You can. They don’t list the prices, but it’s a wedding between two rich people, so I doubt it was much of a factor at the end of the day.
Cool. I was looking at the pictures thinking “I’ve been in that part of the Archives, and it’s way too small to host a wedding reception”, then I read “the couple, 5 guests and their children” and it made way more sense. What a cool idea, and the atmosphere in the Archives is pretty awe inspiring no matter who you are (as is D.C. in general).
It’s available, if not necessarily affordable. A whole bunch of big public buildings in DC are available for events if the price is right. Library of Congress? Sure. Air and Space Museum? Absolutely, if you donate enough. Jefferson Memorial? Yep.
Private events happen at these venues all the time - although DC being DC they’re more likely to be industry-sponsored events for lobbyists than Joe the Plumber getting married.
Having lived and worked around DC for longer than I’m comfortable recalling, I’ve been to several corporate and government receptions in a bunch of Smithsonian museums (after hours).
A friend of mine got married at the Jefferson Memorial… but not inside the Rotunda. Rather it was a lawn space next to the memorial itself. That didn’t stop them getting their pic taken in the Memorial proper, but they had to politely ask the regular tourists to stand aside for a couple minutes, which everyone graciously did. I recall the fee being trivial… but it was like 20 years ago.
Yeah, I have been to some private events at Smithsonian buildings, but for corporate type things, not an event like a wedding.
I have also played three events for a company Christmas party … once at The National Building Museum and twice at the National Cathedral(!). Playing in the cathedral is weird… the ceiling is so high that the sound you put out is just absorbed and dies. You can’t hear us (an 18 piece jazz band) if you’re more than 30 feet away!
We always get told we’re playing too loud… everywhere but in the Cathedral!
The failing NY Times continues to fail.
The story is always Dems in disarray, no matter what is actually happening.
Now now, that’s not the whole story.
… The Times also goes out if its way to make women in power seem scary and aggressive, having to engage in “arm-twisting and cajoling,” unlike white men, our “overwhelming” natural leaders!
Yeah, wow that is pretty stark looking at those side by side.
Somebody at WSJ is feeling frisky:
So how are the media reporting the GOP’s blatant power grabs in Wisconsin and Michigan?
OK, what headline is the New York Times using? Their slogan is “Democracy dies in darkness,” after all. I’m sure they’ll have something to say …
Of course. Just as Democrats are always in disarray in the NYT, Republicans are always strong, even (especially) when thwarting the will of the people.
That’s the Washington Post. :)
Also, fuck the New York Times.
Bah, you’re right. About the same time the Post rolled that out, the NYT tried a new slogan as well (“The truth. It’s more important now than ever”) but it didn’t stick.
When the Republicans pulled this shit in NC, the Democrats and incoming governor vowed to challenge the legislation in court. What was the result of those legal challenges?
A lot of this stuff ends up coming down to what a state’s constitution says. If the constitution allows it, there’s not much you can do, other than try to make a federal case… but the feds have limited ability to step in on this stuff, by design. You essentially need to make a case that their actions are violating your civil rights under the US constitution.
We recently bought a year of Hulu with their limited commercial option ($1/month seemed like a no brainer) and the New York Times actually is running a pretty good ad there (it’s the only time I see ads, and boy do almost all of them suck.)
Nonetheless, as @KevinC says, fuck the NYT.
I feel obligated to give the NYT credit for certain pieces they’ve done, including the big one about Trump family tax fraud, the Facebook expose, and ‘Losing Earth,’ a fantastic overview of the tragic history of American government response to climate change.
Sure we all hate MAGA Haberman and their overall framing of issues (hello, Hillary emails) but there is also valuable work being done inside those walls.
No room for voices critical of Trump in the Republican party.
Ross Douthat’s NYT editorial today might be the most mainstream White Supremacist opinion piece I’ve seen in a while.
You’re not kidding.
Put simply, Americans miss Bush because we miss the WASPs — because we feel, at some level, that their more meritocratic and diverse and secular successors rule us neither as wisely nor as well.
Halfway through that I finally had to look up what WASP meant. I kept thinking that he was going to tell us, but he never does. (White Anglo Saxon Protestant). It certainly colors the article differently once you know what WASP means. From reading it, I just figured he meant the greatest generation or something.