene and that opens her up for judgment.

While on the other hand, what could make this much bigger story (if they were economists and not lobbyists) was the poor way Rep. Ryan handled it and the response he had prepared.

When TPM asked him for a comment, the Congressman said that he didn’t order it, didn’t know what it cost and he only had one glass out of two bottles — so if Ms. Feinberg was “drunk”, what did it make Rep. Ryan’s friends and why are there so many economists hanging out at this diner, anyway?

Then, apparently because he thought it’d help his cover, he produced the receipt.

As I’ve commented elsewhere, if you look at the non-itemized receipt, his meal cost $42 including tax and he tells TPM that he was surprised at the price of the wine, which was more than eight times the cost of his meal. I don’t know about you or anyone else, but I generally expect my dinner to cost the price of the food, plus a little something for the overpriced drinks, but eight times as much is one heck of a surprise.

It’s like going to the McDonalds drive-thru and ordering one item from the dollar menu, then having a passenger yell for Coke and getting charged $9.50 at the register.

I really hope he takes greater care in keeping surprises out of his legislation because unforeseen costs and unintended results wouldn’t speak well for him as a legislator.

Rio said:
the loony lib had a half a bottle, but she wasn’t drunk, heh

She most likely could not pass a roadside test for and would be arrested for DUI.

She said she had two glasses of wine…..Right.

They all say they had two glasses of wine or a couple of beers a couply of hours ago. Every DUI officer in American has heard this same line when they ask someone if they have been consuming any alcholic beverages.

Go take a ride with a DUI enforcement officer some time…you would be suprised. People who can’t even hold their head up will tell you they had a couple of drinks a couple of hours ago.

The nastiness and pettiness and rudeness of some liberals is boundless .

Magister said:
If Ms. Feinberg had simply snapped her pics, and that was then end of it, the story would be a brief for some of the gossip blogs and probably work its way into one of the late night monologues, but it sounds like she made a scene and that opens her up for judgment.

While on the other hand, what could make this much bigger story (if they were economists and not lobbyists) was the poor way Rep. Ryan handled it and the response he had prepared.

When TPM asked him for a comment, the Congressman said that he didn’t order it, didn’t know what it cost and he only had one glass out of two bottles — so if Ms. Feinberg was “drunk”, what did it make Rep. Ryan’s friends and why are there so many economists hanging out at this diner, anyway?

Then, apparently because he thought it’d help his cover, he produced the receipt.

As I’ve commented elsewhere, if you look at the non-itemized receipt, his meal cost $42 including tax and he tells TPM that he was surprised at the price of the wine, which was more than eight times the cost of his meal. I don’t know about you or anyone else, but I generally expect my dinner to cost the price of the food, plus a little something for the overpriced drinks, but eight times as much is one heck of a surprise.

It’s like going to the McDonalds drive-thru and ordering one item from the dollar menu, then having a passenger yell for Coke and getting charged $9.50 at the register.

I really hope he takes greater care in keeping surprises out of his legislation because unforeseen costs and unintended results wouldn’t speak well for him as a legislator.

You have drunk the kool-aid. Really not your business what he eats or drinks, and you thinking you have the right to judge is distasteful.

Some whacky drunk starts screaming in a restaurant and mediaite thinks it’s newsworthy because the drunk was screaming at a republican. Sad state of political discourse isn’t it?

Nature Freak said:
Seek, everything is interconnected.
We do not live in a vacuum.
History is relevant. Whitman is relevant. The American psyche does exist.

Considering Ryan’s family construction firm, I would hope it allowed him to be exposed to others who are not of a upper middle class background.
I am 40 years old. I observe the world around me. The Republican party has changed for the worse. I also am well read, thank you. I guess this makes me an anachronism.

To you Seek, the tea party craziness may be a good thing. You are entitled to your opinion. So am I.

Seek, I suspect you dislike my avatar tonight. His son Justin, I do find interesting.
Canadian politics need to be paid better attention to.

1. I’m sure Ryan was exposed to all sorts of people. I bet he’s still exposed to all sorts of people – he doesn’t live in a vacuum
2. According to you, the republican party has changed for the worse. According to me the democrat party has changed for the worse. – a saw off
3. Don’t care about your avatar – didn’t even notice. You have a love affair going with the Trudeau’s? The Canadian’s threw out the liberal (democrat) party and are now a Conservative majority. They rewarded Harper for saving them from the disaster in the lower 49.
4. You suspect a lot of things that are incorrect Freak. You don’t usually hit my radar, but keep trying.
5. You’re a Whitman lover – great
6. You’re only 40 – you have time to learn more and broaden your myopic view of the world.

Nature Freak said:
Let them eat cake, I mean drink wine!

America needs more people like the late Studs Terkel. The poor and working class, no matter their race or ethnicity, are now totally marginalized in America. This is not good. There will be ramifications, possibly of an ugly sort.

Walt Whitman
To Working Men
http://www.readbookonline.net/readOnLine/26645/

In my opinion, Walt Whitman is possibly the greatest American poet. Walt had a vision of America which is timeless. Walt Whitman will still matter 200 years from now.

Paul Ryan probably hates Walt Whitman.
Paul Ryan’s family construction firm taught him little about others.

Nature Red, and Tooth, and Claw. This is the modern Republican way.

To paraphrase a great poet “be kind fair lad, let those who will be humble”

Publius219 said:
And we all know if the hinterlandgazette.com says it, it must be true. Even the article linked says neither he nor we paid for it, but instead the British royal family. So what was your point again?

Optics! Also, Ryan paid for his wine, which makes it just fine with me. But anyone who wants to moan about Ryan drinking $350 wine while there are poor, black, transgendered gay babies going without Lady Gaga tickets should be appalled at Obama drinking $1500 wine while those same intolerable conditions exist.

Publius219 said:
And we all know if the hinterlandgazette.com says it, it must be true.

If you prefer US News and World Report, you should have clicked the link in the piece.

Who are the people in the background manipulating our Congressmen for their own gain, and how much do they pay for that influence? More than anyone dreams.

valkyrie101 said:
Who are the people in the background manipulating our Congressmen for their own gain, and how much do they pay for that influence? More than anyone dreams.

to paraphrase your question: Who are the people in the background manipulating our President for their own gain, and how much do we pay for their influence?

@ Magister,so if Ms. Feinberg was “drunk”, what did it make Rep. Ryan’s friends and why are there so many economists hanging out at this diner, anyway?
It could have something to do with the topic of conversation in Washington right now which is deficit spending and the debt ceiling. Imagine a politician doing his job brainstorming with economists over a glass of wine. You’re pathetic.

valkyrie101 said:
Who are the people in the background manipulating our Congressmen for their own gain, and how much do they pay for that influence? More than anyone dreams.

http://www.whitehousedossier.com/2011/07/08/percent-obama-travel-partly-politics/

valkyrie101 said:
Who are the people in the background manipulating our Congressmen for their own gain, and how much do they pay for that influence? More than anyone dreams.

Not more than Patty Murray dreams.

DSCC chair hits Koch brothers up for donation

NeoKong said:
If you are an adult married couple making minimum wage in D.C. then your life is pretty much a failure.

If you’re an adult married couple making minimum wage and living in DC, you’re getting considerably more in cash and benefits from us, the taxpayers. Dear Susie didn’t figure that in, did she?

