Knocked cold by Sinister Sandy’s Shoulder

Posted on November 2, 2012 by Mike Shortall

Photo by Colleen Wilson

It’s complacency really. That’s my defense. Complacency – along with a side order of impatience topped with boredom – is how I came to post such a silly thing as From the Shoulder of Hurricane Sandy early on Monday evening. Ho hum … another “Monster Storm” bearing down on the East Coast.

I was so thoroughly unimpressed.

Three days later without electricity, heat, hot water … Creeping towards the edge of Unplugged Insanity … You tend to learn a few things about yourself.

You take way too many things for granted. Could not count the number of times I mindlessly pawed a wall switch expecting the lights to come on as I entered a room. After the first 100 failures, you would think your brain would make the adjustment.
When the Power goes out, you lose all perspective of what’s going on around you. All you care about is how YOUR problem(s) will be resolved.
You resent The Lighted People, that cluster of homes just 100 yards from your backdoor that somehow had their power restored two days before you.
You can handle the stress of family challenges, work issues, health scares, and an important election. But let a creature comfort – or two or three – disappear, and suddenly you’re fighting a long slide down into hysteria.
When the Power comes back on, and you see what other people are dealing with here and elsewhere as the result of Sinister Sandy, you feel like a schmuck for complaining about your situation.
And you come to realize if The Big One hits, you probably won’t make it – physically or mentally – to the end of the Week 1!

Sad that last one, but probably true. You realize how fragile your relatively sane existence is, based as it is on mass technology, connected to a network that can be thrown into chaos by a few strategically placed trees and a good huff from Mother Nature.

Yes, that’s an over-simplification of what happened this week. But you get my drift, don’t you?

Photo by Tara M. Smith

If the definition of Insanity is repeating the same action over and over again – like pawing at a powerless wall switch – and expecting a different result, I was technically insane by Tuesday evening. The same holds true for reacting as though every truck you hear coming down the street is a caravan of utility trucks (The techs wearing white hats and halos, no doubt.) coming to the rescue … or that every rumor you hear (“The guy who lives down the street from my sister’s hair dresser says we’ll have power by 8:00 PM tonight!”) is based on any whiff of fact.

You resolve to change a few things, you know you won’t. Buy a generator; pay serious attention to the weather forecasters; take a survivor skills course (for The Big One, ya know!); watch Doomsday Preppers without laughing; learn to camp, fish, hunt; pledge to reduce your Carbon Footprint …

eh … Who am I kidding?!? When the NEXT 50-year storm hits, I’ll be long gone. Won’t I?!?

(Tip of Cranky’s Lawn Mower to the guys from Illinois, whose company name I cannot recall that were responsible for getting a nice chunk of us Horshamites back on the grid!)

Half correct on 47% still tells the ugly truth

Posted on September 24, 2012 by Mike Shortall

It’s imperative that write something today, just to break the lazy hangover I have enjoyed all week following the frantic, emotional stress of Mike Jr.’s wedding last week. I promise to follow-up with details and pictures of the great time we had; but that would require sorting through 8000 photos (my estimate) to pick those that would best tell the story of our Lost Weekend in Williamsport. (Trust me. That title connotes a very favorable experience within the crazy motions and emotions of a son’s (or daughter’s) wedding. More on that later … )

I could write about my recent lawn treatment. But that would require an uptick in my Lawn Geek Level that I’m not willing to invest in this Sunday morning.

And so I’ll turn to more recent news, and one of my favorite pastimes … Cranky Political Observations.

First, let’s look at Mitt Romney and some of the absolutely ridiculous claims President Obama‘s campaign and supporters continue to make when it comes to Romney’s wealth and tax history. The important thing to keep in mind is every minute spent defending Romney against such nonsenseical attacks is time diverted from hammering away at the sorry state of The Obama Economy.

Afterall, with almost four years of President Obama’s stewardship, the Economy – or lack thereof – is rightfully his to won! (You only get to blame your predecessor for so long, and certainly not through a full term in The Oval Office when – as President – you have shown no Leadership whatsoever on Issues of Economic Recovery.)

Now Mitt admittedly caused himself a self-inflicted wound with his meanderings on the “47% of Americans who do not pay taxes”. Not paying taxes does not automatically make you a slouch. There are plenty of people, rightfully classified as disabled, aging veterans, etc. who fall into that very broad 47% category. Mitt might have bitten off more than he could chew; but let’s be honest, he was at least 53% correct about that 47%.

Regardless of the dangers associated with judging-by-percentages into which Romney stumbled, we ALL KNOW what he meant. Within that group is a hardcore class of people who have not the slightest interest or desire to break their dependence on the REDISTRIBUTION of other people’s hard work and income! And within that sub-class is another that not only shows little-to-no interest in self-sufficiency, they REVEL in their status as Economic Sponges!

Even Bill Clinton recognized the need to fix this when he joined with Congressional Republicans to pass the Welfare Reform Act of 1996. So this is not news to even the most hardened of Liberals.

