When Paul Ryan paid $350 dollar bottle of this wine and some rabid woman thought it was her duty to play cop and I wanted to bop the agitator, (an associate business professor at Rutgers, named Feinberg--who on this links explains herself, though I don't think she added anything to the conversation.) over the head with a bottle of Screaming Eagle.
Take a look at this Outside the Beltway post. Human behavior, is a rare and strange weave.
" Rep. Paul Ryan (R-WI), a leading advocate of shrinking entitlement spending and the architect of the plan to privatize Medicare, spent Wednesday evening sipping $350 wine with two like-minded conservative economists at the swanky Capitol Hill eatery Bistro Bis."
The story gets bizarre.
The clash became especially heated when Feinberg asked the men if they were lobbyists.
“F—- her,” one of them replied and stood up in a menacing way, according to Feinberg’s account. Feinberg said her husband then “puffed out his chest” in response before the manager and a waiter came over and Feinberg decided she had said her piece and it was time to leave."
I think she somehow missed Wine 101 and erroneously believed that all wine is Two-Buck Chuck at different price points. Also, she missed that the choice $350 and not $3500, a more common clam point for bailed out Morgan Stanley employees.
$350 is more than I can usually deal with. Jayer-Giles is not my speed, but Ryan must make about fifty times what I do. To me, the idea of getting in between someone and his Burgundy that he can afford is not an arguable position. All relative. In the end, the wine retails for about $190, it wasn't even overpriced.
The comparison Foxites want to invoke is to the famed Edward's $400 haircut. Apples and nuts analogy; one about bells and whistles (cushy treatment in the chair) and perhaps overpriced vanity (such as the intial vinyl impregnated merchandise from LV), the other is about rarity, work, exploration, cultural and aesthetic.
Soil matters. All vineyards really are not created equal. And if you can afford it, why the hell not. Especially as the politician was there with two economists, not lobbyists, and all were splitting the bill.
So there they were, three people with two bottles of wine and a $700 wine bill. Big deal. If the government wasn't paying for it, or if there was a specific reason for shmoozing with the bottles, again, I fail to see the crime. The only crime was that from my point of view there were better choices on the list, and he could have done better, and cheaper.
I went to look at the list. As it turns out, it's not bad. If the gents were interested in good choices at better prices, they could have asked me, but what can I say; Ryan didn't call me for advice.
Outside of an eh-champagne selection, and a strange devotion to V. Giradin, there were wines at decent price points, and some were even palatable. Being Parker territory there was quite a bit of Chateauneuf, but some surprising choices like the Domaine Pierre André 2001, Châteauneuf-du-Pape $112 (delicious!). The 2001 and 2004 Clapes on the list for $165 and $195 were more greaet choices. And if I was there on my own budget I might have risked the 2005 Descombes Morgon for $36 (but I do remember quite a lot of brett.).
What the rabid woman failed to understand is that the table wanted Burgundy. Their choice seemed to indicate that the table wasn’t focused on price but on taste. They were dodging the sloppy 2003 and the stubborn 2005 vintages. The Claude Dugat 1er Cru, Lavaux St. Jacques 2004 Gevrey-Chambertin for $215, would have worked for them, and they could have saved a cool $145, but maybe they just wanted a GC.
In the end, the woman's behavior to me was far more interesting than the politicians, and the question I have, what I want to know is what was Feinberg drinking on that night at Bistro Bis to celebrate her birthday.