Ryan is living a double life. He lives a lie and lies to live. Who really wants to reelect hypocrite? I would never vote for an elitist who drinks French wine at $350.00 a pop. Those who would are as phony as he is.

Caroline M. Corman said:
Ryan is living a double life. He lives a lie and lies to live. Who really wants to reelect hypocrite? I would never vote for an elitist who drinks French wine at $350.00 a pop. Those who would are as phony as he is.

Then I think you must stay home and not vote for anybody. If you think Ryan is a hypocrite for going out to dinner and Obama isn’t because he stays home and doesn’t eat out – you have a problem.

You would never vote for someone who imports the best foods, wine, entertainment and doesn’t pay for it because we all do?

Good to know that you’re taking a second look at what’s happening in the White House.

Caroline M. Corman said:
Ryan is living a double life. He lives a lie and lies to live. Who really wants to reelect hypocrite? I would never vote for an elitist who drinks French wine at $350.00 a pop. Those who would are as phony as he is.

good to know you would never vote for a kennedy

seek said:
to paraphrase your question: Who are the people in the background manipulating our President for their own gain, and how much do we pay for their influence?

This why we need strict rules limiting corporate political influence, and forcing congressman to recuse themselves from any legislation from which they will personally benefit. Both sides of the isle, of course. Apparently Canter is invested in a fund that sells short and would catch a windfall if the debt ceiling is not raised. Does that sound right?

Apparently you’d believe anything. If you’re so certain of this “fund” (if you knew anything about funds, you’d know that’s b.s.) why don’t you invest?

If you’re so “certain” then you’d “certainly” make money wouldn’t you?

seek said:
Apparently you’d believe anything.

So Canter is not invested in a fund that sells short?

valkyrie101 said:
So Canter is not invested in a fund that sells short?

I have no idea, nor do I care. I have never heard of a “fund” that sells short. I’ve heard of people doing so – but never a fund that is based on that. So…..

but for the sake of argument – let’s say there is such a fund. How much would Canter lose if the debt ceiling was raised? How much would he gain if the debt ceiling wasn’t raised?

See the argument is hypothetical really – because this “fund” would no more know how people would react either way, would they? The market hasn’t been playing by the “rules” as is. Who’s to say what if the what if’s don’t occur?

valkyrie101 said:
So Canter is not invested in a fund that sells short?

I just “found” your source of information: Salon – need I say more.

According to Salon – Cantor invested between $1,000 to $15,000 (they don’t know how much) in some fund that Salon claims is known for selling short. Salon has no bases for this except some ejit writer who claims it is so.

p.s. the story is a Facebook story?????

Come on valk – that is just silly. So far they claim (the fund) their return is 3.3%, so Cantor could be up $30 to
$45.

seek said:
I just “found” your source of information: Salon – need I say more. According to Salon – Cantor invested between $1,000 to $15,000 (they don’t know how much) in some fund that Salon claims is known for selling short. Salon has no bases for this except some ejit writer who claims it is so. p.s. the story is a Facebook story????? Come on valk – that is just silly. So far they claim (the fund) their return is 3.3%, so Cantor could be up $30 to$45.

So your answer is yes, Cantor is invested in a short seller. Thank you.

Don’t you know the joke about asking the girl in the bar if she would sleep with a man for a million dollars? Sure, for that kind of money. Just one night? Yep. Sure. Can I offer you fifty dollars to sleep with me? What kind of a girl do you think I am? Well, we have already established that, now we are just haggling over the price?

Ryan has the morals of a slug. What a disgusting hypocrite.

valkyrie101 said:
So your answer is yes, Cantor is invested in a short seller. Thank you.

What a stupid response – no surprise. I have no idea if Cantor is or isn’t – I provided further information as to what Cantor might make if he in fact invested in a fund that sells short. I have no idea if Salon is blowing smoke up your butt – nor do I care. I do not get my well founded information from Salon, nor from something someone posted on Facebook. You’ve hit an all time low there bro.

seek said:
What a stupid response – no surprise. I have no idea if Cantor is or isn’t – I provided further information as to what Cantor might make if he in fact invested in a fund that sells short. I have no idea if Salon is blowing smoke up your butt – nor do I care. I do not get my well founded information from Salon, nor from something someone posted on Facebook. You’ve hit an all time low there bro.

Dude, I was just raving. Sorry. But no, it was on his financial disclosure form. The exact amount of the investment was not listed but it was 15K or less. They show it here: http://thinkprogress.org/politics/2011/07/08/263264/olson-cantor-shorting-treasury/

This may be the dumbest thing ever to be put under a headline at Mediaite…so, I guess none of the Democrats here voted for Kerry? None have voted for or supported a Kennedy? Nancy Pelosi? Feinstein? All are liberals that are multimillionaires and I guarantee they have all bought wine for $350 or more and most likely have bought something even more extravagant in their lifetimes.

What about Rangel? Maxine Waters? They seem to be manipulating the law for their own financial gain. Where’s your outrage over that?

Why is Feinberg eating there herself? Why is she not respecting the Ryan’s privacy? In terms of whether or not Cantor is invested in selling short, what about Soros? He’s the worst in terms of working against the American dollar has openly worked to destroy the economies of several countries for his own profit. I am 100% sure that if you look at the investment portfolios of every Democrat in Congress, a great majority of them will have at least one or two investments that sell short – as a strategy, many people diversify to protect themselves…that means that at least some of them will have money in a company that seems to work against their philosophy.

What about GE doing business for years with Iran through a foreign-run subsidiary? The President’s own economic adviser seems to be running a company that is helping kill Americans. Where’s the outrage there?

This whole article and 99% of the comments related to it are DUMB and self-satisfying.

Ryan, you idiot! Best you learn how to conduct an austere behavior and image–if you ever expect to get your plan approved. I thought you were one of the more intelligent Repugnants in the House of Representatives. You prove that you are no better than all of the spendthrift Demon-rats. Shape up or ship out, idiot!

That’s just what being a welfare state success story is all about. You can grow up collecting Social Security, become a congressman, drink really expensive wine, and plot about how you’re going to kill Social Security.

I guess the real question that should be asked is why would Feinberg be eating in a place that serves such as expensive wine if in fact she was as concerned with the cost as she makes out? Sort of hypocritical to eat at a fancy restaurant then chastise someone else on what they spent at dinner.

350.00 for a bottle of wine. Man what I could do with 350.00. But then thats not the point. If that fool wants to report on this sort of spending these days so be it. HOWEVER, lets make sure we report such spending by all representatives from all sides. What you have now is an army of “Operatives” as the Liberals label them, all running around tracking all Conservatives with cameras, still and video, hoping to catch someone in some small gotcha item they can plaster on u-tube or other places. They do this because they have nothing else to offer. No plan, the last few devastated this country and they now have no plan to get us out of it. So they revert to the thing that happened to Ryan. It will be a way of life for the next year or so. I think the politions should take out blanket restraining orders against all reporters unless invited. Dont seem fair but then reporters are not being reporters anymore either, I have never seen so much pathetic and childish conduct as you see in the Liberal camp these days. You are the problem and you cant see that you are only sending us deeper into the problem with no hope or solution coming from your side. Get the hell out ot town or change your ridiculous ways.

