Tuesday, July 29, 2008

Uncomfortable Answers to Questions on the Economy

Uncomfortable Answers to Questions on the Economy

by Peter S. Goodman

provided by
The New York Times

You have heard that Fannie and Freddie, their gentle names notwithstanding, may cripple the financial system without a large infusion of taxpayer money. You have gleaned that jobs are disappearing, housing prices are plummeting, and paychecks are effectively shrinking as food and energy prices soar. You have noted the disturbing talk of crisis hovering over Wall Street.

Something has clearly gone wrong with the economy. But how bad are things, really? And how bad might they get before better days return? Even to many economists who recently thought the gloom was overblown, the situation looks grim. The economy is in the midst of a very rough patch. The worst is probably still ahead.

Job losses will probably accelerate through this year and into 2009, and the job market will probably stay weak even longer. Home prices will probably keep falling, shrinking household wealth and eroding spending power.

"The open question is whether we're in for a bad couple of years, or a bad decade," said Kenneth S. Rogoff, a former chief economist at the International Monetary Fund, now a professor at Harvard.

Is This a Recession?

Officially, no. The economy is not in recession until a panel at a private institution called the National Bureau of Economic Research says so. Unofficially, many economists think a recession started six or seven months ago, even as the economy has continued to expand -- albeit at a tepid pace.

Many assume that if the economy expands at all, then it isn't a recession, but that's not true. The bureau defines a recession as "a significant decline in economic activity spread across the economy, lasting more than a few months." If enough people lose their jobs, factories stop making things, stores stop selling things, and less money lands in people's pockets, it is probably a recession.

Whatever it is called, it is a painful time for tens of millions of people. Indeed, this may turn out to be the most wrenching downturn since the two recessions in the early 1980s; almost surely worse than the recession that ended the technology bubble at the beginning of this decade; perhaps worse than the downturn of the early 1990s that followed the last dip in real estate prices.

But, despite what some doomsayers now proclaim, this is not the Great Depression, when unemployment spiked to 25 percent and millions of previously working people woke up in shantytowns. Not by any measure, even as your neighbors make cryptic remarks above dusting off lessons passed down from grandparents about how to turn a can of beans into a family meal.

How Bad is Housing?

Bad in many markets, awful in some, and still O.K. in a few.

The downturn has its roots in the real estate frenzy that turned lonely Nevada ranches into suburban ranch homes and swampland in Florida into condominiums. Speculators drove home prices beyond any historical connection to incomes. Gravity did the rest. After roughly doubling in value from 2000 to 2005, home prices have fallen about 17 percent -- and more like 25 percent in inflation-adjusted terms -- according to the widely watched Case-Shiller index.

Even so, most economists think house prices must fall an additional 10 to 15 percent to get back to reality. One useful measure is the relationship between the costs of buying and renting a home. From 1985 to 2002, the average American home sold for about 14 times the annual rent for a similar home, according to Moody's Economy.com. By early 2006, home prices ballooned to 25 times rental prices. Since then, the ratio has dipped back to about 20 -- still far above the historical norm.

With mortgages now hard to obtain and speculation no longer attractive, arithmetic has replaced momentum as the guiding force for housing prices. The fundamental equation points down: Even as construction grinds down, there are still many more houses on the market than there are people to buy them, and more on the way as more homeowners slip into foreclosure.

By the reckoning of Economy.com, enough houses are on the market to satisfy demand for the next two-and-a-half years without building a single new one.

The time it takes to sell a newly completed house has expanded from an average of four months in 2005 to about nine months, according to analysis by Dean Baker, co-director of the Center for Economic and Policy Research.

And many sales are falling through -- more than 30 percent in some parts of California and Florida -- as buyers fail to secure financing, exacerbating the glut of homes, Mr. Baker said.

No wonder that in Los Angeles, San Francisco, Phoenix and Las Vegas, house prices have in recent months declined at annual rates of more than 33 percent.

When Will Banks Revive?

So far, they have written off more than $300 billion in loans. Many experts now predict the toll will rise to $1 trillion or more -- a staggering sum that could cripple many institutions for years.

Back when home prices were multiplying, banks poured oceans of borrowed money into real estate loans. Unlike the dot-com companies at the heart of the last speculative investment bubble, the new gold rush was centered on something that seemed unimpeachably solid -- the American home.