Sunday’s Philadelphia Inquirer attempts to make the claim that REDISTRIBUTION of income is not a “bad word”. They try to soft sell this idea by stating that REDISTRIBUTION is used for small business loans, Pell Grants for college education, veterans’ benefits, etc. Of course they also throw in food stamps and welfare, but almost as an afterthought.

Intelligent, reality-educated people can distinguish between good uses for REDISTRIBUTED INCOME and other programs that simply rely on the toils and work ethic of the majority of Americans to fund the never-ending cycle of handouts to perpetual non-contributors. And that’s what MOST objectors to the Welfare Mentality think of when they hear INCOME REDISTRIBUTION … not Pell Grants, small business loans and taking care of aging veterans.

Liberals – and Obama supporters – KNOW this; but it suits their intentions in this 2012 election year to make it about the whole of benefits that come from INCOME REDISTRIBUTION, not the perfectly acceptable Social Contract that expects those who work at good jobs to provide TEMPORARY assistance to those who need a hand up in tough times or even those with legitimate long-term disabilities and maladies that prevent even part-time employment.

Do not allow them to suggest that there is no difference between Good Income Redistribution and the ugly realities of the Welfare State of Mind!

As for Mitt’s tax records, one observation is enough to put that entire subject into perspective. If President Obama’s proxies, like the half-baked Liar from Arizona – Harry Reid, are so desperate as to criticize Romney for tax rates and wealth shelters that were perfectly acceptable for Al Gore (2000) and John “Heinz 57” Kerry (2004), then you must recognize them for what those attacks are … Deperate attempts to distract you, me, and all voters from the Unemployed Economy.

So the more we spend talking about this, the less time we have to address what the REAL PROBLEM is in 2012, the stagnant National Economy and the broken stewardship of a Leadership-challenged President! Those of us longing for REAL Economic Leadership need to ignore these straw men and do what we can to refocus on the horrible state of President Obama’s own Economic Malaise!

Tom Smith for U.S. Senate

Will Pennsylvania U.S. Senate candidate Tom Smith ever get the chance to smoke out do-nothing U.S. Senator Bob Casey in his race to challenge a man who has nothing on his resume’ other than a famous father?

You can’t find anything on Bob Casey’s re-election campaign without a brace of media savvy internet bloodhounds. Casey refuses to come out into the open, like any politician with little track record, and a recognizable name. (How many voters still think they are voting for his father?) Casey continues to hide behind Barack Obama, even while doing anything to avoid endorsing him too much, too often.

He and Congressional REP Allyson Schwartz (See Joe Rooney) are probably sharing the same remote Pocono cabin; waiting for election day to come so they can sneak into their neighborhood polling location and hope for the best … meaning of course, voters who don’t bother looking at how their support of a poor Presidential leader has contributed to the Economic Stagnation we still face after four years of Democrat control over the U.S. Government.

For that reason alone, Bob Casey, Jr. would gladly spend this election cycle hiding under his bed! Add to that his opposition to the Liberal Litmus that is Abortion, his obvious implied stance against Gay Marriage, (Go ahead and try to find any reference to Gay Marriage on his official campaign or Senate websites!) and you have a Liberal Democrat’s biggest nightmare … Supporting a family values candidate that disdains everything a Good Liberal loves all because he has a “D” connected to his father’s name!

The REAL Bob Casey

Fortunately for Pennsylvania Liberals, Casey’s middle name is not “Fracking”!

Tom Smith stands for Ending Out-of-Control Federal Spending, Reducing Job-Killing Regulations, Promoting American Energy to Provide American Jobs, Simplified Tax Codes, and reasonable solutions to Healthcare and the long-term viability of Social Security and Medicare. These are the issues of the day that need discussing. But Bob Casey will not be found this election season discussing anything you care about in the presence of Tom Smith, and that’s a shame for all Pennsylvania voters!

Finally, if you get the chance, read Trudy Rubin’s column on The Real Muslim Movie Outrage in the Philadelphia Inquirer’s Opinion page this Sunday. I rarely agree with Ms. Rubin’s view on domestic politics, but her concise, honest review of the radical Islamic elements working to inflate Muslim tensions is enlightening.

A 1% President?

Posted on September 4, 2012 by Mike Shortall

(Enjoy this re-post both timely and appropriate for this week of the Democratic National Committee convention in Charlotte, NC. Previously posted in January 2012.)

Democratic Party officials announced recently that President Obama will accept his party’s nomination on the last night of their national convention at Bank of America Stadium.

It’s an odd choice, given the recent spate of Occupy Wall Street events originating from the most liberal wings of the Democratic Party. The visuals will not be very comforting to those who believe that the richest 1% of the country set the rules that elevates, protects and perpetuates their wealth, while at the same time oppresses the remaining 99%.