IOKIYR! It really speaks to Ryan’s value system. He has so much money in his pocket, he doesn’t have to check the cost, before he buys. Must be nice!! His arrogance comes from the security money buys, and which he is so willing to take away from millions of americans. He does not see them. He does not have to see the damage he is doing. The dems are rich too, but their party ideology doesn’t sanction the starving of the poor, the elderly and children in order to secure their wealth. They do not SUCK THE TITS OF WALL STREET in order to secure their financial futures. The republican ideology is solving 21st century problems with 18th century solutions. A return to a ruthless, selfish SOCIAL DARWINISM that supports survival of the fittest. It is ashame that most of us don’t have a FARM to go back to in order to feed our families, or hunt the meat for food and clothing. The repubs are retro, conservative and afraid of the future, the dems see the future and head into the unknown confident that we can do anything, if we stick together and support each other just as the PILGRIMS did during their first winter in america.

Gee, I never knew Ryan was one of the elite class, to be compred to a Kennedy or Kerry! He looks like such a rednecky kind of guy, who would think he could detect the difference between a $350 bottle of wine, and a boxed one !
And he was with ECONOMISTS? Now were they all laughing in his face when he told them his idea of giving their mothers VOUCHERS for her insurance, and killing their Medicare?

Silly, impotent, weak, crying little Repub males these days. The females in the party can kick the h*ll out of all of them !

I have one thing to say to you lib idiots. Hypocrites. You think your dem pals don’t enjoy meals out? That isn’t even that much money for a vintage wine so suck it up and quit finger pointing. Maybe if people could find JOBS they could enjoy better wine too. Check the prices of the wines at the WH dinners. You people turn my stomach. No substance, no brains. I say to Mr.Ryan, buy whatever wine you want and tell these freaks to go to hell.

Ryan was paying for his food and drink with his own money, in a country where one has a reasonable expectation to eat and drink without being policed, without having to ‘make his case’, and without being subjected to hypocritical liberals. Too bad Ms. Feinberg didn’t feel emboldened to mind her own business.

AndyZNYer says:
All are liberals that are multimillionaires and I guarantee they have all bought wine for $350 or more and most likely have bought something even more extravagant in their lifetimes.
…………………………………………….
Standard “tea” spin! You don’t have a clue as to this being the truth, (unless you have been hanging out in restrooms again). you are correct on this being a non-story, unless it’s paid by tax dollars, we shouldn’t care. It clearly is another example of “teas” being out of touch and speaking out of both sides of their mouths. Let the wine flow as long as ‘teas” spend all their time defending the slips.

gar said:
@ Magister,so if Ms. Feinberg was “drunk”, what did it make Rep. Ryan’s friends and why are there so many economists hanging out at this diner, anyway?
It could have something to do with the topic of conversation in Washington right now which is deficit spending and the debt ceiling. Imagine a politician doing his job brainstorming with economists over a glass of wine. You’re pathetic.

I just made an aside about the unusual number of economists in this story. I’m sure I’m not the only one who noticed and it wasn’t a hit against Ryan. Economics may be the topic du jour, but Washington DC is a fairly large metro and the restaurant doesn’t sound like it has bus parking.

Also, a lot of commenters had been going-off on Ms. Feinberg for being drunk, but if she had only half a bottle (or had split a half bottle with her husband), no matter how you do the math and even if the Congressman had more than one glass, his two companions would’ve had more to drink.
—

seek said:
You have drunk the kool-aid. Really not your business what he eats or drinks, and you thinking you have the right to judge is distasteful.

I said in my comment that because she apparently made a scene, Ms. Feinberg opened herself up for judgment which you, Tommy and others have provided, but I don’t think there’s anything wrong with her snapping a couple of pics and reporting it to gossip columns.

With the pics, it’s like something for Gawker Stalker and if there were no pics, the anecdote could’ve been framed as a blind item; What politician who preaches austerity and sacrifice enjoyed two bottles of $350 wine with his $42 meal?

Otherwise, again, I feel the story of the Congressman drinking his wine would’ve passed with only a brief mention on a couple of websites, if he hadn’t have had such a poor reaction.

I don’t think claiming surprise at the bottle’s price reflects well on him and it also didn’t help that he told TPM as a CYA, he thought $100 would be too much for wine and that the bottle may have been $250, but he didn’t remember. Tommy linked the menu, so we all can see the bottles of wine are priced at $350, not to mention that him claiming that he didn’t know the price the next day, after being “surprised”, means that he doesn’t know whether his food cost $42 including tax or a $142, a difference that would probably be noticed by most of his constituents.

He should’ve just let it go, but since he didn’t, he should’ve at least remembered.

“The dems are rich too, but their party ideology doesn’t sanction the starving of the poor, the elderly and children in order to secure their wealth. ” – CarmenK

Exactly, they just want to run up enough debt that interest will be 10% of the GDP in 20 years… that’s good. Because the children now who will be paying for it then are all rich, who cares about children. Screw the next generation,we’ve got to spend more now to show how compassionate we are.

The greatest good you can do is to steal from a random person and give that money to the poor… at least from the Dem ideals… right? Stealing from future generations to run up a bill you can’t afford is really noble and good and kind… right Carmen?

“the dems see the future and head into the unknown confident that we can do anything” So long as we can push the debt of our extravagance onto that same “future” and not have to pay for it ourselves… right? The future can do anything, even pay for our idiotic spending.

This economist / professor Susan Feinberg was eating at the SAME restaurant for Pete’s sake! She’s complaining about how much Paul Ryan spent but why won’t she fork over her receipt? I bet the cost of HER dinner could feed a poor family of 4 breakfast, lunch, AND dinner.

Elitist liberal hypocrites…. they’re a dime a dozen in today’s world.

I think all of the winemakers in the country should be forced to pool all of their wine in one giant vat, somewhere in Napa Valley. Then there should be a fleet of tanker trucks for distribution around the country, to state-run wine distribution centers, where they would be bottled and labeled with photos of our Dear Leader. Then we should all be forced to obtain a prescription from our Obamacare doctors for our monthly ration of it, depending upon our conformity with state-mandated health criteria. Of course, the King’s – er, I mean, the President’s – people would have to “quality test” the individual winemakers’ products before adding them to the vat, and hold back any vintages they deem inappropriate for the masses, for further testing at the White House. That would be a fairer way to go than the free market system, wouldn’t it Professor Feinburg?

RyGuy said:
This economist / professor Susan Feinberg was eating at the SAME restaurant for Pete’s sake! She’s complaining about how much Paul Ryan spent but why won’t she fork over her receipt? I bet the cost of HER dinner could feed a poor family of 4 breakfast, lunch, AND dinner.

This is far closer to politics than I like to get on this site, but because you, Tommy and others have raised the idea that Ms. Feinberg was eating at the same restaurant…

Based upon the Congressman’s receipt (which he shouldn’t have offered to the media), his food cost $42 including tax. The most expensive entree on the menu is $33 with most priced around $27. She shouldn’t have made a scene, but the issue raised wasn’t about the cost of the meal.

After all, you could feed a family of four, three squares for what Ms. Feinberg (or the Congressman) would have spent, if either had taken their party to the Olive Garden.

I don’t understand what the painful cuts Ryan asks for in his budget have to do with the wine he drinks. Ryan is entitled to spend his own money however he sees fit. If he wants to be a $1000 bottle of wine that’s his right. If Newt Gingrich wants to spend $100K at Tiffany’s that’s his right. Obama wants to take Paul Ryan’s money and the rest of our money and give everyone a $300 bottle of wine. People who didn’t earn the money to buy that wine. People who should stick to water until they can afford that wine.