But the whole thing worked only as long as housing prices rose. Falling prices landed like a bomb. Homeowners fell behind on their loans and could not qualify for new ones: There was no value left in their house to borrow against. As millions of people defaulted, the banks confronted enormous losses in a bloody period of reckoning.

In March, the Federal Reserve helped engineer a deal for JPMorgan Chase to buy troubled investment bank Bear Stearns. Many assumed the worst was over. But, this month, the open distress of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac -- two huge, government sponsored institutions that together own or guarantee nearly half of the nation's $12 trillion in outstanding mortgages -- sent a signal that more ugly surprises may lie in wait.

To calm markets, the government last weekend hurriedly put together a rescue package for Fannie and Freddie that, if used, could cost as much as $300 billion. The urgent need for a rescue -- together with another round of billion-dollar write-offs on Wall Street -- has unnerved economists and investors.

"I was a relative optimist, but I've certainly become more pessimistic," said Alan S. Blinder, an economist at Princeton, and a former vice chairman of the board of governors at the Federal Reserve. "The financial system looks substantially worse now than it did a month ago. If the Freddie and Fannie bailout were to fail, it could get a hell of a lot worse. If we get more bank failures, we have the possibility of seeing more of these pictures of people standing in line to pull their money out. That could really scare consumers."

In one respect, Mr. Blinder added, this is like the Great Depression. "We haven't seen this kind of travail in the financial markets since the 1930s," he said.

More than two years ago, Nouriel Roubini, an economist at the Stern School of Business at New York University, said that the housing bubble would give way to a financial crisis and a recession. He was widely dismissed as an attention-seeking Chicken Little. Now, Mr. Roubini says the worst is yet to come, because the account-squaring has so far been confined mostly to bad mortgages, leaving other areas remaining -- credit cards, auto loans, corporate and municipal debt.

Mr. Roubini says the cost of the financial system's losses could reach $2 trillion. Even if it's closer to $1 trillion, he adds, "we're not even a third of the way there."

Where will the banks raise the huge sums needed to replenish the capital they have apparently lost? And what will happen if they cannot?

The answers to these questions are unknown, an unsettling void that holds much of the economy at a standstill.

"We're in a dangerous spot," said Andrew Tilton, an economist at Goldman Sachs. "The big threat is more capital losses."

Banks are a crucial piece of the economy's arterial system, steering capital where it is needed to fuel spending and power growth. Now, they are holding tight to their dollars, starving businesses of loans they might use to expand, and depriving families of money they might use to buy houses and fill them with furniture and appliances.

From last June to this June, commercial bank lending declined more than 9 percent, according to an analysis of Federal Reserve data by Goldman Sachs.

"You have another wave of anxiety, another tightening of credit," said Robert Barbera, chief economist at the research and trading firm ITG. "The idea that we'll have a second half of the year recovery has gone by the boards."

Is My Job Safe?

Economic slowdowns always mean job losses. Unemployment already has risen, and almost certainly will increase more.

The first signs of distress emerged in housing. Construction companies, real estate agencies, mortgage brokers and banks began laying people off. Next, jobs started being cut at factories making products linked to housing, from carpets and furniture to lighting and flooring.

But as the real estate bust spilled over into the broader economy, depleting household wealth, the impacts rippled out to retailers, beauty parlors, law offices and trucking companies, inflicting cutbacks throughout the economy, save for health care, farming and energy. Over the last six months, the economy has shed 485,000 private sector jobs, according to the Labor Department. Many people have seen hours reduced.

The unemployment rate still remains low by historical standards, at 5.5 percent. And so far, the job losses -- about 65,000 a month this year -- do not approach the magnitude of those seen in past downturns, particularly the twin recessions at the beginning of the 1980s, when the economy shed upward of 140,000 jobs a month and the unemployment rate exceeded 10 percent.

But Goldman Sachs assumes unemployment will reach 6.5 percent by the end of 2009, which translates into several hundred thousand more Americans out of work.

These losses are landing on top of what was, for most Americans, a remarkably weak period of expansion. From 1992 to 2000 -- as the technology boom catalyzed spending and hiring -- the economy added more than 22 million private sector jobs. Over the last eight years, only 5 million new jobs have been added.

The loss of work is hitting Americans along with an assortment of troubles -- gasoline prices in excess of $4 a gallon, over all inflation of about 5 percent, and declining wages.

"In every dimension, people are worse off than they were," said Mr. Roubini, the New York University economist.

Are Consumers Done?

