Register for free to join our community of investors and share your ideas. You will also get access to streaming quotes, interactive charts, trades, portfolio, live options flow and more tools.
Register for free to join our community of investors and share your ideas. You will also get access to streaming quotes, interactive charts, trades, portfolio, live options flow and more tools.
LOOF ......
I'M SIPPING A LITTLE WOODFORD RESERVE RIGHT NOW CELEBRATING MY 70TH BIRTHDAY TODAY......
IMO ....IT'S BETTER THAN THE KOOL AID THEY HAVE BEEN SELLING US THE LAST 21 YEARS .......
KOOL AID FLOWING NOW...........
OBONGO SPEAKING LIVE ON TV............
NO NEED TO .THEY ALREADY HAVE THE VOTES NEEDED.........
Affordable Healthcare for Politicians
Tuesday, 01 Oct 2013 10:03 AM
Just over 15 years ago, come to think of it during another Democrat administration, the federal government tried to “do something” about rising healthcare costs. The smart thing to do would have been to get the dead hand of government out of healthcare and let the market work the problems out.
As usual, Democrats opted for more regulation and began pushing citizens into “managed care” (another word for HMOs) in an effort to cut cost. Results were predictable: Unsatisfactory care for patients and healthcare prices still went up.
That time period was notorious for the “drive-through delivery” where expectant mothers were rushed through the hospital’s front door to give birth and then given the bum’s rush out the backdoor to cut costs. In addition, 24-hour hospital stays for new mothers became the rule with only the rich or the elected being the exception.
This didn’t last long as new mothers made their outrage known to doctors and bureaucrats alike.
Fast forward to today. Once again the public is faced with a federal attempt to make healthcare “affordable,” this time using Obamacare. Except there is one big difference: Instead of the bill making healthcare affordable for the public, Obamacare has cuts designed to make the bill affordable for politicians.
Part of the posturing involved in passing Obamacare was the risible claim that it would not be a budget buster. To make the numbers (or at least the PowerPoint) work, Senate legislative mechanics cut hundreds of millions from Medicare.
Now the bill is coming due. According to a report on KBPS.org, California hospitals are responding to “performance-based reimbursement” with job cuts. An unnamed medical group in the San Francisco Bay area is expected to cut more than 200 jobs in response to financial pressure.
Obamacare is designed to bring millions of patients into the system on one hand and on the other the financial incentives cause providers to fire employees. The outcome should be obvious even to a politician: reduced quality of care and overburdened medical professionals.
And what’s really infuriating is this government-mandated health insurance is more expensive than the “unaffordable coverage” consumers relied upon before. The Manhattan Institute estimates the average increase in health insurance premiums will be 99 percent for men and 62 percent for women. So much for affordability.
I defy you to find any area where government competes with the private sector and the government provides an equivalent product at a lower price. You’ll find a unicorn first.
No wonder congressmen and senators have asked the executive branch to exempt them from Obamacare rules. Now if we could only find someone to exempt us from Congress.
microbe_man ........
LOTS OF PEOPLE HERE WHO ARE BS'ERS .......LIKE TO MAKE YOU BELIEVE THEY KNOW MORE THAN EVERYONE ELSE ....BEEN THAT WAY ON ALL PPHM BOARDS FOR YEARS
LEMMY AND GWEN.........
IM BACK ...
I HAD TO GO TO DR'S TODAY EARLY FOR A CHECK UP FOR MY UPCOMING SURGERY ..I AM GETTING A COMPLETE ANKLE REPLACEMENT ON NOV.12TH........I THEN WENT TO THE GOLF COURSE TO GET MORE AGGRAVATED...... I READ THE NEWS RELEASE AND SAW THE SHARE PRICE ...I SAID TYPICAL PPHM AND SHUT OFF THE COMPUTER ....LOL... NO SENSE MOANING AND GROANING I CAN'T SEE THIS SHIT EVER CHANGING ...........PPHM SING DIS SONG DOO-DAH DOO DAH ......
WOW...........
THEY KILLED A UNARMED WOMEN TO SAVE OUR KING .......
I'M SUPRISED THEY DIDN'T SHOOT THE BABY TOO.............WHERE HAS THIS COUNTRY GONE TO ?? WELCOME TO THE NEW IRAQ/IRAN AMERICA !!!
TROUBLE AT THE CAPITAL BUILDING ....
