I wrote about this in my own blog two weeks ago:

http://backwards-and-in-high-heels.blogspot.com/2009/06/for-richer-or-poorer-taste.html

That wedding announcement stuck out like a sore thumb in the NY Times.

...then it falls to them to record ALL facets of American life, including people who overcome huge barriers (like addiction) to find love. Who cares about rich people marrying other rich people? Having money doesn't make you any more "upstanding" than those who don't. How many of those Wall Street marriages do you think will survive if the economy doesn't start turning around? I'll put my money on the rehab couple making it - they've already beat real adversity to get to their special day. Good for the New York Times - this couple's story illustrates the redemptive power of love. Very romantic.

Congratulations to my fellow Sacramentans.

Gawker features a regular installment of Times wedding mockery, based on their point system.

Young women see these pictures and they think that they Prince Charming with lots of cash will eventually come. So they dismiss regular guys after they are in their mid-thirties. Then their looks have disminished and end up alone and writing in Broadsheet about how men are pigs.

Imnobody, I believe you were just bitching about how women don't want to support you and your babies. Perhaps your poor attitude is to blame for your current romantic status?

This section does not exist in other countries. In most European countries would be laughable. Newspapers are for news and a wedding is not news.

This is the top of narcissism. Yes, you are going to get married, so what? Billions of people have done it before you and billions of people will do it after you. You are not the center of the universe. You are only a bug in a tiny rock in a vulgar galaxy.

Young women see these pictures and they think that they Prince Charming with lots of cash will eventually come. So they dismiss regular guys after they are in their mid-thirties. Then their looks have disminished and end up alone and writing in Broadsheet about how men are pigs.

I loved Ms. Berman's take on the Vows section being a place to indulge in envy or sarcasm, I've done both. I would like to offer another reason in these hard times to read the column, and that is to check for employment opportunities. I've been a Banquet sever for about ten years and I largely earn my living on weddings and corporate parties. As the years have gone by and I've served hundreds of different weddings I find my self drawn to the Vows section out of professional curiosity; whats new and hot for example. One of the saddest things about the industry is that whenever anyone comes up with something beautiful or creative it is published either in a style section or a wedding magazine and becomes a fad until we are drowning in Monarch butterflies or cases of tray passed mineral water that go flat because no one actually want's them. I've seen my share of spoilt brats burning their parents savings for an extremely well dressed frat kegger, but more often I've seen a lot of scared and insecure young women trying to plan a party that will truly engage their family and friends only to fall short. Part of this comes from the wedding industry which is constantly guiding brides to a series of fads that are already fading into cliches, so that no matter how well heeled and well wired the bride might be she is fated to be feted in last years dress. This holds true for hors d'oerves and dinner menus, flower arrangements tuxedos etc. I recently served a wedding between two chefs, who are both young attractive and head quality houses here in Sonoma. Instead of one wedding cake the bride baked a German Honey Cake for each of the tables which along with small gift jars of honey and beeswax candles made up the center pieces for the table. I was happy for her because she had left something of herself in the impression of her wedding. Just a week later I'm serving another wedding at a ranch on the other side of the county, this time between two Berkeley Phd candidates. Neither was a chef so they had a vendor bake the ever popular cupcake Wedding cake option, but there on each table surrounding the center piece was a gift jar of honey and beeswax candles. It just made me sad for everyone. Last year was deadly for hotel banquet workers and this year is not looking any better in terms of corporate functions, so the wedding business with all it's frivolity and narcisism will continue to command my attention.

I'm not crazy about that phrase. If we're talking about the majority or median of Americans, we're not talking about people who went to selective, private colleges, blah, etc., but we're also not talking about people who've been imprisoned or had kids out of wedlock. It's not more "regular" in a statistical sense to be the second rather than the first, depending on where we draw those lines.

If the Times started giving space to couples who are middle-class (but in debt and perhaps currently underemployed), don't have prestige jobs, have some college but not four-year degrees, live in the suburbs (and not particularly tony ones), voted for Bush twice and then Obama, shop at big box stores, and aren't very good at math -- that would be a lot more "regular people," if there's a scale for what it means to be "regular."

That's a big assumption, that all the rich folks in these announcements are "upstanding." I think it's far worse to tank the world's economy as a hedge fund manager or investment banker selling mortgage-backed securities than to just be a junkie.

If you're going to thank anyone, it should be the late Ann Richards, who made that phrase famous while referring to the elder George Bush.

http://en.wikiquote.org/wiki/Ann_Richards

The line gained even greater popularity (and accuracy) once the younger Bush entered national politics.