@Chris Jones: I agree, what a Congressman (or anyone) wants to pay for wine isn’t really an issue and I’ve tried only to criticize him for his response in the media.

TPM made some hay out of his fellow Wisconsin Congressional representative, Sean Duffy claiming poverty on his $174k congressional salary a few months ago. So they’re a natural outlet for these kinds of stories and perhaps memories of how that was played by blogs and the Democrats prompted Rep. Ryan to try and combat the optics with such a poor and kneejerk reaction.

AndyZNYer said:
This may be the dumbest thing ever to be put under a headline at Mediaite…so, I guess none of the Democrats here voted for Kerry? None have voted for or supported a Kennedy? Nancy Pelosi? Feinstein? All are liberals that are multimillionaires and I guarantee they have all bought wine for $350 or more and most likely have bought something even more extravagant in their lifetimes.

What about Rangel? Maxine Waters? They seem to be manipulating the law for their own financial gain. Where’s your outrage over that?

Why is Feinberg eating there herself? Why is she not respecting the Ryan’s privacy? In terms of whether or not Cantor is invested in selling short, what about Soros? He’s the worst in terms of working against the American dollar has openly worked to destroy the economies of several countries for his own profit. I am 100% sure that if you look at the investment portfolios of every Democrat in Congress, a great majority of them will have at least one or two investments that sell short – as a strategy, many people diversify to protect themselves…that means that at least some of them will have money in a company that seems to work against their philosophy.

What about GE doing business for years with Iran through a foreign-run subsidiary? The President’s own economic adviser seems to be running a company that is helping kill Americans. Where’s the outrage there?

This whole article and 99% of the comments related to it are DUMB and self-satisfying.

You should probably include yourself in that 99% description after you failed to realize that this was viral long before this site picked it up. Glad you are part of the 99′ers that has a job. :)

Juarez
And along comes “tedderman” making shit up…

Tedderman says: Watch it and weep.

http://www.imdb.com/video/cbs.vi1829542169/-cashed

Oops, copied the wrong line, here’s the right one.

tpmdc.talkingpointsmemo.com/…/male-rand-paul-supporter-stomps

I won’t go into the math (it may confuse the posters that aren’t Associate Professors of Economics), but here’s a rough sketch of how Burgundy works in general (even writing that pains me, because I’ve met vignerons from Burgundy who have seen the hail storms destroy their neighbors’ plot and left them alone, etc.):

1) There is no “En Primeur” in the same sense that Bordeaux has by any stretch of the imagination. The Bordelais have a pretty strict system because you can divide them into two general parcels, one with a predominance of Cabernet Sauvignon in the blend and one with a predominance of Merlot. It’s pretty hard to say, “Let’s split the Pinot Noir and well, the Pinot Noir.”

2) If you were an Associate Professor of Economics you would say to yourself, “Ok. How many cases were available in year 2004 from this particular producer and their vineyards, Burgundy overall, etc.?” Oh? You weren’t aware of the limits that they place on every step of production in France, let alone Burgundy and a Grand Cru? I’ll buy you a glass, Ms. Associate Professor of Economics.

3) Hmm. I probably shouldn’t mention the Euro vs. the Dollar and such, because that would just confuse your Associate Professor of Economics brain. The whole thing about the importer buying, distributing and trying to sell it before it goes to a restaurant. Oh. You mean you don’t know when any of them signed off for purchase?That and the fact that any decent buyer requires documents about caring for the bottle during every step of the way.

MY BAD. I’M THE SILLY ONE.

If anyone has some good 2004 Grand Cru Echezeux that they are willing to share my friends who know nothing bought a 1st growth of Lafite-Rothschild 1997 for $250 at a silent auction that I attended. It was worth almost four times that much. Those steaks tasted so good with a 1st growth for a pittance.

The biggest consumers of $350-a-bottle wines are hypocritical Hollywood elites, who scream about needing taxes raised while finding ten million ways to AVOID then when they make their movies. Look at all the movies filmed in Canada where they ‘pretend’ it’s somewhere in this country: They want to avoid union coats and taxes…while insisting that those are ‘necessary’ things for everyone else.

Effing hypocrite Libs.

Know what the difference between Ryan’s $350.00 dollar bottle of wine, Pelosi’s “$100,000.00 “Air Pelosi” bar tab and Obama’s $399.00 dollar bottle of wine is?

You, the taxpayer, paid for Pelosi and Obama’s bar tab. Ryan paid for his with his own money.

Mr Tighten yer Belt Ryan???

What a fkin hypocrite

I love wine. Right now I’m drinking something called “Daily Red” which is a Californian organic red wine that I bouht for $9.89. It’s not bad but certainly not great. I usually drink an Italian or French dry red for about $15-18 dollars which is probably almost as good as the $350 French Red Rep Ryan was drinking.
I get a kick out of wine snobs who are amongst the most silly of our elites. Naturally, you rightwingers think that Ryan should be able to do what he damn well pleases, and, of course, it doesn’t dawn on you for a moment how incredibly hypocritical and nasty it is of Ryan to put millions of elderly people in jeopardy and try to force many more millions to tighten their belts while he has no intention of doing so himself. It’s all beyond hypocrisy and greed, don’t you think?

ChrisNH says:
Effing hypocrite Libs.
…………………………………..
Teas, never fail to amaze! How you get hypocrites out of donating millions a year is another “tea” wonder!

ganymede said:
I love wine. Right now I’m drinking something called “Daily Red” which is a Californian organic red wine that I bouht for $9.89. It’s not bad but certainly not great. I usually drink an Italian or French dry red for about $15-18 dollars which is probably almost as good as the $350 French Red Rep Ryan was drinking.
I get a kick out of wine snobs who are amongst the most silly of our elites. Naturally, you rightwingers think that Ryan should be able to do what he damn well pleases, and, of course, it doesn’t dawn on you for a moment how incredibly hypocritical and nasty it is of Ryan to put millions of elderly people in jeopardy and try to force many more millions to tighten their belts while he has no intention of doing so himself. It’s all beyond hypocrisy and greed, don’t you think?

What part of “it’s his money” don’t you understand?

You don’t seem to grasp that you don’t want those who can afford it to tighten their belts! You want them spending spending spending! Open an economics book. Why do you think the market is stagnant – cause people who have money are not spending money – they’re waiting for the other shoe to fall.

Do you think Nancy or Harry have “tightened their belts”?

You are so far off the mark that it is pitiful and you have a vote? dangerous, very dangerous.

What a hypocrite Rep. R. Paul Ryan is ordering such expensive wine at a luncheon while he whittles away the social programs of the mos needy. Why don’t the Republicans ever consider reducing the military budget and/or making corporations pay their fair share in taxes. Perhaps its because the Republicans get their support mainly from big business. So what do the Republicans do, they go after the population they perceive will least likely be capable of fighting back. Mainly people of low income. Unfortunately Obama seems to be doing this too with his social security, medicare and medicaid cuts.

Hypocrite Rep. Paul Ryan, godfather of belt-tightening for the poor, sick and elderly, spent an evening this week sipping $350 wine – actually, two bottles, for $700 – with like-minded cohorts. The event was caught by a Rutgers business professor, who noted they spent more than the weekly earnings of a two-income family making minimum wage.
re: $350.00 glass of vine. Reminds of what Marie Antoinette is as the legend goes, said “Let them eat cake.” In other words , let the most economically disadvantaged get screwed while fat cats politicos drink their super expensive wine. Heaven forbid they would do any economic belt tightening themselves.