PROBABLY ONE OF OBONGO'S FRIENDS
NOT THAT I REMEMBER ........LOL
I HAVE BEEN IN SO LONG I CAN'T REMEMBER ANYTHING ANYMORE... BUT I DO BELIEVE I WASN'T
THE LAST WAS OCTOBER 19, 2009
http://ir.peregrineinc.com/releasedetail.cfm?ReleaseID=416393
AND THE FIRST WAS MARCH 12 1987
http://articles.latimes.com/1987-03-08/business/fi-13561_1_reverse-stock
I WOULD HAVE TO LOOK UP THE FIRST ONE AND I WILL .......THE 5-1 WAS ONLY ABOUT TWO YEARS AGO MAYBE 3 .......
NEWSMAX...............
Tuesday October 01, 2013
Home
Newsfront
America
Politics
Insiders
The Wire
Sci & Tech
Slideshows
Jokes
Cartoons
Latest
Do You Support the Government Shutdown? Vote Here in National Poll
Do you support the full repeal of President Obama's healthcare plan that Congress passed in 2010?
Yes, repeal it completely
242,358(82%)
No, don’t repeal it at all
42,112(14%)
No, repeal just parts of it
8,943(3%)
Should Congress cut off all funding for Obamacare even if it risks a government shutdown?
Yes, cut all funding
245,736(83%)
No, don't cut funding
47,684(16%)
Should Congress restore $500 billion in Medicare benefits for seniors that the Obama plan cut?
Yes, restore the Medicare benefits
262,211(89%)
No, don't restore the Medicare benefits
31,211(10%)
Do you support President Obama's desire to give 12 million illegal aliens amnesty and a path to citizenship?
Yes, I support Obama's amnesty plan
41,418(14%)
No, I oppose it
252,015(85%)
Read Latest Breaking News from Newsmax.com http://www.newsmax.com/Surveys/Results/id/84#ixzz2gUgoUE5M
Urgent: Should Obamacare Be Repealed? Vote Here Now!
I WAS 49 WHEN I FIRST BOUGHT TCLN (PPHM)
NOW I'M 70 AND STILL WAITING ......
JIMSGTX..
I SAID THE SAME THING 21 YEARS AGO ........
??
Maybe it is time for a Congressional hearing!
BECAUSE CONGRESSMEN ARE GOOD HONEST AND UPSTANDING PEOPLE TOO ...LOL
Post # of 140692
How Confident Are You?
O.K...clear your mind. Toss out all of the PPHM message board hoopla and insanity and think very hard about this question.
How confident are you about PPHM reaching $5.00+ in the next 6 months?
Consider the beginning of Phase 3 trials by year end.
Consider all the talent and support being brought in to ramp up Bavi development.
Consider Avid is ramping up and capable of producing Bavi.
Consider management has repeatedly said that the are in discussions with partner candidates and have inferred that they want partners on board with Bavi pipeline.
On the scale of 1-10 how confident are you? Please copy and share your number.
1. TekNuLoof - 8
2. Chip 1- 10
3. Patientlywaiting - 10
4. Stevedazs-5
5. Epcjmc-7.8798544558412
6. PGG76116 PLUS 6 cant believe everyone is on the negative side...
7. lemmy - 1
8. JAKE17- 2
IDIOTS OF THE YEAR....
The California Legislature voted Thursday to allow driver's licenses for immigrants in the U.S. illegally.
JOKE OF THE DAY !!!!!!!!
YOU JUST CAN'T MAKE THIS $HITTTT UP ...THE NEXT CURE FOR CANCER ...
Peregrine Pharmaceuticals, Inc. (PPHM)
-NasdaqCM
1.32 Down 0.04(2.94%) 11:43AM EDT - Nasdaq Real Time Price
NEW JERSEY BOARDWALK ON FIRE FOR BLOCKS IN SEASIDE HEIGHTS .
MOST BUSINESS'S ARE DESTROYED .. ALL WERE JUST REOPENED FROM 'SANDY " JUST A FEW MONTHS AGO .......
LOOF........
FROM ONE KENTUCKIAN TO ANOTHER .. I'M IN TOTAL AGREEMENT WITH YOU AND I ALREADY VOTED NO ON ALL .21 YEARS OF THIS B.O.D. IS ENOUGH.........JAKE
PGG76109..
