• Security incident: ISF was recently accessed by intruders. Please change your password, and change it anywhere else you used it. Read more

Merged Former Forumite Running For Congress

Will you be wearing it at TAM? Did anyone else get one?

I ordered one shortly before they were pulled and I *think* I will be getting a misspelled one. Supposedly the package is currently in New Jersey, so I guess I will find out soon!
 
Last edited:
Found it!
 

Attachments

  • ImageUploadedByTapatalk1328461395.815865.jpg
    ImageUploadedByTapatalk1328461395.815865.jpg
    35.5 KB · Views: 21
Oh noes! Your limited edition rare 'error version' T-shirt is no longer pristine mint unworn new with tags!
 
Absolutely. In fact, I may put off wearing it until then, so you all can see it in pristine condition.

you may want to put it off until then - my experience with cafepress is that the shirts will fade pretty quickly.
 
Guess what I found in my mailbox today???

As I'm a technical writer, my body may actually reject this shirt. :D
 

Attachments

  • packard_shirt.jpg
    packard_shirt.jpg
    62.7 KB · Views: 17
Last edited:
I, for one, am glad there is finally a pro-sparity candidate. All those anti-sparity groups have big super PAC money behind them and they are just spouting lies about sparity and those who are for it. No where in the US constitution is sparity banned or even limited. The Founding Fathers never said anything that could in anyway be construed as anti-sparity. Won't they think of the children? Do you want your children to grow up in a world where one is ridiculed for being pro-sparity?

And don't even get me started on those outginuitists!

Packard 2012 - Because spelling is overated!
 
I will give him some credit though:

Eliminate the ridiculous “use it or lose it” policies of funding allocations to federal agencies. Allow entities to carry over some or all surplus funds to the next fiscal year, rewarding those who use less money, not punishing them. <- this IS a good idea.
 
I will give him some credit though:

Eliminate the ridiculous “use it or lose it” policies of funding allocations to federal agencies. Allow entities to carry over some or all surplus funds to the next fiscal year, rewarding those who use less money, not punishing them. <- this IS a good idea.

It certainly sounds nice in principle, but I don't see how you could carry that out effectively in practice.

Budgeting is a year-by-year process. Every year Congress has to pass a budget resolution (and usually some other supplemental resolutions, continuing resolutions, etc. ... I'm not entirely clear on the details). And short of a Constitutional amendment, one Congress cannot bind the hands of a future Congress.

So it's all well and good to say, "Dear Congressional Agencies, Here are your budget allocations for Fiscal Year 2013. If you spend less than what we've allocated, you'll get to apply it to Fiscal Year 2014. We totally promise. Love, the 112th Congress. XOXOXO." But the 113th Congress can and will do whatever it wants.

And when the difficult negotiations for the FY 2014 start, and everyone has their own priorities, but pretty much all of them involve searching for any actually easy or at least politically easy spending cuts, to be used for other spending, tax cuts, and/or deficit reduction (depending on which Congressperson we're talking about), and the Department of Whatever is insisting that it needs $100 Billion for FY 2014, but everyone can see that it got by just fine on $90 Billion in FY 2013.... the Secretary of Whatever is going to have a difficult enough time persuading Congress to authorize another $100 Billion allocation, let alone getting $110 Billion as a "reward" for not spending the other $10B last year.
 
It certainly sounds nice in principle, but I don't see how you could carry that out effectively in practice.

Budgeting is a year-by-year process. Every year Congress has to pass a budget resolution (and usually some other supplemental resolutions, continuing resolutions, etc. ... I'm not entirely clear on the details). And short of a Constitutional amendment, one Congress cannot bind the hands of a future Congress.

So it's all well and good to say, "Dear Congressional Agencies, Here are your budget allocations for Fiscal Year 2013. If you spend less than what we've allocated, you'll get to apply it to Fiscal Year 2014. We totally promise. Love, the 112th Congress. XOXOXO." But the 113th Congress can and will do whatever it wants.

And when the difficult negotiations for the FY 2014 start, and everyone has their own priorities, but pretty much all of them involve searching for any actually easy or at least politically easy spending cuts, to be used for other spending, tax cuts, and/or deficit reduction (depending on which Congressperson we're talking about), and the Department of Whatever is insisting that it needs $100 Billion for FY 2014, but everyone can see that it got by just fine on $90 Billion in FY 2013.... the Secretary of Whatever is going to have a difficult enough time persuading Congress to authorize another $100 Billion allocation, let alone getting $110 Billion as a "reward" for not spending the other $10B last year.

Yup, and before anyone tries to cite this as reasons to privatize, Large companies that typically do the major contracting for the US Govt are no different.
 
Last edited:
Reference earlier in the thread. At TAM 9, DrBuzzo glomed onto The Dolly within five minutes of her entering the DelMar. In their conversation, DrBuzzo observed that he'd never been tazed and The Dolly asked him if he wanted to be. I thought we were going to have to pick Cleon up off the floor at that point...

I really need to hang out at the DelMar more often :)
 
Oh wow... that's gold :)

Are people getting T-shirts directly from Buzz0's website or just putting the image into a "make-your-own-shirt" thingamajig like Cafepress.com?

ETA: would the make-your-own option be legal?

ETA2: does anyone have a higher-res version of the picture?

Those of us who already got ours ordered them through Buzz0's Cafe Press shop *before* he pulled the design; they were available for about a week or so. He suddenly pulled those and has since replaced them with shirts with a different design (my guess is that somebody - purposely or not - alerted him to the spelling errors :D).

Can't answer the other two questions. I would think that if Buzz0 hadn't trademarked the design, it would be fair game to use. But I'm not a lawyer so I'll leave that to someone else to answer authoritatively.
 

ISF - Join now!

Every member here is approved by hand. No bots, no spam, just people who care about evidence and honest debate.

Membership is free!

Create your free account

Back
Top Bottom