Right? That drama in the below post is 'good' stuff, and never in 1000 years would I have thought that a simple post about how I don't buy the numbers the gov't is spoon feeding us would have caused such controversy, LOL!
I have a blog entry (not mine) to find, and if I can find it, I may have an interesting blog coming up, if not, well, without the 'whole' story I'm not sure it'll work.
I did post earlier that I was going full disclosure on the whole J little sister thing, but I deleted it. Yes, I know. I don't delete as a rule, but it seemed I could go about it a little differently then I did, and no one had commented. At least I admit that I posted about it (and that I was going full disclosure) instead if denying I posted it.
I just need to find that blog.
6 comments:
LOL, that post was mine, LOL, oops!
It said I found the blog, HA!
but I wanted to add Thank You to J!
who on eath was that wackadoo posting as anonymus below?
I have no clue Kate, someone saying they are "Barb" after a good bit of poking. So who knows.
I don't think it was someone named "barb" She skirted too many questions, as if she was hiding something.
Anyway.. An interesting article in my local paper also stated the number, but whoever wrote it was smart enough to say, hey that is not an increase of 103, it was an increase closer to 35-40 taking seasonal work into account.
I suspect it wasn't 'barb' as well, but oh well, who am I to say right?
Kim, yeah, there are just to many different number for me to believe that #! What you presented seems far more accurate.
Post a Comment