IT'S WHY I RARELY POST ANYMORE AND ALSO WHY I HAVEN'T RENEWED MY IHUB SUBSCRIPTION........CERTAIN PEOPLE CAN SAY WHAT THEY WANT AND OTHERS AREN'T ALLOWED TO EXPRESS THEIR OPINIONS .........GLTY
A$$HOLE 'S JUST DELETED ALL MY POSTS ON PPHM BOARD ........
I INSULTED NO ONE AND JUST TRASHED THE CC ...I FORGOT YOU HAVE TO STAY UPBEAT ON THE STOCK NO MATTER HOW BAD THE CC IS .............
ANYTHING FOR YOU SWEETIE ...........LOL
OR MAYBE THIS ONE ....LOL
http://www.wired.com/wiredscience/2013/09/china-chicken-usda/
LEMMY ......
I BELIEVE THIS WAS THE LINK
http://www.npr.org/blogs/thesalt/2013/09/05/219377718/was-your-chicken-nugget-made-in-china-itll-soon-be-hard-to-know?ft=1&f=1006
AS USUAL SPANKY ......
WITH PPHM IT ALWAYS HOPE FOR THE BEST AND EXPECT NOTHING .BEEN THAT WAY FOREVER ........BEEN THRU IT FOR 21 YEARS NOW .........
GET READY TO BE SICK !!!!!!!!!!
Would you willingly eat a chicken nuggets processed in a country that has no intention of meeting U.S. food-safety standards? Most Americans likely wouldn't.
That may explain why the U.S. Department of Agriculture waited until Friday -- the day before a long holiday weekend -- to announce that it had ended a ban on Chinese chicken imports by approving four Chinese poultry processors to ship processed ("heat-treated/cooked") chicken to the U.S. The report on the approved poultry plants noted that the audit set out to "to determine whether the People's Republic of China's (PRC) food safety system governing poultry processing remains equivalent to that of the United States (U.S.), with the ability to produce products that are safe, wholesome, unadulterated, and properly labeled." Needless to say, the Chinese plants passed.
Initially, at least, the chickens will be slaughtered in the U.S. (or another nation that's allowed to export slaughtered chicken to the U.S.), then shipped to China for processing and re-export. That's the good news. The bad news is that, according to the New York Times, no USDA inspectors will be present in the Chinese processing plants (despite the fact that China has never before been allowed to export chicken to the U.S.), thus offering consumers no guarantees where the processed chickens were in fact slaughtered. Even worse, because the birds will be processed, the USDA will not require point-of-origin labeling (under USDA rules, foods that have been cooked aren't subject to point-of-origin labeling). In other words: Consumers will have no way to tell if those chicken nuggets in the supermarket freezer were processed in the U.S. or in China.
That's a big problem. For more than a decade, China has earned a reputation as one of the world's worst food-safety offenders. In just the last year, consumers have been confronted with a bird flu outbreak, news of sales of 46-year-old chicken feet and reports of poisonous fake mutton. These are not isolated incidents, but rather the most spectacular instances of a crisis that has become so severe that some consumers now smuggle quantities of infant milk formula from foreign countries into China so as to avoid buying potentially tainted Chinese dairy products.
The Chinese government, sensitive to people's beliefs that it isn't doing enough to protect their food supply, has made a point of regular, ineffective crackdowns on food-safety violators. Yet in July, when a senior Chinese policy maker involved in developing new food safety standards was asked at a press conference if and when it would meet developed-world standards, he conceded that it would, instead, have to meet China's "national condition" as a developing country. In other words: China's food supply cannot meet USDA standards.
China's "national condition" has already seemingly had a harmful effect on its poultry – and on U.S. consumers unlucky enough to have bought it for their pets. (The U.S. allows chicken imports for animal consumption.) As of December 2012, the U.S. Food and Drug Administration reported that it had received reports of 501 dog deaths (and thousands of dog sicknesses), many seemingly from chicken jerky treats manufactured in China, dating back to 2007. But the department has so far been unable to pinpoint a cause for the problem, and the Chinese have been unwilling to volunteer one.
What was the USDA thinking when it decided to sign-off on Chinese processed chicken exports for humans? Probably not the best interest of American consumers. Rather, U.S. beef and poultry producers have long sought to have the restrictions lifted in hope of encouraging Beijing to reciprocate and open its huge market to more U.S. meat exports (U.S. beef is currently banned for import into China). It's a reasonable goal, and one that the USDA should pursue -- just not at the expense of a safe U.S. food supply.
