« I Don't Support The Troops | Main | Alito Nomination Goes To Full Senate »
New Hampshire is the only state bold enough to ask the truly tough questions: who better to revamp the state's child-support guidelines than a guy who went to jail for non-support?
Permalink | Linking Blogs | Sphere: Related Content | Digg this! | FARK It!
Filed under:
Odd News
Send e-mail tips to us:
Get Wizbang in your inbox by submitting your email address below.
Section Editor: Maggie Whitton
Editors: Jay Tea, Lorie Byrd, Kim Priestap, DJ Drummond, Michael Laprarie, Baron Von Ottomatic, Shawn Mallow, Rick, Dan Karipides, Michael Avitablile, Charlie Quidnunc, Steve Schippert
Emeritus: Paul, Mary Katherine Ham, Jim Addison, Alexander K. McClure, Cassy Fiano, Bill Jempty, John Stansbury, Rob Port
In Memorium: HughS
All original content copyright © 2003-2010 by Wizbang®, LLC. All rights reserved. Wizbang® is a registered service mark.
Powered by Movable Type Pro 4.361
Hosting by ServInt
Ratings on this site are powered by the Ajax Ratings Pro plugin for Movable Type.
Search on this site is powered by the FastSearch plugin for Movable Type.
Blogrolls on this site are powered by the MT-Blogroll.
Temporary site design is based on Cutline and Cutline for MT. Graphics by Apothegm Designs.
Comments (4)
Why not? It worked for Pres... (Below threshold)1. Posted by Don | January 24, 2006 2:24 PM | Score: 0 (0 votes cast)
Why not? It worked for President Franklin D. Roosevelt who appointed Joseph P. Kennedy, Sr, father of President John F. Kennedy, to serve as the first Chairman of the SEC. Who better knows how a crook works than another crook?
1. Posted by Don | January 24, 2006 2:24 PM |
Score: 0 (0 votes cast)
Posted on January 24, 2006 14:24
2. Posted by mantis | January 24, 2006 2:59 PM | Score: 0 (0 votes cast)
Hey, why not? It worked for the Feds hiring Frank Abagnale.
2. Posted by mantis | January 24, 2006 2:59 PM |
Score: 0 (0 votes cast)
Posted on January 24, 2006 14:59
3. Posted by cubanbob | January 24, 2006 5:37 PM | Score: 0 (0 votes cast)
is the state to incompetent to garnish wages or other income and or revenue checks?
3. Posted by cubanbob | January 24, 2006 5:37 PM |
Score: 0 (0 votes cast)
Posted on January 24, 2006 17:37
4. Posted by E | January 26, 2006 1:23 AM | Score: 0 (0 votes cast)
You are a nutcase.
4. Posted by E | January 26, 2006 1:23 AM |
Score: 0 (0 votes cast)
Posted on January 26, 2006 01:23