The New York Times on "Lucrative"
By David Henderson
Neither Ms. Abedin [Anthony Weiner’s wife] nor Mr. Weiner earn lucrative salaries, and Ms. Abedin is worried about her husband, who has been in politics much of his adult life, finding work. Mr. Weiner would still be eligible to collect his pension after his resignation.
This is from Raymond Hernandez, “Weiner Resigns in Chaotic Final Scene,” New York Times, June 16, 2011.
Huh? If Mr. Hernandez wants to make the point that neither Ms. Abedin nor Mr. Weiner earn the money they are paid, I will agree with him. Weiner was paid to be a Congressman; enough said. Abedin was and is paid to help Hillary Clinton go around the world interfering in foreigners’ lives.
But that’s obviously not what Raymond Hernandez meant. He meant that the annual salary of $174,000 that Weiner made until recently is not lucrative. Nor, in Hernandez’s opinion, is Huma Abedin’s salary lucrative. But he doesn’t tell us what her salary is. Does he know? He’s a reporter for the New York Times and so you would expect him to check. Did he? I’m guessing her salary is well in excess of $100,000. To me, that’s lucrative. Notice also that if I’m right, the couple’s salaries together totaled over $250K. Isn’t that supposed to be the magic number in this country that makes you rich? It was when Abedin’s big boss, Barack Obama, ran for president in 2008.