The re-election imagery for OWS’s Presumptive Hero could be a Recipe for Disaster …

Standing in front of a Bank of America backdrop, which BofA paid $100 million just for 20 years worth of naming rights …
In the Home of the Carolina Panthers and their 1% athletes …
Who are owned by Jerry Richardson, former CEO of Flagstar, whose net worth is estimated at $500 million …
In front of Democrat contributors willing to pay up to $1.5 million for the full-blown Premiere Events Package.
Serve over 8.5% Unemployment and the “disappearing middle class”

Hmmmmm …

Well, the good news is that it will be a heck of a lot warmer for the good Occupy Wall Street people in Charlotte in early September than it was on Wall Street this past November. That’s assuming of course that they even bother to show up to drag this particular demographic of the 1% out into the glaring media light.

I’m not holding my breath …

If you too want the Superbox Treatment”, consider your options:

Suzi Emmerling, a spokeswoman for the Charlotte Host Committee, confirmed a Bloomberg report that those deals — presented to Washington lobbyists last month — include an escalating menu of packages starting with the $1 million “presidential” level. Those who buy in will receive a “premier uptown hotel room,” a “platinum events package and “concierge services.” Another $500,000 “Gold Rush” level includes hotel room, credentials and a “premiere events package.”

Myself? I’ll be home watching the Democratic National Convention on TV with my 99% compadres, all the while marveling at how the Democratic 1% get to live it so large!

When the crazies kill, why sanction the legal and responsible?

Posted on July 23, 2012 by Mike Shortall

Here we go again …

Another crazy gets hold of an arsenal of weapons; breaks almost every law in the books; and shoots scores of innocents. And the result is predictable … a groundswell of opinion that never wavers … PASS LAWS TO RESTRICT GUN OWNERSHIP!

The problem with that sentiment is that third word … “LAWS”. Because “laws” only apply to those inclined to obey them in the first place!

It’s one thing if our elected leaders had the backbone to take on such an unpopular position (unpopular that is to most people who do not live in large, liberal-run cities) and accept the political consequences. But that’s rarely ever the case, when politics and power are of greater value. And that’s exactly the sentiment that was expressed by Democrat stalwart Senator (CA) Dianne Feinstein, who stated, although a sane discussion on gun control and a ban on military-type assault rifles was important, an election year was not the time to address it.

Huh?!? Wouldn’t that be the PERFECT time to address the issue?!?

Apparently the Democrats see a discussion of gun control to be a political loser in a year when President Obama is fighting for re-election in what is expected to be a close election. For these Democrats, the subject of limiting gun violence by restricting access to guns for everyone is trumped by White House aspirations. It says much about where the issue really sits with the political animals of the Democratic Party. So, if they refuse to have this discussion now, why should they be taken seriously when they finally get around to it?

In that same vein, we are still waiting for The President to get around to his 2008 campaign promises on gun control. Instead, President Obama has signed bills allowing guns in national parks and even on Amtrak! He has steadfastly refused to seek reinstatement of the Assault Weapons Ban. And maybe that’s the real reason Democrats – like Senator Feinstein – do not wish to bring it up now!

But in truth, even if we did have this conversation today, it would accomplish NOTHING for keeping guns of all shapes, sizes, and magazine capacities from the criminals and the crazies.

If it were that easy, we wouldn’t have had Aurora … or Columbine … or Howard Unruh … or the University of Texas clock tower … or Virginia Tech …

That’s the REAL problem … the criminals and the crazies. You have no right to ask law-biding citizens to give up access to responsible gun ownership if you have no prospects for denying similar weapons to the criminals and the crazies. And it’s mind-boggling that anyone would propose such a ban in an age where our own Federal Government openly distributed guns to the most dangerous criminals currently on the continent. They must solve the problem of keeping automatic assault weapons from the drug runners, the gangs, and criminally insane before asking John Q. Citizen to even consider doing the same.

I ain’t holding my breath on the former, but fully expect continued efforts to do the latter.

For another reason entirely, I laugh when gun opponents run up the flag of the Founding Fathers to claim that they had no intention for gun ownership to exist outside what was needed for the purposes of organized state militias. That may well have been their original intent, just like it was to restrict the voting rights of women or to count African slaves as 3/5 of a person. In reality, the concept of militia had little-to-nothing to do historically with the development of a gun culture in the United States.

Every household in 18th century America REQUIRED the possession of a firearm. This was not a legal requirement; it was a requirement for survival. For if you lived anywhere other than the relative safety of early American cities, a gun was as important as food in surviving the dangers and hostilities of the unsettled frontier.

Whether it was dealing with the growing hostility of a native population or using the point-of-a-gun to discourage foreign intervention and push American civilization West across the North American continent, the National Government fostered the concept of private gun ownership – far removed from the concept of militia service – among its citizens. Huge tracts of territory were settled and controlled; colonial forces from Spain, Britain, and France were pushed out; and the Wild West was colonized, then civilized with the help of armed citizens that NEVER once stepped foot into a militia formation.