Have you ever thought that maybe he is helping to stimulate the economy. When someone can tell you how you can spend your money then we’re really in trouble. Obama and his class warfare agenda is making Americans hate each other. Oh but wait, wasn’t he suppose to be the uniter . Not the president of blue states or red states but of the united states. What a bunch of crock! This guy has perpetuated a lot of hate. And maybe just maybe he was paying attention to Rev Wright’s hate speeches for the 22 years he sat in the pews.

Lynda Appell said:
What a hypocrite Rep. R. Paul Ryan is ordering such expensive wine at a luncheon while he whittles away the social programs of the mos needy. Why don’t the Republicans ever consider reducing the military budget and/or making corporations pay their fair share in taxes. Perhaps its because the Republicans get their support mainly from big business. So what do the Republicans do, they go after the population they perceive will least likely be capable of fighting back. Mainly people of low income. Unfortunately Obama seems to be doing this too with his social security, medicare and medicaid cuts.

Hypocrite Rep. Paul Ryan, godfather of belt-tightening for the poor, sick and elderly, spent an evening this week sipping $350 wine – actually, two bottles, for $700 – with like-minded cohorts. The event was caught by a Rutgers business professor, who noted they spent more than the weekly earnings of a two-income family making minimum wage.
re: $350.00 glass of vine. Reminds of what Marie Antoinette is as the legend goes, said “Let them eat cake.” In other words , let the most economically disadvantaged get screwed while fat cats politicos drink their super expensive wine. Heaven forbid they would do any economic belt tightening themselves.

Make up your mind – lunch or dinner. See, you don’t know anything but there you are flapping. How would you like it if someone saw you in a restaurant and decided to get in your face about what you are eating – how you’re eating etc

The “woman” who got in Ryan’s face was at the same upscale restaurant – an economist no less and you don’t seem to want her to be tightening any part of her body. She got tipsy (stated so herself) and acted like an ignorant jerk. All fine by you.

Wonder if you would be so forgiving of a boor if say some idiot started screaming at Obama at a restaurant about how dare he – blah blah (the truth is – you and I pay for his meal).

So, Nancy is up in Napa for the weekend and drops in for dinner at the “French Laundry”. Do you have any idea how much that costs? I would venture to guess that Nancy has been there umpteen times and it’s perfectly all right because it’s her money. Get it? It’s not your money, it sure the hell isn’t my money – It’s Nancy’s money
(the wines served with dinner – very expensive – been there, worth the money).

Neither is our business – not Nancy and not Paul. Get over your “lack of decorum” and act like an adult.

Ryan drinks expensive wine for a guy making 150 grand a year. Many of these guys go to Congress and their net worth increases by a factor of 20 to 100. I’m sure he will be no different.

wake up america said:
Have you ever thought that maybe he is helping to stimulate the economy. When someone can tell you how you can spend your money then we’re really in trouble. Obama and his class warfare agenda is making Americans hate each other. Oh but wait, wasn’t he suppose to be the uniter . Not the president of blue states or red states but of the united states. What a bunch of crock! This guy has perpetuated a lot of hate. And maybe just maybe he was paying attention to Rev Wright’s hate speeches for the 22 years he sat in the pews.

I dunno. I would feel better if he was drinking a beer. So tired of these elites. These guys all live a lot higher on the hog than their salaries would indicate.

seek said:
Wonder if you would be so forgiving of a boor if say some idiot started screaming at Obama at a restaurant about how dare he – blah blah (the truth is – you and I pay for his meal).

I agree that was Rep. Ryan’s money and the woman shouldn’t have made a scene, but for the record, Presidents buy their own groceries, food for unofficial guests and when they’re in a restaurant, they pay for their own meals. We buy state dinners as a diplomatic gesture and we provide food for official guests, but the President pay for their own personal food.

My understanding is that groceries are purchased for him, then it’s either deducted from his check or they are billed. I’ve seen conflicting reports.
—

wake up america said:
Have you ever thought that maybe he is helping to stimulate the economy.

I’m not sure how much stimulation comes from expensive wine, but it’d be a good and noble argument, if the Rep hadn’t come out and said that he didn’t order it; he didn’t know how much it cost; he thinks it’s stupid to pay that much for wine; he thinks it’s stupid to pay $100 for wine; he doesn’t remember what it cost and apparently he was walking around two days later with the credit card receipt, in case someone asked.

The woman shouldn’t have confronted him — though I don’t think there was anything wrong with her sending the tip to TPM — but because he had been spooked, he flailed.

dougx said:
Ryan drinks expensive wine for a guy making 150 grand a year. Many of these guys go to Congress and their net worth increases by a factor of 20 to 100. I’m sure he will be no different.

Ryan did not decide to become a congressman for the money. He was doing fine before he ever got there. So, I’m sure he is different. He cared about his Country – so sue him.

As he stated, he had a glass of wine.

The “brilliant” economist is so freaking stupid that she does not understand enough about economics that more people who can afford it should be spending instead of socking it away. She admitted she was feeling no pain.
So a drunk, stupid economist gets in his face – what would you have done?

Magister said:
I agree that was Rep. Ryan’s money and the woman shouldn’t have made a scene, but for the record, Presidents buy their own groceries, food for unofficial guests and when they’re in a restaurant, they pay for their own meals. We buy state dinners as a diplomatic gesture and we provide food for official guests, but the President pay for their own personal food.

My understanding is that groceries are purchased for him, then it’s either deducted from his check or they are billed. I’ve seen conflicting reports.
—

I’m not sure how much stimulation comes from expensive wine, but it’d be a good and noble argument, if the Rep hadn’t come out and said that he didn’t order it; he didn’t know how much it cost; he thinks it’s stupid to pay that much for wine; he thinks it’s stupid to pay $100 for wine; he doesn’t remember what it cost and apparently he was walking around two days later with the credit card receipt, in case someone asked.

The woman shouldn’t have confronted him — though I don’t think there was anything wrong with her sending the tip to TPM — but because he had been spooked, he flailed.

I’ve heard all about how the Pres pays for “personal” groceries (but nowhere does it say how much, ever)
I think it’s stupid to pay that much for red wine cause I hate red wine. My husband enjoys it – so different strokes for different folks.

Let’s stop and think – who’s business is it in all honesty? Where you shocked when you heard that Obama has the finest kobe beef shipped from Japan because they love it? Bet you didn’t blink, cause that’s just fine.

seek said:
What part of “it’s his money” don’t you understand?

You don’t seem to grasp that you don’t want those who can afford it to tighten their belts! You want them spending spending spending! Open an economics book. Why do you think the market is stagnant – cause people who have money are not spending money – they’re waiting for the other shoe to fall.

Do you think Nancy or Harry have “tightened their belts”?

You are so far off the mark that it is pitiful and you have a vote? dangerous, very dangerous.

Seek, you have to admit that drinking $700 of wine for lunch is not exactly what the average American is drinking for lunch. You and I both know what was going on. All of them are paid off crooks. Please spare me the rigmarole about how well they are doing before going to Congress. They are going there so they can be doing a whole lot better. Check their net worth before and after and get back to me.

seek said:
Let’s stop and think – who’s business is it in all honesty? Where you shocked when you heard that Obama has the finest kobe beef shipped from Japan because they love it? Bet you didn’t blink, cause that’s just fine.

