this post is priceless!

Since Rutgers is a public university, they get federal funds don’t they? So most likely our tax dollars in some way paid for Ms. Feinberg’s whine and probably her wine, too.

Ryans from Wisconsin. He would’ve been drinking beer. Probably Leinenkugels.

“Oldgeezer111 49 minutes ago:

I dont want to wish this guy any
bad luck
but……………….Id like to see a bullet hole in his fore head. ”

——————-

Lefties are so peaceful, aren’t they?

Speaking as a Rutgers grad, I promise, promise, PROMISE you that we are not all like that.

with sharing a bottle of fine wine with friends or associates.

Even this lowly carpenter likes to pop the cork on a bottle of vintage Moet & Chandon Dom Perignon Brut with close friends.

1978, 1985, 1998, 2005 and 2006 are my favorites… They’re even better than the 1962. Especially the 1998 and 2006.

…at any of Obama’s swanky state dinners??
At least Ryan’s wine wasn’t paid for with tax dollars.

OMG, He’s eating a Porterhouse Steak!

Unbelivable, He’s using real Silverware!

…which if the MSM try to use this. Not the freak show at the MSDNC, but CBSABCNBCCNN.

…which OF.

liberal’s husband “puffed out his chest” like some game bird mating.
Bawaahahahaha

so really it was only a $150-$180 bottle. You can say the rest went to helping the DC economy, all the waiters etc.

… quickly did the math and calculated that two bottles of wine at $350 = $700. Wow! Rutgers must be a top flight institution.

The NYTimes ran something like 300 articles on how wasteful and elitist Nancy Reagan was in her ordering her own WH china and the designer dresses whe wore, but THEOSE “EXPENSES” were all on private money dimes. And some gowns were donated or loaned for publicity, which is now THE practice by celebrity culture everywhere.

The left cannot tell the difference between public and private money. which is one reason they cannot curtail the debt or spending. They have no understanding of wealth generation and how all of their “job creating” and “stimulus” garbonzas are worthless because they just shuffle revenues to states and localities which do not generate any wealth either.

This is typical cracked, petty nastiness from people boiling in their own lava, the open minded, tolerant progressives.

But who had 2 bottles of wine in this story?

eat cake treatment. Economic Royalists feast on frogs legs and champagne while the masses toil in the sun, babies die for lack of medicine, and a virtual rainfall of Grandmas get wheeled from cliffs, Ryan doing his share of the pushing.
A Republican drinks expensive wine in a restaurant, a president & his party wreck a nation’s economy, and the real story is the wine. There are even[did I say even?] some putative conservative a–holes getting on the leftist Mind Bender Express on this trivia. Bad taste you see.

It apparently ruined her birthday dinner.

Don’t sugar coat it, Eric…

I’m trying to get the Progressive story straight.

Is it good for the economy when people spend money? Or, is it bad when people spend?

Is it only good if Ryan spends on middle-class goods? What is the recommendation from the Department of Spending?

Maybe that is why Team Obama wants to take a big chunk of money from the wealthy. And, they want to take a big chunk of money from the middle class, if you want the truth.

Then, they can spend it in the right way, the politically correct way, the Progressive way, through a thoughtful, educated, and socially just bureaucracy.

EasyOpinions.blogspot.com

Professor Feinberg, an economist by training, was stunned and outraged when she saw Paul Ryan’s table order two bottles of the most expensive wine in the house, which sold for $350 a bottle. This liberal/Statist apparently needs more economic training. If people that have the money stop buying things that people make; then the people that make the things will be out of work. So those people will be unable to buy the things they want or need and the people that make those things will be out of work.

The Statist’s tried this class envy approach when they imposed a luxury tax on boats and jewelry. When the rich stopped buying those things or went abroad to buy them the people in this country who made those things were out of work. For the Statist information, the rich do not have to buy things. The politicians finally came to their senses and repealed the tax.

Another point this economist in training Feinberg failed to comprehend is the economic chain from the farmer to the waiter; wherein each participant in the chain makes some money. Let’s look at it from the waiter’s point of view. It was mentioned that she was drinking an 80 dollar bottle of wine and the Ryan table was drinking 350 dollar per bottle. Giving her the benefit of the doubt that she does tip the waiter, 20% of $80 would be $16, whereas 20% of $350 would be $70. Now, which one is more beneficial to the waiter? Which one stimulates the economy more?

BTW she attacked Ryan, because of his Medicare plan. Medicare is going BANKRUPT and needs to be addressed. Ultimately, I would like to see a complete overhaul of the system and move towards privatization giving the people CONTROL over their healthcare costs. Nevertheless, the Obama Regime and the Democrat Statists cut $500 billion from Medicare when they passed Obamacare. I wonder if this economist in training Feinberg is aware of that.

http://teapartiers.blogspot.com/2011/07/make-that-white-wine-please-they-dont.html

Check out what her students say about her.

http://www.ratemyprofessors.com/ShowRatings.jsp?tid=697660