Trade Detail
After Hours
Time (ET) After Hours
Price After Hours
Share Volume
16:42 $ 1.3647 Low 1,500
16:33 $ 1.3698 2,090
16:26 $ 1.37 High 15,523
16:22 $ 1.365 303
16:22 $ 1.365 1,797
16:22 $ 1.365 3,482
16:00 $ 1.37 1,568
Read more: http://www.nasdaq.com/symbol/pphm/after-hours#ixzz2dUrveIg1
POTUS Comparison Bush vs Obama
1. Spending
Both were profligate spenders. While Bush had Medicare Part D, and largely unfunded wars, President Obama has doubled down with an $812 stimulus package and ObamaCare – which has been taxing us without providing benefits. Obama signed onto the 2009 budget exploding spending, which he only slightly scaled back. While W’s average yearly deficit was $250.7 billion, President Obama’s has been $1.273 trillion, and he has racked up over $6 trillion in national debt. Yet Obama once called Bush’s debt “irresponsible."
2. Job Creation
Both had recessions to deal with. W. came into office with a recession after the dotcom bubble burst and then 9/11 hit. However, he was able to generate 52 straight months of job growth, before a housing market collapse. Obama’s average unemployment has been 8.8% (Bush’s was 5.27%), labor force participation rate is at the lowest since Oct. 1978 at 63.4%, without the benefit of much job growth - the country has netted 270,000 jobs since 2009, and the majority of Obama’s job creation has been temp & part-time jobs.
3. War
While W’s invasions of Iraq and Afghanistan had bipartisan backing, and with prominent Democrats like Hillary Clinton and Nancy Pelosi having stated their beliefs that Iraq had wmds, Obama feels he has the authority to send troops to potentially die for the country without Congressional representation. Joe Biden said W. should be impeached if he unilaterally took the U.S. to war with Iran, but the Nobel Peace Prize winning president may do it twice with Libya and Syria, while racking up 74% of the U.S. fatalities in Afghanistan.
4. Civil Liberties
The Patriot Act was opposed by Democrats and many Independents, Libertarians and libertarian-leaning Republicans, even in the aftermath of 9/11. Obama warned about the Patriot Act as a Senator in 2005, but signed onto it twice as president, without major alterations – by autopen. On Guantanamo Bay, he promised he would shut it down in his first year in office, but it remains open. And as far as domestic spying, the Bush-era breaches of Constitutional protections can’t touch Obama’s brazenly lawless NSA programs like PRISM.
5. Corruption
While the main bone of contention for Democrats that Bush was corrupt was the refrain of Haliburton and no-bid contracts, President Obama too hired Haliburton subsidiary KBR with a no-bid contract worth $568 million. Additionally, the mantra “No Blood for Oil” proved to be an ill-founded concern when post-liberation Iraq was opened up for oil contracts. President Obama passed a massive healthcare package, like Bush, but exempted many unions and friendly corporations, not to mention politicians like himself. Obvious green energy kickbacks for party supporters include Solyndra, BrightSource, and NRG Energy. The stimulus package was rife with pet projects and pork.
6. Scandals
The most egregious scandal of the Bush era was Abu Ghraib, which ran as a headline on the New York Times frontpage 47 times. Fast & Furious has drawn allusions to similar programs under Bush; however, the “gunwalking” under Obama led to untracked “assault rifles” falling into the hands of drug cartels, which promptly used them to murder hundreds of Mexicans and border patrol agent Brian Terry. Benghazi, seen as an unacceptable scandal by many, is where a US ambassador was murdered with no serious rescue operation ordered until much later... after stand down orders halted rescue protocols. The IRS’ profiling of conservative groups, and the NSA’s illegal surveillance programs, are also scandals that are not perceived to be “phony” to the majority of the informed public, as polled.
7. Lobbyists
Lobbyists were said to be a main problem in Bush-era by the Obama administration, and Obama promised to put an end to it upon his arrival to Washington. Yet he continued hiring lobbyists and even secretly met with them off-the-record. Additionally, members of Obama’s economic team were plucked from Wall Street, and particularly, from Goldman Sachs, like Treasury Chief of Staff Mark Patterson, after the financial titan lucratively backed his first election. As for another big deal that makes Bush seem like a piker
8. Whistleblowers
Whistleblowers have been suppressed more under Obama than under any other president. The current Commander-in-Chief has gone after multiple whistleblowers in the NSA, including Edward Snowden. Witnesses to Benghazi have been hidden from public questioning, and the #2 man in Libya Gregory Hicks was ostensibly demoted for even talking to Republican Congress members about what happened. The administration has unleashed the DOJ on the ATF, journalists at the AP, and Fox News reporter James Rosen.