That is a major worry.

The fate of the economy now rests on the shoulders of the American consumer, whose spending amounts to 70 percent of all economic activity.

When people go to the mall and buy televisions and eat out, their money circulates through the economy. When they tighten their belts, austerity ripples out and chokes growth.

Through the years of the housing boom, many Americans came to treat their homes like automated teller machines that never required a deposit. They harvested cash through sales, second mortgages and home equity lines of credit -- an artery of finance that reached $840 billion a year from 2004 to 2006, according to work by the economists James Kennedy and Alan Greenspan, the former Federal Reserve chairman. That allowed Americans to live far in excess of what they brought home from work.

But by the first three months of this year, that flow had constricted to an annual rate of about $200 billion.

Average household debt has swelled to 120 percent of annual income, up from 60 percent in 1984, according to the Federal Reserve.

And now the banks are turning off the credit taps.

"Credit is going to remain tight for a time potentially measured in years," said Mr. Tilton, the Goldman Sachs economist.

This is the landscape that has so many economists convinced that consumer spending must dip, putting the squeeze on the economy for several years.

"The question is, will it get as bad as the 1970s?" asked Mr. Rogoff, recalling an era of spiking gas prices and double-digit inflation.

Long term, Americans may have no choice but to spend less, save more and reduce debts -- in short, to live within their means.

"We're getting a lot of the adjustment and it hurts," said Kristin Forbes, a former member of the Council of Economic Advisers under President George W. Bush, and now a scholar at M.I.T.'s Sloan School of Management. "But it's an adjustment we're going to have to make."

Who's to Blame?

There is plenty to go around.

In the estimation of many economists, it starts with the Federal Reserve. The central bank lowered interest rates following the calamitous end of the technology bubble in 2000, lowered them more after the terrorist attacks of Sept. 11, 2001, and then kept them low, even as speculators began to trade homes like dot-com stocks.

Meanwhile, the Fed sat back and watched as Wall Street's financial wizards engineered diabolically complicated investments linked to mortgages, generating huge amounts of speculative capital that turned real estate into a conflagration.

"At the end of this movie, it's clear that the Fed will have to care about excesses," Mr. Barbera said.

Prices multiplied as many homeowners took on more property than they could afford, lured by low introductory interest rates that eventually reset higher, sending many people into foreclosure.
Mortgage brokers netted commissions as they lent almost indiscriminately, offering exotically lenient terms -- no money down, no income or job required. Wall Street banks earned billions selling risky mortgage-linked securities around the world, aided by ratings agencies that branded them solid.

Through it all, a lot of ordinary Americans borrowed a lot more money then they could afford to pay back, running up enormous credit card bills and borrowing against the value of their homes. Now comes the day of reckoning.

Sunday, July 27, 2008

Bobby Kennedy Predicts Future?

He gave a speech to the Voice of America all around the world 40 years ago. And despite what was going on in the country, particularly in Alabama, Bobby Kennedy said this: "Things are 'moving so fast in race relations a Negro could be president in 40 years."

This is in 1968, we're now in 2008.

"There's no question about it," the attorney general said. "In the next 40 years a Negro can achieve the same position that my brother has." ...Kennedy said that prejudice exists and probably will continue to ... "But we have tried to make progress and we are making progress. We are not going to accept the status quo."

- Robert F. Kennedy, Washington Post, May 27, 1968

Friday, July 25, 2008

What Men Aren't Telling Us

What Men Aren't Telling Us
Shy man
Photo: Stockbyte/Getty Images
That women are mysterious and unknowable is something every young man grows up believing. Men, on the other hand, never think of themselves as mysterious or confusing, and we are often at a loss as to why women want to figure us out. But since you asked:

When you say we don't really talk to you or reveal ourselves to you, we wish you knew just how much we have had to suppress about our desires, pains, fears, and vulnerability over the years to conform to the script of masculinity that we are given. Sometimes we don't open up because we are afraid of what we will find. We are also afraid that if you see who we really are, in all our flawed humanity (and not the flaws that annoy you, like being untidy or driving fast), you won't like us.

Men do communicate, often very directly, but women sometimes cannot accept how simple what we have to say is. We seldom play games—we aren't that sophisticated. If we don't call you for a couple of days after a date, it is because either we are afraid you will think we are stalkers (and we will call on day three) or we aren't into you. That's all there is.

