It's Boorish to Order a SECOND Bottle of $350 Wine

If you're a real connoisseur of fine wine and can appreciate a rare vintage, you don't waste the good stuff on dinner companions who'd be just as happy with table wine. And you certainly don't order a second bottle merely to watch them guzzle it down.

Paul Ryan admits his own ignorance of fine wine, admitting he can't taste the difference beyond a certain level. At least he's honest about it, unlike his boorish companions who probably can't taste the difference either. What attracted them to this particular wine was that it was the most expensive on the menu. Feeling lightheaded, they ordered a second bottle, although by then they certainly couldn't appreciate the quality of the wine.

There's an argument to be made that the finer things in life cost more and more power to those who can appreciate them. But here's an instance of wealthy boors trying to pass themselves off as better than they are. Their own behavior shows that they don't appreciate fine wine; they pretend they do for the sake of conspicuous consumption.



A Boor Asleep

Its their money, if they want to spend 700 on wine, who am I to judge.

People who really do appreciate fine wine are appalled at boorish behavior. True, the three dinner companions were spending their own money, but ordering a second bottle shows vulgarity. It implies that the first bottle was wasted on people who bought it only because it was expensive.

If this was a lowly teacher then there would be a big stink over this...brought on by some asshole republican.

If they're (lobbyists) buying then the people deserve to know what their employee is doing to get $700 dollars worth of vino, and what is he expected to return in favor.

Seems a bit trivial.

It's an instance of what the vulgar rich do with money - they don't spend it wisely, they throw it around. And these guys are economists offering policy advice to the chairman of the House budget committee.

Have you been paying attention to the news lately? Republicans are refusing to agree to an increase in the debt ceiling because, they say, it's wrong to take money from the wealthy to spend it for America's collective good. This, at a time of massive unemployment and social unrest.

I don't think these were friends having a little wonkish chat about quantitative easing. I think his companions were lobbyists.

The brave lady who called them out at dinner had it right.

And they were guzzling $350 wine while Ryan looks at the public with a straight face and tells them the government can't afford to continue their Social Security and Medicare. He represents a part of Wisconsin that was devastated a few years ago when Chrysler pulled out a major plant, costing thousands of jobs.

He doesn't think that the whole "shared sacrifice" thing should include him.

-Louis XVI

Is it somewhere near Boorneo?



:rofl:

Boorish seems to reek of pretentious elitism. ;)

I'm kinda kidding, but kinda not.

Boorishness and stupidity are not the same thing. And there's a definite use for the word boorishness.

he does it to flaunt his position, his power, and his wealth.

If you sold him a $350.00 bottle of dog piss, it would not make a difference.

make him drink it.

Considering his position and infamous budget proposal and obvious wealth ~
I think ordering the first $350 bottle of wine in public was boorish. Ordering the second was outrageous. He deserves any and all blow back that he gets.