{"id":13660,"date":"2014-09-13T00:06:01","date_gmt":"2014-09-13T07:06:01","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/www.politicsplus.org\/blog\/?p=13660"},"modified":"2014-09-13T00:06:07","modified_gmt":"2014-09-13T07:06:07","slug":"open-thread9131014","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.politicsplus.org\/blog\/2014\/09\/13\/open-thread9131014\/","title":{"rendered":"Open Thread–9\/13\/1014"},"content":{"rendered":"

I\u2019m writ5ing for tomorrow, day 145.  It\u2019s late in the day.  After doing my research early this morning, I scheduled routine medical appointments through the middle of next month, cooked and cleaned, and took a cat nap.  Tomorrow I have some errands to run in the morning, but they should not interfere with blogging.<\/font><\/p>\n

Jig Zone Puzzle<\/strong>:<\/font><\/p>\n

Today\u2019s took me 2:40 (average 4:30).  To do it, click here<\/a>.  How did you do?<\/font><\/p>\n

Short Takes<\/strong>:<\/font><\/p>\n

From Daily Kos<\/a>: <\/font>There is a diary on the Rec List about a Wall Street Journal article detailing how those making $400,000\/year can still feel like they are \u201cjust getting by\u201d. http:\/\/www.dailykos.com\/…<\/a><\/p>\n

I am glad the WSJ is giving comfort to its target audience, reassuring those well within the 1% of annual income that it is okay if they feel they are struggling to get by. The purpose, IMO, is to assuage any potential feelings their readers might have toward those with less, because they, the members of the 1%, have it rough as well, so that the 1% can be justified in their dissatisfaction with how little they have.<\/p>\n

Of course, what the article actually does is prove to us, those who are way down the income scale from these 1%ers, how little the WSJ actually cares about the vast majority of this country, and how as a newspaper its editorial purpose is to be a fluffer to the 1% and keep them insulated from the realities that most people in the country live with every minute of every day.<\/p>\n

But the corollary story that the WSJ won\u2019t touch is this: if it families making $400,000\/yr are feeling like they are struggling, then how must 150 million people getting by on less than $50,000\/yr feel? Where is the WSJ chart showing us the typical distribution of expenses for a family making less than $50 grand a year? Show us that chart WSJ, and then explain to us, since you advocate for cutting all programs that benefit or help support these people, exactly where the fat is in their budgets?<\/p>\n

Is anyone surprised? Didn’t we all know that, when Murdoch took over, the WSJ would become the Republican Reichsministry of Propaganda, Faux Print<\/em>?<\/font><\/p>\n

From Upworthy<\/a>: <\/font>Just so we’re clear, alcohol and tobacco, which kill thousands of people every year? Legal. Marijuana, which has never killed a single person ever in recorded human history? Illegal. OK then.<\/p>\n