Date/Time: 2009-04-22 19:16 (UTC)Posted by: [identity profile] txtriffidranch.livejournal.com
And it figures that Liz Peek would be the one bitching. Journalism tends to encourage whores of all sorts, but there's a special spot in hell for the business writers who bend over, both literally and figuratively, for the subjects of their interviews. And of course she married him: how else would she be able to afford to buy her way out of the stigma of working in journalism?

(Sorry: life at weekly newspapers ruined my brain. I'm still chuckling about a former ad director at my old weekly wanting to get all chummy about a reunion of its staffers, fifteen years after the paper started and nine after it was murdered by its publisher. She alternated between pissing on anybody who didn't go to Southern Methodist University and literally fucking the publisher because there was no other way she'd have been able to keep her job, so I'm having grand fun watching her try to ply the old contacts in a desperate hope of getting out of medical billing.)
Date/Time: 2009-04-22 19:25 (UTC)Posted by: [identity profile] shaysdays.livejournal.com
Ahahahahaha she is... something, that Tarp wife.
Date/Time: 2009-04-22 19:28 (UTC)Posted by: [identity profile] sloot.livejournal.com
related article:
http://nymag.com/news/businessfinance/56151/
Date/Time: 2009-04-22 19:58 (UTC)Posted by: [identity profile] txtriffidranch.livejournal.com
Boy, I haven't heard that much impotent whining from delusional entitlement brats outside of a Pearl Jam show in Portland. Funny: when it's the little guys who are laid off and forced to live well below their old standards because they can't find work, that's "the invisible hand of the market". However, the moment they actually have to live in the real world instead of their little Ayn Rand fantasies, they don't like it one little bit, do they?
Date/Time: 2009-04-22 19:59 (UTC)Posted by: [identity profile] hellsop.livejournal.com
I can't help but read the first link as a humor piece (mostly because I used to read a LOT of such in the back pages of the wall stree journal), which makes the second sound like a heap of "Didn't get it."
Date/Time: 2009-04-22 20:59 (UTC)Posted by: [identity profile] david-deacon.livejournal.com
But . . . the Condé Nast Portfolio.com essay is satire, surely? (And makes a great WHOOSH over the Huffington Post's collective head?)
Date/Time: 2009-04-22 22:44 (UTC)Posted by: [identity profile] y2kdragon.livejournal.com
I seemed to have misplaced my sympathy here.