We are as nervous as you are about sex; I don't care what you've heard. Your anatomy is a mystery that nobody bothers explaining to us. Even when we think we have mastered one woman's body, every body is different. We feel inadequate if we can't satisfy you in bed, and since no one has told us what to do with feelings of inadequacy, we project them onto you. Sad but true.

We are very insecure about how we look and what you really think about us, and we are excited when you do small, nice things for us like make coffee or come with us to the barber or just buy us a good book. We've been trained never to show this side to you, but it is there.

We are not subtle creatures. You might think that when you play with your hair in our presence, we know that means you like us. We don't know for sure. Men who do are bad men (sorry, guys!). And anything you've been told about playing hard to get is wrong.

We crave cuddling and hand-holding, maybe even more than you do.

We are desperate to please you because we know you are far sexier and more beautiful than you will ever admit to yourself, and we're confused (but extremely happy) as to why you like us.

Here's the thing: You rescue us every day in small, quiet ways, so why not in this way? Let us into your mystery, tell us how you would like to be loved, show us how to see you, really see you.

Orginial

Friday, July 18, 2008

What Jesse Jackson Said





I believe one of the roots of this issue that blacks need to understand especially black "leaders" is that Barack Obama is not running for the United States of "Black America" but the United States of America PERIOD so he is not going to sugar coat anything for Black America! I do agree though that perhaps something nicer could have been said for Father's Day. But at the same time Senator Obama had an absent father so maybe that gives him more passion for his distaste to this issue that plagues the Black community. It has also become strangely apparent that many Black leaders have a problem with Senator Obama because he is not using them or really asking them for much aid in this monumental endeavor to become the first Black president.


Anyway, I thought this article was a pretty good read and carried some very valid points.
___________________________________________________________

By Eric Easter (Chief of Digital Strategy for Johnson Publishing, Inc. He writes about politics, culture and technology for ebonyjet.com)

Jesse Jackson made a mistake and he has appropriately apologized. His language was unnecessary, his timing off and the venue (Fox News of all places) gave the comment an illegitimate quality that marred the underlying point Jackson was making, though the castration analogy didn’t exactly help either. It’s all about context. In another setting, stated another way to a different group of people, his comment could have had the power to begin a dialogue to address some of the concerns about Obama’s appeal to mainstream voters and what that means.
But of course, it’s not just what you say, it’s where, how, when and to whom that matter as well. He learned a lesson. But according to quite a number of prominent black activists who are strong Obama supporters but “lovingly critical,” Obama should learn a lesson about what he says and to whom as well. Far from some sign of a rift between Jackson and Obama, what Jackson said was repeated many times in various forms at the recent Rainbow PUSH Coalition by many thoughtful Black activists who, while supportive of Obama, also choose to be “lovingly critical” to ensure that Obama lives up to the promise he presents.

That this growing opinion surfaced in a troubling way is unfortunate, but the Obama campaign and Obama himself would be wrong not to listen to the writing between the lines.
At specific issue is Obama’s Father’s Day speech at Apostolic Church that focused on several points regarding the strengthening of urban families but focused most aggressively on the pathologies of a disturbing percentage of Black men. The fact is that Obama has given some version of his responsibility speech for years. He has written about it as well and as the son of an absentee father he speaks of the issue with passion and authority. It is a Cosby-esque speech (but so) and the message needs to be heard. But, as with Jackson’s example, it’s not what you say, it’s all about where, when and to whom.

When Obama uses a Black church pulpit to send his message of responsibility, he is preaching to the choir both literally and figuratively. The people who need to hear that message are neither on the choir nor in the church, which of course, is part of the problem.

But that particular speech was not in just any church. It was in the first Chicago church Obama attended after repudiating Jeremiah Wright and after resigning Wright’s Trinity Church after incendiary comments made by Father Michael Pfleger. The press and the world was watching and hanging on every word.

The fear among critics is that the real audience that day was not the Black people in the pews at all, but the white people in middle America looking for a strong signal that Obama was rejecting the politics of racial division and animosity. By choosing that moment to castigate Black fathers, some worry that Obama gave public voice to what white people whisper about Blacks in their living rooms and cemented his image as a post-racial savior at the expense of Black men. Whether that was Obama’ s intention or whether he just figured it was Father’s Day so why not do the absent Father stump speech again is impossible to know, but the event smacked of calculated political expediency that troubled more than a few people.