9. Economic Inequality
Economic inequality has worsened under Obama. As Emmanuel Saez found, under Bush from 2002 to 2007, the top 1% of earners captured 65% of all income growth. Under Obama from 2009-2010, the top 1% captured 93% of all income growth in the country. It could be posed that this widening disparity is a reflection of regulatory barriers to small business growth being erected in the private sector, the tax write-offs and loopholes for corporations that still persist (including in green energy), and the flood of easy money that is channeled to Wall Street, but erodes the value of the dollar on Main Street.
10. GDP Growth
George W. Bush’s real GDP or economic growth was a subpar 1.67% (the historical average from 1980-2000 was 3.405%), but President Obama is the worst post-WWII president in such terms at 1.075%. In fact, in the last quarter of 2012, the economy Obama helps set policy for experienced negative GDP growth of 0.1%, also known as “contraction.” This year, the Obama reworked the formula the government uses to come up with GDP growth numbers by adding Hollywood movies and other intellectual property sources to the equation.
11. Race Relations
Race relations seem to be getting worse under President Obama, contrary to expectations upon the election of America’s first black president. While there are no sound reasons to believe George W. Bush’s policies were substantively racist – it seemed a foregone conclusion that relations would improve under Obama. However, only 10% polled by Rasmussen believe race relations are improving. President Obama may share King’s “dream,” but as far as his record goes, it is too often being judged by the color of his skin, and not by the character of its content.
I Too Have Become Disillusioned
By Matt Patterson (Newsweek Columnist – Opinion Writer)
Finally, Matt Patterson and Newsweek speak out about Obama. This is timely and tough. As many of you know, Newsweek has a reputation for being extremely liberal. The fact that their editor saw fit to print the following article about Obama and the one that appears in the latest Newsweek, makes this a truly amazing event, and a news story in and of itself. At last, the truth about our President and his agenda are starting to trickle through the“protective wall” built around him by the liberal media....
______________________________________________________________
I Too Have Become Disillusioned
By Matt Patterson (Newsweek Columnist – Opinion Writer)
Years from now, historians may regard the 2008 election of Barack Obama as an inscrutable and disturbing phenomenon, the result of a baffling breed of mass hysteria akin perhaps to the witch craze of the Middle Ages. How, they will wonder, did a man so devoid of professional accomplishment beguile so many into thinking he could manage the world's largest economy, direct the world's most powerful military, execute the world's most consequential job?
Imagine a future historian examining Obama's pre-presidential life: ushered into and through the Ivy League, despite unremarkable grades and test scores along the way; a cushy non-job as a "community organizer;" a brief career as a state legislator devoid of legislative achievement (and in fact nearly devoid of his attention, less often did he vote "present"); and finally an unaccomplished single term in the United States Senate, the entirety of which was devoted to his presidential ambitions.
He left no academic legacy in academia, authored no signature legislation as a legislator. And then there is the matter of his troubling associations: the white-hating, America-loathing preacher who for decades served as Obama's "spiritual mentor;" a real-life, actual terrorist who served as Obama's colleague and political sponsor. It is easy to imagine a future historian looking at it all and asking: how on Earth was such a man elected president?
Not content to wait for history, the incomparable Norman Podhoretz addressed the question recently in the Wall Street Journal: To be sure, no white candidate who had close associations with an outspoken hater of America like Jeremiah Wright and an unrepentant terrorist like Bill Ayers, would have lasted a single day. But because Mr. Obama was black, and therefore entitled in the eyes of liberal Dom to have hung out with protesters against various American injustices, even if they were 'a bit' extreme, he was given a pass. Let that sink in: Obama was given a pass - held to a lower standard - because of the color of his skin.
Podhoretz continues: And in any case, what did such ancient history matter when he was also so articulate and elegant and (as he himself had said) "non-threatening," all of which gave him a fighting chance to become the first black president and thereby to lay the curse of racism to rest?
Podhoretz puts his finger, I think, on the animating pulse of the Obama phenomenon - affirmative action. Not in the legal sense, of course. But certainly in the motivating sentiment behind all affirmative action laws and regulations, which are designed primarily to make white people, and especially white liberals, feel good about themselves.