It renders the concept of “militia” a convenient interpretation of a badly worded phrase in the Bill of Rights. So for better or worse – depending on your point-of-view – America grew and flourished as the result of a gun culture that was accepted by a Government led directly by those same Founding Fathers. The same ones who supposedly never intended private gun ownership outside of a quasi-military apparatus.

The irony seems lost on those who want to blame the carnage on law-biding citizens and their long-held rights.

Exaggerating the Pennsylvania Voter ID “crisis”

Posted on July 12, 2012 by Mike Shortall

Nelson Mandela expresses his views on Voter ID laws

The news sent shock waves throughout the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania and the national political media networks. Over 700,000 Pennsylvanians lacked the most common, state-provided form of photo identification, meaning that over 9% of the Pennsylvania’s registered voters might be unable to vote in this year’s Presidential election!!

The claims of a voting rights armaggedon were prolific! Ten percent of registered Pennsylvanian voters would be turned away at the polls because they lacked photo ID! In Philadelphia, the numbers are supposedly TWICE as bad! The nefarious plot, born of Republican designs to defeat President Obama in November, was working to perfection! Woe is us! Democracy was D-E-A-D!!!

As you can see, I love an overabundance of exclamation points! It never really makes silly arguments any more plausible or intellectually honest; but it does gives the eyes a thrill. Best of all, it might even distract one from looking at what’s behind the numbers.

So let’s take a peek under the curtain.

The first statistic that jumps out is that 22% of those 758,000 Pennsylvania voters would statistically fall into the “inactive voter” category, meaning that they have not voted since 2007. In other words, these 170,000 Pennsylvanians have been sitting on their voting hands for at least 5 years. It also means – by the way – that not a single one of them bothered to vote in the 2008 Presidential election.

Frankly, I find that 22% to be well on the low side. From my own experience working on the polls in Horsham Township, the number of voters who do not bother to vote in even the most important presidential races is much closer to 40% than it is to 20%. A 22% inactive voter rate would conversely suggest a 78% voter turnout, which has not been experienced in Pennsylvania since 1992 (82%). In 2008, in one of the most provocative national elections in U.S. history, only 68% of Pennsylvania voters cast ballots. That’s a 32% “no-vote rate”. If that rate is applied to the 758,000 without PA photo IDs, 242,000 would not be expected to vote in this year’s Presidential contest.

In addition, the gap in voter registration-to-PENNDOT photo ID includes college students who lived in Pennsylvania while attending in-state colleges and universities; registered to vote during their studies here; then left the state following graduation to pursue their careers. There are roughly 590,000 college students attending over 3200 schools in Pennsylvania. According to a 2010 Student Retention Survey, Philadelphia enjoys a 58% student retention figure. Even though this would be considered a bit on the high side for the entire state, let’s assume it applies. It still suggests that every four years roughly 62,000 college students leave the state (590,000/4 years x 42%).

Without even trying all that hard with admittedly fuzzy math, I’m able to whack that 758,000 by 40% (304,000). And that’s without addressing the multitudes living in large city environs who simply have not needed a PENNDOT drivers license because they rely on mass transit.

Now let’s consider that a goodly number of these mismatched Pennsylvania voters have other acceptable forms of identification:

Accredited Pennsylvania colleges or universities (with photo and expiration date)
Pennsylvania care facilities
Military identification
Valid U.S. passports (cannot be expired)
Other photo identification issued by the federal or Pennsylvania government
Employee identification issued by the federal, Pennsylvania, or a county or municipal government

It’s impossible to count those who will have the above at their disposal; but a valid assumption is they would significantly reduce the number of those left without acceptable forms of voter ID.

Finally, comes a number that illustrates why Democrats really fear the numbers being thrown around by PENNDOT. That number is 2477, or the total number of voters – according to Karen Heller’s column in The Philadelphia Inquirer – who have sought photo voter IDs from PENNDOT since the new voting law was passed in March 2012. That’s just 620 people per month!

Is that a systemic problem, caused by inaccessible PENNDOT facilities, long lines, poor transportation options, bad customer service, overly complicated documentation requirements, etc.? Or is there another reason why citizen response has been slow and not nearly adequate to address this “constitutional crisis”?

The critics would like you to believe that all the remaining individuals who haven’t bothered to seek the required photo IDs, are all physically disabled, obscenely poor, or 93-year-old grandmothers born in far away Southern states where racial discrimination rendered them unable to produce native state birth certificates.

The real problem for Democrats might just be that those they count on to carry the vote in urban locales – like Philadelphia – simply won’t be motivated enough by their precious constitutional right to vote to bother trying to get a valid photo ID. Excuses will abound for this. Some will be valid; others will be nothing more than excuses. You can be certain that, if our newly minted and recently upheld Affordable Care Act required a photo ID to obtain federally subsidized health insurance, the lines outside local PENNDOT offices would be long and suddenly so very easy to reach.