Arguably, Obama could have used that international exposure to salute the majority of Black fathers who provide strong role models. Or, since the issue was his choice of pastors, he could have simply sat down and listened to a safer sermon.

But the Father’s Day speech is only indicative of a broader issue. Rightly or wrongly, some Black progressives are deeply suspicious of the change in white America that has led to Obama’s position. Specifically that white people don’t just want political change, they want a change in the racial dynamic. And hearing about black problems does not fit into their idea of this new America that will be created when Obama becomes president. There are equal parts of truth, paranoia and resistance to change in that suspicion. That’s one of the reasons Jackson said what he did.

No one realistically expects that the first Black man with a real shot at President of the United States was going to be the reincarnation of Stokely Carmichael, but to the extent that some highly visible supporters are worried that Obama’s move to the center is a move away from urban issues and the community suffering from those issues, Senator Obama has reason to be concerned. Inelegantly, rudely and stupidly, that’s what Jesse Jackson was suggesting.

Friday, July 11, 2008

Ryan Lesile

I first came across Ryan Lesile, when I heard the Track "Diamond Girl" spoke to me because the beat was hot, and the lyrics called to me.
I can be ya wake up reason daily
You can be my first and leading lady
I'ma make you happy that you waited
For me to settle down (oh oh)


Started researching more and I saw for one he was good looking and stylish. I saw he was educated, Ivy Leaguer at Harvard. Sought to be an original producer and is very passionate about music. Beyond this all the dude is in sync with his community as he protested during the Sean Bell Trial. All great features of a Buppie.

This dude flaunts his talent via You tube. Sorta of Obama-eqsue on his self promotion. On his youtube videos he shows he comes up with this beats and concepts. On his myspace page, he sent a honest message to members talking about how he was hoodwinked into a Music Video he disliked.

R-Les has a nostalgic style, sometimes mimicking Stevie Wonder, Morris Day, and Prince. Yet hip enough to compete for the same crowds Kanye moves!



Thursday, July 10, 2008

COOKIES!!


5 Questions to ask a man (when you meet him AND definitely before you "break off the cookie"!!!) –Steve Harvey:

1.What are your short term goals? (What are working on now and your 1, 2, 5 yr goals?)
2.What are your long-term goals? Cannot be the same as the short term goals.
3.How is your relationship with your family? Family Questions..Relationship with GOD.
4. What do you think about me? Sit and LISTEN!!!
5. How do you feel about me? (This is what he is REALLY thinking).

****IF you have already "Broke off the Cookie", go directly to #4 & #5.





The COOOOOOOOOOOKIE!!! Buppie's, When do you give up the cookie or take the cookie?
Lets be real it is apart of buppie's life. If you are a married buppie, you doing it, if your single you can if you want. As a buppie we are liberated in a entirely different way than those before us. So what do we do? As I mentioned Women are Smuts. Men have been smutting for years. I have been Smut free and counting for 4 months. And I do not plan on handing out cookies to those who are not worthy. Men, are tricky. And I'll admit Women are tricky too. Men are cookie monsters. Women are Girl scouts. If you treat them nicely and pay their fee you get the cookies.
Those five questions my homie Steve mentioned. On point. Men giving you answers. Ah not so easy. You see cookies women give out to people they like. Men, do not care where the cookies come from they just eat eat eat. So you are likely to hear what they think you want to hear so he can get his cookie's....

Wednesday, July 9, 2008

Being the Token


I have the gift and the curse of being a person of color, a female, and young in a white male 35+ world.I love my job, I love my co-workers..blah blah. However sometimes, I cannot help to feel that I am the token.

Have you ever walked into the situation at work where you are the token ___person? Token is not just a "black people thing". Even though it was developed to note the ONE black person in the movie, who always ended up dead. One can be a token, white, Asian, male, elder, etc.

Here are some "Token" things I have noticed.

1. When you walk into to work and say hello, every changes their vernacular to say "WHAZZUP? How you doin'?"
2. To relate to you, the sing songs like, "To the window to the walls" just to prove they are down?
3. They try to prove they have diverse friends? "I went skiing with my Neighbor AKBAR, he is from Bangalore"
4. They want to go to Lunch to Cultural place and swear the food is authentic as if they were born there. "Let's go to Sue Lings. They have the best soy sauce ever. I know its authentic. It is better the Bak Choys" or "Bahamas Breeze makes the best Curry Chicken." (AS IF)
5. When they are all talking about some man issues, and they say, "You are lucky you do not have to deal with that".