Unfortunately, minorities often suffer so that whites can pat themselves on the back. Liberals routinely admit minorities to schools for which they are not qualified, yet take no responsibility for the inevitable poor performance and high drop-out rates which follow. Liberals don't care if these minority students fail; liberals aren't around to witness the emotional devastation and deflated self-esteem resulting from the racist policy that is affirmative action. Yes, racist. Holding someone to a separate standard merely because of the color of his skin - that's affirmative action in a nutshell, and if that isn't racism, then nothing is.
And that is what America did to Obama. True, Obama himself was never troubled by his lack of achievements, but why would he be? As many have noted, Obama was told he was good enough for Columbia despite undistinguished grades at Occidental; he was told he was good enough for the US Senate despite a mediocre record in Illinois ; he was told he was good enough to be president despite no record at all in the Senate. All his life, every step of the way, Obama was told he was good enough for the next step, in spite of ample evidence to the contrary.
What could this breed if not the sort of empty narcissism on display every time Obama speaks? In 2008, many who agreed that he lacked executive qualifications nonetheless raved about Obama's oratory skills, intellect, and cool character. Those people – conservatives included - ought now to be deeply embarrassed.
The man thinks and speaks in the hoariest of clichés, and that's when he has his Teleprompters in front of him; when the prompter is absent he can barely think or speak at all. Not one original idea has ever issued from his mouth - it's all warmed-over Marxism of the kind that has failed over and over again for 100 years. (An example is his 2012 campaign speeches which are almost word for word his 2008 speeches)
And what about his character? Obama is constantly blaming anything and everything else for his troubles. Bush did it; it was bad luck; I inherited this mess. Remember, he wanted the job, campaigned for the task. It is embarrassing to see a president so willing to advertise his own powerlessness, so comfortable with his own incompetence. (The other day he actually came out and said no one could have done anything to get our economy and country back on track). But really, what were we to expect? The man has never been responsible for anything, so how do we expect him to act responsibly?
In short: our president is a small-minded man, with neither the temperament nor the intellect to handle his job. When you understand that, and only when you understand that, will the current erosion of liberty and prosperity make sense? It could not have gone otherwise with such an impostor in the Oval Office.
Trade Detail
After Hours
Time (ET) After Hours
Price After Hours
Share Volume
16:53 $ 1.40 Low 8,450
16:48 $ 1.42 High 121
16:47 $ 1.4003 514
16:43 $ 1.4003 2,112
16:23 $ 1.40 1,000
16:23 $ 1.40 13,891
Read more: http://www.nasdaq.com/symbol/pphm/after-hours#ixzz2dP1cSNxo
DJOHN........
DON'T FEEL BAD ABOUT VENTING .I DO THE SAME ONCE IN AWHILE ....I'M NOW STARTING MY 21ST YEAR WITH TCLN/PPHM ... IT CERTAINLY DOES GET FRUSTRATING SOMETIMES ...JAKE
Trade Detail
After Hours
Time (ET) After Hours
Price After Hours
Share Volume
17:05 $ 1.35 2,564
16:32 $ 1.3503 High 121
16:31 $ 1.3503 2,051
16:22 $ 1.35 8,073
16:13 $ 1.32 Low 150
Read more: http://www.nasdaq.com/symbol/pphm/after-hours#ixzz2cXxgerKM
DOO-DAH..........
July 19. 2013 11:58PM
Jonah Goldberg: Enabling Al Sharpton damages America
ShareThis
JONAH GOLDBERG
IF TOM WOLFE were writing "The Bonfire of the Vanities" today, he'd need a scene in the Grand Havana Room in New York City. It's an Olympian den fit for what Wolfe called "Masters of the Universe" - the super-rich gods of finance who today go by "the one percent." Taking up the penthouse floor of 666 Fifth Ave., the Grand Havana Room is a private, by-invitation-only cigar club and four-star restaurant. Through its windows, you can see the toiling salary men 39 floors below as they scurry about like ants, some furtively smoking in doorways, ever fearful of Nanny Bloomberg's All-Seeing Eye.
Named by Business Insider as one of the "11 exclusive clubs Wall Streeters are dying to get into," the Grand Havana Room is where powerbrokers and celebrities hobnob with captains of industry in one of the last places where it's still legal to smoke in the Big Apple.