Again, I don’t begrudge the Congressman his wine and I occasionally splurge, but most of the time I know what my choice costs and when I’ve been surprised, I remember why.

The way Rep. Ryan tells the story, he ordered an entree and an appetizer which totaled $42 including tax. When the bill came, he learned that his glass of wine cost $350 and he left a 20% tip, which totaled more than twice the cost of his food before tax.

If the above had happened to me, I’d certainly recall it and would laugh at my mistake. I wouldn’t spout-off a lot of excuses and two days later, I’d remember the price, especially if I were carrying around a credit card receipt to show anyone who asked.

seek said:
I’ve heard all about how the Pres pays for “personal” groceries (but nowhere does it say how much, ever)

This NatGeo article published around the inauguration doesn’t give an amount, probably because it’d vary based on what was in season and who was in town, but it does say that the President is billed for groceries and that most of them experience sticker shock because the chefs don’t cut corners. (Also, I’m going to guess that the shoppers don’t worry about sales, they may not have a frequent shopper’s discount card for security purposes and unless a member of the family does it, I doubt they use coupons)

The point is still the same – rude behaviour by a tipsy patron at an upscale restaurant turned into a story about Ryan.

Nobody bats an eye at Michelles $600 runners. Michelle travelling to Spain (with friends and family) on the public dime. Perfectly fine and deserving. Not so much if it’s a republican.
Remember the outrage at Palin’s wardrobe? Yes folks – 2 sets of rules. One for whatever the Democrats deem is o.k. for one of their own and the other for anyone they want to smear.

Hmmm, when Nancy Pelosi spent $3,000 on flowers, Mediaite wasn’t interested in covering the story. But Paul Ryan buys a $350 bottle of wine, and it is big news.

Then again, the real story is the TOTAL spending agenda of Ryan versus Pelosi. But don’t expect any coverage of THAT in the media. For example, here’s a number you won’t see on Mediaite – the FIVE TRILLION DOLLARS that the US Treasury needed to borrow to pay for Nancy Pelosi’s budgets. Now compare that with the $4 trillion Ryan WANTS TO CUT FROM THE BUDGET. You might think THAT tiny difference – hey what’s a swing of $9 trillion anyway? – would be more important than a $350 bottle of wine. But since the Left can’t defend Pelosi’s spending spree and wants to hide Ryan’s prudence, it has no other option except to play tiny, trivial gotcha games over a bottle of wine.

felixw said:
Hmmm, when Nancy Pelosi spent $3,000 on flowers, Mediaite wasn’t interested in covering the story. But Paul Ryan buys a $350 bottle of wine, and it is big news.

Then again, the real story is the TOTAL spending agenda of Ryan versus Pelosi. But don’t expect any coverage of THAT in the media. For example, here’s a number you won’t see on Mediaite – the FIVE TRILLION DOLLARS that the US Treasury needed to borrow to pay for Nancy Pelosi’s budgets. Now compare that with the $4 trillion Ryan WANTS TO CUT FROM THE BUDGET. You might think THAT tiny difference – hey what’s a swing of $9 trillion anyway? – would be more important than a $350 bottle of wine. But since the Left can’t defend Pelosi’s spending spree and wants to hide Ryan’s prudence, it has no other option except to play tiny, trivial gotcha games over a bottle of wine.

exactly – the story should be about a stupid “economics professor” who has no idea how economics works.
If everyone was out spending money they had instead of hoarding it – it would surely help the economy.

seek said:
If everyone was out spending money they had instead of hoarding it – it would surely help the economy.

You are right. Good point. As opposed to sticking it in an off shore bank. And lots of the super wealthy see their wealth as power and certainly do not like the idea of divesting themselves of any of that.

seek said:
exactly – the story should be about a stupid “economics professor” who has no idea how economics works.

The issue was not about that, but about political influence and the millions of bottles of wine that is spent to get it.

This is profoundly stupid. You can’t drink anything more than a wine that costs $4 because you have a plan that will prevent the nation from going so bankrupt we’ll never crawl out of the hole. You guys need to learn what it means to be a hypocrite, because this isn’t it.

I do love the boilerplate BS about him destroying programs for seniors and the poor, when his plan would solve a lot of the issues that are coming if we do nothing. No mention of the damage our inaction will do to seniors that will end both programs COMPLETELY, which will no doubt be a bit worse than any planned Ryan cuts.

If only Paul Ryan weren’t such a cold-hearted conservative and simply gave his hard earned money away to others, the world would be a better place. John Kerry has been a consistent mentor to the poor, and his latest example is no paying taxes on his yacht until he was caught by Howie Carr at WRKO. Oh yeah, Kerry was not helping the poor but helping himself. Hypocritical liberal heal thyself!

seek says:
Nobody bats an eye at Michelles $600 runners. Michelle travelling to Spain (with friends and family) on the public dime. Perfectly fine and deserving. Not so much if it’s a republican.
Remember the outrage at Palin’s wardrobe? Yes folks – 2 sets of rules. One for whatever the Democrats deem is o.k. for one of their own and the other for anyone they want to smear
……………………………….
So, since I know your not just being an uninformed spin clown, you must mean “Bush” and all before him should give everything bought and all trip costs back to the tax payers? What was that “2 sets of rules” and just wanting to “smear”!

Dear Seek I thin it is our business when the most low income of us are asked to tighten their belts while these fat cats wine and dine on such super expensive meals. Whether its lunch or dinner is to me, a minor point. What I think is important is the hypocritical behavior. Being that we pay for the meal , the more deplorable.

Doubt people will get in my face what I order at a restaurant since I’m not involved in the US budget but Paul Ryan most certainly is intimately involved. I still say and believe he’s being a hypocrite.

Make up your mind – lunch or dinner. See, you don’t know anything but there you are flapping. How would you like it if someone saw you in a restaurant and decided to get in your face about what you are eating – how you’re eating etc

The “woman” who got in Ryan’s face was at the same upscale restaurant – an economist no less and you don’t seem to want her to be tightening any part of her body. She got tipsy (stated so herself) and acted like an ignorant jerk. All fine by you..
Wonder if you would be so forgiving of a boor if say some idiot started screaming at Obama at a restaurant about how dare he – blah blah (the truth is – you and I pay for his meal).

So, Nancy is up in Napa for the weekend and drops in for dinner at the “French Laundry”. Do you have any idea how much that costs? I would venture to guess that Nancy has been there umpteen times and it’s perfectly all right because it’s her money. Get it? It’s not your money, it sure the hell isn’t my money – It’s Nancy’s money
(the wines served with dinner – very expensive – been there, worth the money).

Neither is our business – not Nancy and not Paul. Get over your “lack of decorum” and act like an adult.

Who cares?????? If he has his own cash to pay for it then go ahead and drink as much as you want, as long as the bill is not written off as a business meal. If he does this then he is cheating the system that allows for it and this is why we need better tax laws and not loops.

valkyrie101 said:
The issue was not about that, but about political influence and the millions of bottles of wine that is spent to get it.

Ryan was buying his own influence? That’s weird.

dougx said:
I dunno. I would feel better if he was drinking a beer. So tired of these elites. These guys all live a lot higher on the hog than their salaries would indicate.

I think so, too, especially since Wisconsin brews so many fine beers.