Certainly the truth lies somewhere in between my admittedly cynical, sometimes sarcastic analysis and the breast-beating wails of Jim Crow and poll taxes. If you were in Houston this week, you could have heard the Obama Administration’s view of the voter ID controversy from none other than U.S. Attorney General Eric Holder, who addressed the NAACP’s convention on the issue. Unfortunately you could only get inside the convention site by showing up with your government-approved photo ID!!

For me, it’s incredibly difficult to reconcile a view that requires photo ID to cash a check, ride an airplane, visit a new doctor, sign for a mortgage, or taking an opportunity to listen to the insights of the U.S. Attorney General, yet shuns the same added integrity and transparency for one of our most precious freedoms with the same level of effort.

Only in America …

Cranky Man’s Lawn Epistles ’12 – Help your lawn beat the heat

Posted on June 22, 2012 by Mike Shortall

When it comes to my little 1/4 acre of turf, I have a few lawn care prejudices. They are in descending order of irritation:

crabgrass
large dogs with inconsiderate owners
all other weeds
lawn mowing contractors
small dogs with inconsiderate owners

As you can see, I consider lawn mowing contractors roughly equivalent to “medium-sized dogs with inconsiderate owners”. It’s not that I “hate” them per se; and I do not begrudge their need to earn a living or the demand for their services by home owners who simply don’t want to be bothered. The truth is lawn mowing services rarely care about your lawn. They cut your grass way too short – no matter how hot it is – in order to make it easier on themselves should rainy weather prevent them from making a weekly cutting.

But I digress …

The point of this post is to provide some uneducated, experience-related tips on how to help your lawn survive the long, hot, dry summer and then thrive once cooler temps return.

My front lawn absolutely BAKES during the summer. An east-by-southeast exposure, and the absence of shade or an irrigation system, guarantees that by late August it looks more like a lawn in Afghanistan than it does one in southeast Pennsylvania. My back yard is exactly the opposite … plenty of shade provided by the house and large neighboring trees. It still gets dry; but it doesn’t sun-bake nearly as much as the front.

Differing conditions should influence how much time and care you dedicate to your lawn’s summer survival. I will water the front yard every other day during hot, dry weather; but I NEVER bother watering the back yard.

Common sense is the recurring theme in my suggestions for helping your lawn beat the heat and survive the summer:

Make sure you fertilize regularly, especially in the spring and fall.
- Search the Tag cloud or Categories on the menu bar for Lawn Care to read these posts.
Don’t be afraid to let your lawn grow LONGER once it starts getting HOT. (This is where the aforementioned lawn-mowing contractors are so often no friend to your lawn!)
- A well-maintained lawn will look fuller and more lush when allowed to grow longer.
- Longer grass will collect and retain more moisture, even just from morning dew.
- Long grass also helps shade underlying soil, helps it retain moisture, and protects the plants’ roots.
When it starts getting hot, water regularly those sections of your lawn that tend to dry out first and turn brown.
- It’s never to late to water; but do not wait until the lawn is already starting to brown to start watering.
- Pay attention to weather forecasts for anticipated rains and plan accordingly.
- Water in the evening when moisture has longer to soak the soil and reach plant roots.
Use common sense when it comes to fertilizing during heat waves and dry conditions. Don’t fertilize a severely dry or burnt lawn. You’re likely to do more harm than good.
- This is generally an issue only with anti-grub applications, normally applied around the 4th of July. In my opinion, you could do more harm than any lawn pest by applying a grub treatment when your lawn is water-starved.
If worse comes to worse and the lawn turns to straw, watering can still help to keep the roots from drying out completely.

The most important take-away here was best addressed by my Great Grandpappy* who used to say …

If you cut your lawn like a golf course fairway in May, it will look as lush an airport runway in July! *

(* OK, I never really knew my great-grandfather and barely remember one grandfather, but folksy wisdom always sounds more believable when attributed to someone older, wiser and near death.)

None of these suggestions will guarantee your lawn won’t turn brown. If Mother Nature doesn’t cooperate with an occasional rain, only an irrigation system will keep your lawn green for any extended period of time during hot, dry weather. So far this year, Mom Nature has been kind. But like all women, that could change in the time it takes to narfle the garthok.

My lawn does not have an irrigation system. So I TRY to water every other day (which is a practical compromise between wanting to water every day and the cost of doing so). But even when I am conscientious about watering, without help from Above, my front lawn will stay green only for so long. There is NEVER a summer where patches – usually the same spots each year – don’t thin out, turn brown, and resemble more closely straw than grass. These areas get early special attention in an attempt to mitigate the damage.

The MOST IMPORTANT result is that my lawn usually bounces back pretty quickly because – I like to think – I’m sensible about keeping it in as good a shape as I can BEFORE the long, hot, dry summer starts taking its toll! The secret is to pay attention to your lawn’s condition BEFORE Mother Nature turns on the oven, and to anticipate what needs to be done to protect it!