Immune as I am to the seductions of class resentment and Jacobin envy, I will admit it: I love the place. If invited, and if I could afford it, I'd join.
The one question I have is: Who's paying for Al Sharpton's membership?
"The Rev." is an omnipresent member of the club. After his MSNBC show, he'll swing by for dinner and cigars amidst the other Masters of the Universe. I couldn't confirm that he repaired there after he broadcast his radio show, "Keeping it Real," from Zuccotti Park to show his solidarity with the 99 percenters.
The reason I ask who's paying for his membership is that Sharpton's relationship with money has always been complicated. When he claimed he didn't have the resources to pay damages in a defamation suit he lost, Sharpton was asked in a deposition how he could afford his suits. He didn't own them, he replied, someone else did. He was merely granted "access" to the garments as needed. The same went for his TV, silverware, etc.
There's a metaphor in there somewhere. In our overly therapeutic culture, we talk a lot about "enabling" pathologies, self-destructive behavior, etc. Well, Sharpton is a pathology enabled by the very system he loathes.
In a healthy society, Sharpton might be on parole now - not the must-get guest for "Meet the Press" and "Today" on issues of racial justice. He was a ringleader in perpetuating the evil Tawana Brawley hoax, in which he and two corrupt lawyers (now disbarred), falsely accused assistant district attorney Steven Pagones and others of gang-raping a 15-year-old girl in a racist attack (Brawley claimed that she'd been smeared with feces and had racist epithets written on her body). No person of any ideological stripe could doubt it was a fraud - except, that is, for the unrepentant Sharpton, who recently insisted "something happened."
If he'd been locked up for that, he might not have helped incite the Crown Heights riots in 1991. After a tragic car accident in the New York neighborhood in which a Jewish driver accidentally struck and killed a black child named Gavin Cato, Sharpton stoked anti-Semitic rage. At the funeral for Cato, amidst shouts from the crowd of "Heil Hitler!" (one banner read: "Hitler did not do the job"), Sharpton didn't call for reconciliation; he inveighed against "diamond dealers." During the riots Jews were beaten in the street, and eventually a Hasidic tourist from Australia, Yankel Rosenbaum, was stabbed to death.
Perhaps if he'd been shunned for his role in that, he might not have encouraged yet more violence in 1995, when Sharpton led protests against the eviction of a black-owned record store. Sharpton fueled rage on his radio show and at rallies to the point where one of the protestors ran into a Jewish-owned store whose owner was wrongly blamed for the eviction, shot several people and then burned the place down, killing seven (mostly Hispanic) occupants.
But he was shunned for none of it. Nor was he shunned for his sometimes cavalier compliance with tax laws or his shabby shakedowns of corporations for donations. In fact, in a culture that increasingly rewards shamelessness, Sharpton got in on the ground floor and has been cashing in on his access ever since. The attorney general himself celebrates his "partnership" with Sharpton.
Sharpton is even hailed as an expert on racial tensions, which in a funny way is true. The establishment he constantly seeks to "speak truth" to has enabled him in every conceivable way. He doesn't just have access to his suits, he's been given access to just about everything the 1 percent has to offer, including the very best cigars.
Jonah Goldberg is the author of "The Tyranny of Cliches" and is the editor-at-large for National Review Online.
AFTER HOUR TRADES..
After Hours Volume: After Hours High: After Hours Low:
149,405 $ 1.44
(16:22:37 PM) $ 1.4131
(16:15:13 PM)
Visit the Most Active in the After-Hours trading session.
Trade Detail
After Hours
Time (ET) After Hours
Price After Hours
Share Volume
16:46 $ 1.42 1,058
16:43 $ 1.42 1,826
16:22 $ 1.44 High 100
16:17 $ 1.414 25,600
16:17 $ 1.418 22,894
16:16 $ 1.42 2,564
16:15 $ 1.4131 Low 6,997
16:13 $ 1.417 828
16:13 $ 1.417 348
16:13 $ 1.417 27,728
16:12 $ 1.423 6,266
16:12 $ 1.42 9,616
16:11 $ 1.414 1,130
16:10 $ 1.42 17,949
16:08 $ 1.4373 9,116
16:00 $ 1.42 15,385
Read more: http://www.nasdaq.com/symbol/pphm/after-hours#ixzz2aev6VGHP
IM WAITING 20 YEARS .WHATS A FEW MORE.....
DREAM ON.......
BUT IT WOULD BE NICE THO...............