Also since, as far as I know, the most expensive beers in the world probably don’t cost more than about $10 a bottle, even at the ritziest restaurants in DC.

Where’s the outcry when Obama has Colby beef, expensive bottle of champagne at most of his cocktail parties? Michelle and her expensive vacations that cost us taxpayers money? At least he’s buying his own bottle of wine. And Obama is constantly trying to look like he is out to help the midfle class. Where are those articles by the so call jounalist? These jounalist are always trying to go after republicans. The ” “gotcha” game. These left wing jounalist are trying their darnest from this point on to paint Republicans as “elitest” and wrong doers. Yes, let’s let these idiots talk us into putting this fool back in the White House since he’s doing such a great job! Class warfare will not work. Obama can’t ran on his record, lord knows the mess he’s done with the country. So yes, let’s go after the man that paid for his own food and wine, but ignore the family in the White House that is spending tax payers money left and right. Smoke and mirrors in the making.

Lynda Appell said:
What a hypocrite Rep. R. Paul Ryan is ordering such expensive wine at a luncheon while he whittles away the social programs of the mos needy.

How dare he spend his own damned money while people are beginning to realize that we can’t supply endless free stuff to whoever wants it? Or that we’re broke.

Yep, sounds like hypocrisy to me. Yours, though, not his.

Lynda Appell said:
Dear Seek I thin it is our business when the most low income of us are asked to tighten their belts while these fat cats wine and dine on such super expensive meals.

Well, you’re wrong.

== w w w ( y a h c c ) u s ===

A new season,

In our website can be found

in many cheap thing,

fashion for your choice.

Your charm start from here,

welcome to our website:
== w w w ( y a h c c ) u s ===
Dedicated service, the new style,

The new update, a large hot
== w w w ( y a h c c ) u s ===
== w w w ( y a h c c ) u s ===

The $700 of wine will end up costing the taxpayers a few billion. That’s generally the return on lobbyists payola.

If that rude woman is so worried about the fate of the poor and elderly what was she doing eating at the same upscale restaurant as Paul Ryan instead of taking the money she admittedly spent on food and wine and mailing it to the IRS?

Can anyone give me the reference to associate business professor Susan Feinberg’s outrage when Sen. Kerry bought a $7 million yacht and docked it in Rhode Island to avoid the taxes on the boat?

welcome to our website:

(http://globalsell.org/ )
shirts,bags,hat and the decorations.

if you like to order anything you like.

More details,

please just browse our website Quality is our Dignity;

Service is our Lift.
thank you!!

Fact What an a$$. Paul Ryan can eat and drink what ever the crap he wants and these food police democrats need to quit trying to say that we are all equal. Because we are not it is life!

What happens when a whiney drunk liberal economist runs to a whiney lefty former journalist hard up for a story of something on something to salvage her reputation? You get salacious nonsense like this from Talking Points Memo.

Horror of horrors, a possibly drunk and possibly crazy left-wing economist Rutgers named Susan Feinberg, and her husband who she probably calls her partner, saw Representative Paul Ryan and two other economists drink a $300 bottle of wine.

And all the lefty economist got was whine.

So she whined to Susan Crabtree, a former reporter turned lefty hacktivist, to write up a whine list lamenting Paul Ryan and friends daring to use . . . wait for it . . . no seriously, wait for it . . .THEIR OWN DAMN MONEY to buy the wine.

Ms. Crabtree felt the need to go to DEFCON 1 for this outrage that a member of Congress and his two economist friends would buy expensive wine with their own money. She’s never, ever written horribly about Barack Obama using taxpayer money for fancy wine at State Dinners. She’s never written salaciously about the liquor bills on Nancy Pelosi’s government funded plane.

But by God you get some failed Rutgers economist out on a birthday date with her husband at a hotel restaurant who gets all jealous that she’s not cool enough to hang out with Little Eddie Munster and his econ pals and . . . well . . . fire up the broom stick and quill pen, we’ve got a hot story and a little scandal on our hands. Rita Skeeter’s unavailable so lets get Susan Crabtree!

If only Paul Ryan had used your tax dollars, Crabtree, instead of getting crabby, would have probably spent those 1,276 words of outraged jealousy extolling the virtues of government spending creating jobs for even lowly sommeliers.

http://www.redstate.com/erick/2011/07/08/possibly-drunk-rutgers-economist-susan-feinberg-whines-to-susan-crabtree-who-is-hard-up-for-a-story/

Azarkhan said:
What happens when a whiney drunk liberal economist runs to a whiney lefty former journalist hard up for a story of something on something to salvage her reputation? You get salacious nonsense like this from Talking Points Memo.

Horror of horrors, a possibly drunk and possibly crazy left-wing economist Rutgers named Susan Feinberg, and her husband who she probably calls her partner, saw Representative Paul Ryan and two other economists drink a $300 bottle of wine.

And all the lefty economist got was whine.

So she whined to Susan Crabtree, a former reporter turned lefty hacktivist, to write up a whine list lamenting Paul Ryan and friends daring to use . . . wait for it . . . no seriously, wait for it . . .THEIR OWN DAMN MONEY to buy the wine.

Ms. Crabtree felt the need to go to DEFCON 1 for this outrage that a member of Congress and his two economist friends would buy expensive wine with their own money. She’s never, ever written horribly about Barack Obama using taxpayer money for fancy wine at State Dinners. She’s never written salaciously about the liquor bills on Nancy Pelosi’s government funded plane.

But by God you get some failed Rutgers economist out on a birthday date with her husband at a hotel restaurant who gets all jealous that she’s not cool enough to hang out with Little Eddie Munster and his econ pals and . . . well . . . fire up the broom stick and quill pen, we’ve got a hot story and a little scandal on our hands. Rita Skeeter’s unavailable so lets get Susan Crabtree!

If only Paul Ryan had used your tax dollars, Crabtree, instead of getting crabby, would have probably spent those 1,276 words of outraged jealousy extolling the virtues of government spending creating jobs for even lowly sommeliers.

http://www.redstate.com/erick/2011/07/08/possibly-drunk-rutgers-economist-susan-feinberg-whines-to-susan-crabtree-who-is-hard-up-for-a-story/

Azarkhan said:
What happens when a whiney drunk liberal economist runs to a whiney lefty former journalist hard up for a story of something on something to salvage her reputation? You get salacious nonsense like this from Talking Points Memo.

Horror of horrors, a possibly drunk and possibly crazy left-wing economist Rutgers named Susan Feinberg, and her husband who she probably calls her partner, saw Representative Paul Ryan and two other economists drink a $300 bottle of wine.

And all the lefty economist got was whine.

So she whined to Susan Crabtree, a former reporter turned lefty hacktivist, to write up a whine list lamenting Paul Ryan and friends daring to use . . . wait for it . . . no seriously, wait for it . . .THEIR OWN DAMN MONEY to buy the wine.

Ms. Crabtree felt the need to go to DEFCON 1 for this outrage that a member of Congress and his two economist friends would buy expensive wine with their own money. She’s never, ever written horribly about Barack Obama using taxpayer money for fancy wine at State Dinners. She’s never written salaciously about the liquor bills on Nancy Pelosi’s government funded plane.

But by God you get some failed Rutgers economist out on a birthday date with her husband at a hotel restaurant who gets all jealous that she’s not cool enough to hang out with Little Eddie Munster and his econ pals and . . . well . . . fire up the broom stick and quill pen, we’ve got a hot story and a little scandal on our hands. Rita Skeeter’s unavailable so lets get Susan Crabtree!