Good luck out there!

The missing Political Middle; the loss of American governance

Posted on June 14, 2012 by Mike Shortall

Thank you, Jeb Bush for putting into words what I have been thinking for quite some time! How exactly to express my frustration with a National Leadership that is getting absolutely nothing done. Nothing fair, nothing honest … simply nothing at all.

Washington, D.C. is broken. And while Jeb Bush touched on one aspect of the problem – the severe hyper-partisan divide, my frustration is centered on another cause of this political stagnation.

What has happened to the Moderate Middle in American politics?!?

First off, allow me to lay the basis of my beliefs for this post:

Hyper-partisanism is a problem with BOTH political parties. The Democrats in Washington are just as hyper-partisan as the Republicans. A point which former Florida Governor Jeb Bush acknowledged in his e-mail to The Associated Press this week.
There is no such thing as RINOs (Republican In Name Only) or DINOs (Democrat-INO).

I have a HUGE issue with this blatant misrepresentation, intended to do nothing more than silence all but those on the extreme Right or Left of the political parties. This is also problem relevant to BOTH parties, although RINO seems to get much more play than DINO. In my opinion, Liberal Dems are simply more subtle in their efforts to trample over The Middle.

There was a time when the Democrats included conservative elements, such as those in The South known as Dixie Democrats. There was also a time when there were Liberal Republicans, those who were more liberal on social issues while sticking to the economic virtues extolled by established GOP Conservatives.

Barry Goldwater, a stalwart Conservative Republican in the ’60s and ’70s was more tolerant in his views on social issues. Goldwater even appreciated the need for Liberal viewpoints as a counterweight to conservatism. Anticipating that Somewhere in the Middle the two would meet!

Well, that’s simply not happening anymore …

The true and proper context for these misleading labels – assuming we even need them – is CINO (Conservative In Name Only) or LINO (Liberal-INO)
The Political Middle is the real issue here. Moderate political viewpoints and participation serves as a buffer to the far edges of the political spectrum. And it offers a middle ground for the germination of political compromise.
The problem? The Political Middle has all but disappeared in this country!

I consider myself a Moderate Republican with conservative leanings. I believe in Smaller Government, reduced Government spending, and a strong National Defense. But I also hold more moderate views on Social Issues (e.g. poverty, illegal immigration, LGBT lifestyles, education, and women’s rights). I believe there are times when increased Government spending is both necessary and unavoidable (e.g. economic crises, natural disaster, military conflict, international leadership).

I have a pragmatic view about taxes. I hate like hell paying them. I despise paying more of them. But at times you simply have to cringe and bear it. And yes, some people should pay more if their financial means allow for it, especially when the condition of the fiscal house rivals an EPA Superfund site.

The spread of views I possess apparently classifies me for the title RINO. Not that I care …

Yet this explains exactly how we have gotten to the point in this country where no National Leader will dare make compromise or reach “across the aisle” to work towards solutions to our very real problems.

It led to President Obama’s decision to throw his own debt reduction plan – Simpson-Bowles Commission – under the bus, because – God forbid – we can’t deal with the specter of social benefit reductions at a time when the federal deficit is roiling out of control! Don’t want to get on the wrong side of the Liberal political base!
It led to the recent attempt to recall Wisconsin Governor Scott Walker for nothing more than his desire to reign in state spending and break the cycle of union-politician cronyism.
It led to the rejection by every single Republican Presidential candidate of the very pragmatic suggestion of increasing tax revenues by $1 for every $10 reduction in government expenditures. Because – ya know – you don’t want to piss off the Tea Party or Grover Norquist …

I wholeheartedly agree with Jeb Bush’s statement, “If you could bring to me a majority of people to say that we’re going to have $10 in spending cuts for $1 of revenue enhancement — put me in, coach.”

Dealing in absolutes in politics is a recipe for stagnation. Stagnation in Leadership, stagnation in developing solutions to real problems, stagnation in progress, stagnation in a much-needed, too long developing economic recovery. What you get – what we have now – are both the Left and the Right burrowing down and digging in behind jingoism and intransigence.

So how did we get here?

In essence, the Political Middle has abandoned the political field of play to both political extremes. It’s simple really to understand. Most people disdain or – perhaps more accurately – are apathetic towards politics, especially given its hateful tone in recent years. For those with no hard and fast anchors on the more edgy political and social questions of the day, politics are just nasty, dirty, aggravating … a waste of time better spent elsewhere. In some ways, it’s hard to blame The Middle for its retreat.

On the other hand, those individuals who possess solid political and social issues anchors, see politics as a Means to their Ends. And this is magnified in those who willingly describe themselves as Ultra-Liberals or Right Wing Conservatives. For instance, they recognize the importance of the primary vetting process for weeding out Presidential candidates they perceive as weak on their respective anchor issues. This is why the early primaries in Iowa, South Carolina, New Hampshire receive such out-of-proportion attention. By the time those of us in Pennsylvania get the chance to cast a primary vote, the candidate list has been pared down to one or two candidates. Indeed they will simply be the candidates who could repeat their talking points without making the Left or the Right throw up in their mouths.