Fill in this blank.
You know you are a token _______, when _________________________________________!

Tuesday, July 8, 2008

Where is my Piece At!!


Since moving into DC last year, I have been wanting to "ARM" myself. I can only afford to live in mid-gentrified areas a.k.a (The hood in transition) and I live by myself.
To my dismay, I found out DC had a Ban on Guns!! So what was a chick to do??


Well, last week the Supreme Court revisited our 2nd Amendment, and ruled that DC's " 32-year-old ban on handguns as incompatible with gun rights under the Second Amendment" .

Sometimes, you just want things because you cannot have them. Now I can really get a gun, but I have mix emotions about this ruling and its effects.

Really, what is the true reason folks have guns? I do not really want to kill anyone. I have been living thus far without the need for one. (Thank GOD) Self Defense is forever the reason why the 2nd amendment continues to exist. But in a way, isn't this the US failing us because our so called "Defense System" does not work? Thus we have to take it in our own hands? How much of our city, state, and federal taxes to funding Intelligence, Defense, and Police Agencies who carry a piece just like I now can? Yet we continue to pay taxes for their shortcomings. Isn't this noting a failure in our system? I mean should we not request some of our money back? Am I not doing the US a favor by carrying a piece? At least give me a write off, if I have a Gun.

Further, I am still waiting for is for folks to take Chris Rock seriously. We do not need Gun Control. We need Bullet Control. That is real, because if I had to take out a loan, and get my Credit check for each bullet I purchased, I would think twice if its a necessity or not. Why can't we tax Bullets??

Now, Now do not get in a tissy fit, I was simply looking at it from another POV. Can you imagine with the current state, we are in everyone running around with a loaded GUN?? Oh wait we do! DC is called the Murda Capital for a reason. We try to regulate it, you know the whole you have to register and not have a criminal background, but really, it has not proven successful. Who are the folks causing all this drama, but criminals that our police officers cannot get to? What impact will the 2nd Amendment is going to do for the US?

Well, lets look at Georgia! You can now tote your heat on the Bus and MARTA!


NOW what if Crazy Soulja Girl had a piece!?? Nope not a good Idea.

Full Article On Supreme Court Decision

Buppie Event in DC

Readers,
If you are local to DC and would like to meet the writers of Buppie, Please join us at our first event. Now, Now. We are not in the business of the "CEO Event Promoters"! We are doing this event to fund raise to make our site bigger and better :)!

We are hosting a truly Buppie after hours. 1AM - 6AM. Yes After the club, come join us. We are also celebrating with the AKA's! It is their conference in DC, and some of those chicks are quite Buppie!


Epilogue

After Hours Lounge And Breakfast


Epilogue is a one of a kind event entitled for its exclusivity, mystery, and intrigue. It is designed to provide guests with a night of wonder and upscale entertainment on a grander scale! These events are usually held at mansions, on yachts, and upper echelon venues that attract a privileged clientele.

This one of a kind event is celebrating 100 years of gracious, vivacious, tenacious, poised, intellectual, sophisticated, and divine women of The Salmon Pink and Apple Green…



July 19th

1:00 AM- 6:00 AM

Description: An after hours lounge providing its attendees refuge from the DC streets. An atmosphere of dignity, grace, and style, allowing its partakers a cool venue to catch up with friends and colleagues and unwind from the eventful week…



Features:

A Breakfast Extravaganza: A Chef and beautiful staff that will cater to you. Belgian Waffles, Omelet stations, Fresh Fruit Medleys, Mimosas, Bellinis, and much much more.

Admission:

VIP-$25 includes breakfast Extravaganza and Drinks

Royalty Package -$250 , Table Service, Unlimited Breakfast, Moet Champagne and entry for 4.

Private Loft/Room Package-$450, Table Service, Unlimited Breakfast, Moet Champagne, Mimosas, entry for 8, private balcony and doors that conduct the flow of traffic.

Where:??

Washington, DC. A private location revealed once tickets are purchased. Features 3 Floors, Flat screen TVs, comfortable seating, Balconies with Views of the Monument and downtown, posh d├ęcor and lounge music.

Tickets go on Sale July 5, 2008…

Hosted by: crocodile's tear management, LLC and Buppie.Blogspot.Com


Contact:

mhn@crocodilestear.com or

askthebuppie@gmail.com


PURCHASE TICKETS Here!