If only Paul Ryan had used your tax dollars, Crabtree, instead of getting crabby, would have probably spent those 1,276 words of outraged jealousy extolling the virtues of government spending creating jobs for even lowly sommeliers.

http://www.redstate.com/erick/2011/07/08/possibly-drunk-rutgers-economist-susan-feinberg-whines-to-susan-crabtree-who-is-hard-up-for-a-story/

Ouch. “Lowly sommeliers”? If I had been at Ryan’s table I would have called out the “lowly sommelier” and made him/her give this Rutgers “economist” a lesson in how purchasing wine from a foreign country works, from weather patterns for the vintage to the Euro v. Dollar (that’s just the really fun stuff that sommeliers get to do) to supply chains, storage, etc.

Ryan’s companion who declared, “F#$% her.”, was absolutely correct.

Scary that people are stalking Congressmen when they eat.

news_junkie said:
Scary that people are stalking Congressmen when they eat.

Actually you should try selling it as a concept for a reality television show. “Stalk your Congressperson” would be a huge hit. Oh wait. Most Americans don’t even know their Senators, let alone their Congressperson.

1/2 a bottle of wine is drunk, and she sounds like a stalker. I don’t think it’s healthy to give a stalker-type publicity of any type. But, as we all know the ‘new tone’ only applies to conservatives…

Democrats should look at their polling, independents like myself are sick of the professional left. I’d vote for Ron Paul over Obama, and for me, that means pretty much anybody….

TPM is the blog where stalkers who like politics go to tell their stalker stories… Lovely. Good way to reward scary and drunk stalkers…

lane said:
1/2 a bottle of wine is drunk, and she sounds like a stalker. I don’t think it’s healthy to give a stalker-type publicity of any type. But, as we all know the ‘new tone’ only applies to conservatives…

Democrats should look at their polling, independents like myself are sick of the professional left. I’d vote for Ron Paul over Obama, and for me, that means pretty much anybody….

Do tell. Why don’t you explain to the rest of the class how half a bottle of wine is drunk?

I’m sure you can tell the rest of the class a typical restaurant pour of a glass of wine, etc.

I could break this down for you, but that would be boring. So why don’t you explain how 1/2 a bottle of wine is drunk.

lane said:
TPM is the blog where stalkers who like politics go to tell their stalker stories… Lovely. Good way to reward scary and drunk stalkers…

So you are a regular reader of TPM? One could accuse many blogs of any ideological stripe of rather silly stories that they drudge up.

I doubt her economics on the face of it, but you seem to like the word stalker. That and you think that half a bottle of wine is “drunk”.

You should have posted your opinion to all those vignerons who pushed restaurants to sell half bottles a few years ago.

J Baustian said:
I think so, too, especially since Wisconsin brews so many fine beers.

Also since, as far as I know, the most expensive beers in the world probably don’t cost more than about $10 a bottle, even at the ritziest restaurants in DC.

Wisconsin doesn’t have fine beers compared to, oh well, just about half a dozen places that created the craft beer category. Stop watching Laverne and Shirley reruns.

You do not know expensive beer if you could make that sort of statement. You are still thinking in terms of singles and six packs.

This is just sad. People not knowing wine is par for the course, to use a cliche, but not knowing the craft beer movement? That is criminal.

Oenolicious said:
I’m sure you can tell the rest of the class a typical restaurant pour of a glass of wine, etc.

5 oz. A typical bottle of wine is 5 glasses.

I could break this down for you, but that would be boring. So why don’t you explain how 1/2 a bottle of wine is drunk.

Well, we’d have to make a couple of reasonable assumptions to calculate this, so let’s do that. A 130 lb woman who drinks 3 glasses of wine over an hour would have a BAC of approx. .088, which is legally intoxicated, according to bloodalcoholcalculator.org.

Pablo said:
5 oz. A typical bottle of wine is 5 glasses.

Well, we’d have to make a couple of reasonable assumptions to calculate this, so let’s do that. A 130 lb woman who drinks 3 glasses of wine over an hour would have a BAC of approx. .088, which is legally intoxicated, according to bloodalcoholcalculator.org.

The first is a myth that restaurants perpetuate, but it’s a good one. Yes. 5 oz. nothing less, while I think about the bar in front of me that will tip much larger for their martini. That combined with the fact that a “pour” is just something you do for nothing. The pour for the couple would be slower than it would be for three grown men at the other table. Dynamics count and neither table of “economists” took this into account.

The latter is just silly. She had wine with her dinner, which changes how alcohol affects a person. She did not have enough to make her “drunk”. She was just pissed and Ryan (it’s been updated at TPM) tried to cover his ass over the $100 “gift” rule, where you have to show some sort of “friendship” for anything above that limit.

He was aware of the optics after she confronted, but does it make sense that he has to prove “prior relationships” and nonesuch to the committee?

He’d have been better off writing tax code and then saying, “Whoops!”

Oenolicious said:
He’d have been better off writing tax code

At least he pays his taxes, unlike Charlie Rangel, former tax code writer and Democrat from NY.

Azarkhan said:
At least he pays his taxes, unlike Charlie Rangel, former tax code writer and Democrat from NY.

I thought that was implied in my post.

I’m more worried about reading skills every day.

Oenolicious said:
The first is a myth that restaurants perpetuate, but it’s a good one. Yes. 5 oz. nothing less, while I think about the bar in front of me that will tip much larger for their martini.

I have lived that myth by pouring many, many 5 oz glasses of wine. Thousands of them. That is the standard restaurant pour. Granted, there are sloppy/incompetent bartenders who can’t get it right, which is why they make glasses with designs that have a marking point for a 5 oz pour. This is irrelevant to the question at hand, though, as Feinberg bought the bottle, not by the glass. And guess who doesn’t want to talk about it anymore? If you guessed Susan Feinburg, you’re right!

Oenolicious said:
I’m more worried about reading skills every day.

Cut down on the People magazine, read more Thucydides.

Oenolicious said:
The first is a myth that restaurants perpetuate, but it’s a good one. Yes. 5 oz. nothing less, while I think about the bar in front of me that will tip much larger for their martini. That combined with the fact that a “pour” is just something you do for nothing. The pour for the couple would be slower than it would be for three grown men at the other table. Dynamics count and neither table of “economists” took this into account.

The latter is just silly. She had wine with her dinner, which changes how alcohol affects a person. She did not have enough to make her “drunk”. She was just pissed and Ryan (it’s been updated at TPM) tried to cover his ass over the $100 “gift” rule, where you have to show some sort of “friendship” for anything above that limit.

He was aware of the optics after she confronted, but does it make sense that he has to prove “prior relationships” and nonesuch to the committee?

He’d have been better off writing tax code and then saying, “Whoops!”

Since none of your posts make any sense, one can assume you were testing the effects of a half of bottle of wine on an empty stomach.

You have a
great passat cc blog here! Would you like to make some invite posts on my blog?

Well, if you are driving to and from the resturant and should be stopped by a police officer and given a breatholizer test or like the Pres says an inhalation test,   do you think that you would be considered drunk after drinking half a bottle of wine? I think so. Why don’t you try drinking a half a bottle of wine and then driving and getting stopped by a police officer then come back and let me know.