This explains how we so often find our National political choices limited to Evil and The Lesser of Two. It explains why many well-qualified individuals will forego involvement in politics and the responsibility of civic leadership. They simply won’t subject themselves to cannibalization by those on the edges of the political spectrum.

Yet few of those who survive this vetting ordeal can be elected without the votes of the Political Middle. And so we see, as soon as the primary process ends, the rush by the annointed candidates to appeal to The Moderate Middle. Their sole objective: to win a general election so they can continue to pander to the only segments who will pay attention to what they do and say afterwards – The Left and The Right.

And so the cycle repeats.

What has happened to the Political Middle?

I guess they think they have better, more important things to do. They do not appreciate that crucial decisions on issues and problems that could potentially affect them for years are being made without their input, long before they – The Middle – even realizes another Election Day is coming. And these decisions are not limited to the social issues that drive stalwart Liberals and Conservatives to action. They include decisions critical to the economy, to education, to fuel and energy prices, the environment, the deficit, and ultimately their futures and the futures of their children.

The Middle’s political apathy is – mildly put – mind-boggling!

So while we wait for America’s Political Middle to wake up to today’s reality, the partisans dig in and refuse to budge, refuse to solve, refuse to govern. The economy continues to falter; the federal deficit continues to grow. We wait for yet another Presidential election where our choices are weak and uninspiring; all the while knowing, nothing’s going to change regardless of the outcome.

Jeb Bush recognizes part of the problem. When will we recognize the solution is a formidable, continuous presence of Moderate political voices?

Another lost weather weekend …

Posted on April 16, 2012 by Mike Shortall

Rain, rain

Stay away,

And watch my lawn

Bake all day.

Ugh … This Summer is lining up to be one long, hot, dry season of discontent. I have already noticed some dried out and yellow patches on the front lawn, which gets pounded day-in and day-out by the sun with no real shade.

So this evening I will be dragging out the hose and watering stretches of the front yard … in April!! I know I’m being a bit obsessed about this, but this is not good … for anyone.

You would do well by your lawn to see if similar damage is already occurring! If it is, you should consider watering as well. Keep praying for a stretch of rainy days … REAL rain, not this sprinkle dinkle crap. A nice 3-4 day soaking …

We need it … badly!

“Game Change”, HBO’s new Democrat-umentary

Posted on March 13, 2012 by Mike Shortall

democratumentary – (def) a media production presented as a “documentary” when it really only addresses issues and events from a subjective point-of-view favorable to the Democratic Party.

I try not to be a cynic. I really do. But when it comes to politics, I am no longer a match for the machinations of those on the National political stage. And when they are joined by willing sycophants in the media and entertainment industries, it’s about all I can stand without blowing a Cranky Man gasket!

My latest migraine comes courtesy of the abomination made by HBO of the best-selling book Game Change, authored by John Heileman and Mark Halperin following the 2008 presidential election.

If you happened to watch this HBO democratumentary this past Sunday (I didn’t, and won’t; and why will become obvious to you as you read this.), please take a moment and read my review of the book Game Change, written for this blog back in January 2011. And as you read my review, see if you can identify what was left out of the HBO democratumentary.

(Cranky hums the Jeopardy theme song as he patiently waits for his readers as they enjoy another brilliant Cranky Man piece.)

That’s right! Not a single mention, character casting, or on-screen appearance of any significance by any Democrat that participated in that 2008 presidential election! Not a single one …

This despite that the dominant theme of Game Change – the book – was the Hillary Clinton-Barack Obama battle in the Democrat primaries, and the harrowing details of John Edwards’ disastrous campaign and failing marriage!

Not a peep …

I had seen several of the teasers and promos for the HBO democratumentary, and kept wondering where was the Clinton-Obama characters? What about the confrontation between the two on the tarmac of Reagan National Airport? Where was the controversy over the Clinton campaign’s speculation on past drug use by Obama and rumors of his Muslim roots? Where was the grab-you-by-the-collar stories of John and Elizabeth Edwards’ constant fights and dysfunction?

Nowhere, that’s where …

It’s gets even uglier – as in Rielle ugly – when you peruse the political donations of the cast and production executives that worked on the democratumentary.

Tom Hanks, producer, well over $100, 000 to the DNC since 1994, $36,500 to liberal causes like SEN Al Franken’s Midwest Values. Republicans: not a dime

Ed Harris (SEN John McCain), $9500 to Democratic candidates, $11,975 to liberal special-interest groups like MoveOn.org. Republicans: squat, nada, nil

Woody Harrelson (Steve Schmidt, McCain-Palin chief strategist), $4,300 to Democratic candidates, $3,500 to liberal causes like GreenVote. Republicans: zip, zero, zilch

Jay Roach, director/co-executive producer, $15,800 to Democrats; Republicans? You should be recognizing the theme by now!

Julianne Moore (Sarah Palin), $2,250 to Democrats, $7,500 to DNC, Democratic White House Victory Fund and special-interest groups. Republicans: Everybody join in!

Danny Strong, co-executive producer, $2500 to Obama Victory Fund. Republicans: a big wet willie

You don’t need someone to draw the picture for you. It’s just sitting there plain as day.

You would think the movie-based-on-the-book would have at least addressed in some way the REAL Game Change in 2008, Barack Obama as the first African-American President. But that story had to be ignored, to avoid the ugliness of the Democrats’ 2008 campaign and to maximize the spotlight on the Republican-Sarah Palin debacle.

Afterall, you never want to beat the horse you’re betting on.

(Shout out to reader Mark D for tipping me to the donation information.)

Lady Allyson of the 1%

Posted on March 9, 2012 by Mike Shortall

Democracy can be a tough nut to crack. But it gets so much harder in this day and age if you have neither the power nor the money that your opponent can muster and use to keep you at bay.

Nate Kleinman

This was the lesson Nate Kleinman learned this week in his bid to challenge Representative Allyson Schwartz for the Democratic nomination in the Pennsylvania 13th Congressional District.

Kleinman is a human rights activist and political organizer within the Democratic Party. He has worked for President Obama and Joe Sestak in his failed U.S. Senate bid. He is also considered the first Occupy Wall Street political candidate. But he really had no chance against the very well-financed, very well-connected Schwartz.

REP Allyson Schwartz (D-PA 13)

Allyson Schwartz, currently serving her fourth term, has always been a savvy fund-raiser, and is reported to have in excess of $2.3 million in her war chest. Her only Republican challenger is Joe Rooney, a former U.S. Marine fighter pilot and current resident of Ardsley.

Schwartz’s funding for the 2011-12 election cycle came primarily from large individual contributors (57%) and Political Action Committees (38%), only 3% came from small individual contributors. Her biggest corporate and association sponsors include Comcast Corp, Teva Pharmaceuticals, and the American Association of Orthopaedic Surgeons. Her top industry support comes from lawyers, health professionals, pharmaceuticals and insurance companies.

Not exactly residents of the 99% …

You would think that with all that fire power behind her, the last thing Allyson Schwartz needed was the appearance that she was insensitive to the interests of the Occupy Wall Street movement.

Yet when it came to Nate Kleinman, Allyson Schwartz went for the throat. She could out spend, out fund-raise, out network, and out wait just about any in-party challenge with one hand tied behind her back. Not to mention the difficulty such an insurgent Democrat faces in getting any form of support from within The Establishment of the DNC when running against such a successful incumbent.

Challenging the validity of nomination petition signatures (required to qualify to appear on Election Day ballots) has become a regular tool for suppressing political opposition. It’s the quick and dirty way to score a knockout; yet it rarely works to the satisfaction of the petition challenger.

The petition challenge has become one of the accepted political practices with which I have a problem. When did it became acceptable to silence opposition in the public square? It smacks of fear for open debate. It makes a candidate look petty, aloof, and overbearing. But as bad as that looks, it gets even worse when the conqueror decides to machine-gun the life rafts.

And this is the part of the Kleinman episode that makes Allyson Schwartz look ruthless and more than a little afraid.

Last week, Kleinman decided to withdraw his name from the ballot as a formal challenger to Schwartz’s Congressional seat. Instead he decided to continue his candidacy by seeking to win the April 24 primary via write-in ballots.

As if Democracy wasn’t already hard enough.

The reason Kleinman decided to throw his lot with the Hail Mary of write-in ballots is the tortured hell that Schwartz’s campaign intended to put Kleinman through just to keep his candidacy hidden from the Democratic voters of the PA 13th. In a move reminiscent of Richard Nixon-esque dirty tricks, the Allyson Schwartz campaign pushed the nominating petition issue to the extent that Kleinman, who has no real political organization, would have had to spend weeks of his own time sitting down with Schwartz’s rather ample campaign staff to go over each and every individual petition signature to prove their validity or to rehabilitate questionable entries.

In other words, keep Mr. Kleinman penned up in a conference room, off the street, out of the public’s view, and away from any potential media attention.

And just when Nate Kleinman was standing there like a deer in the headlights, the Schwartz campaign pulled out the napalm by filing a claim that would have required Kleinman to pay the legal costs incurred by the Schwartz campaign! “It’s a legal option for the campaign to request that Nate Kleinman pay legal fees,” says Rachel Magnuson, Rep. Allyson Schwartz’s Chief of Staff.

Nice …

And since Kleinman’s “campaign war chest” totals just $10-15,000., as compared to Schwartz’s $2.3 million, it’s not hard to see what that move was all about. It was an attempt to threaten Nate Kleinman with personal financial retribution for having dared to challenge Lady Allyson of the 1%!