The moderators did their job in Tuesday night’s Fetterman-Oz debate, and that allowed Oz to score a technical knockout.

Fetterman still was standing at the end of the hour, but he had been bloodied – metaphorically speaking.

I had hoped aloud in a previous blog post today that the moderators would ask tough questions of both candidates for U.S. Senate. They did.

The moderators also followed up when the candidates were evasive, attempting to pin them down. And the moderators did a reasonably good job of keeping the debate on schedule.

Fetterman did his best to derail that, interrupting Oz repeatedly, even in Oz’s final remarks, an extreme breach of debate etiquette.

Dr. Oz seemed to tire of Fetterman’s interruptions about three or four examples in and began to do so himself.

In general, Fetterman bumbled and stumbled through answers. His stock prepared line, to be uttered early and often, was if Oz is talking he’s not telling the truth. There were also periodic references to 10 or so mansions Oz is said to own.

It’s hard to describe exactly what Fetterman was doing as he plodded through answers, paused for uncomfortably long moments and often issued a word salad response fit for Clueless Joe Biden.

Example: When asked what he would do to improve the college education situation, Fetterman said, “It should be affordable.”

The moderators wanted to know how he’d achieve that.

“It costs too much,” was the best Fetterman could manage by way of response.

That was in addition to claiming – falsely – that Oz had not answered the very same question when asked previously.

Oz had suggested a combination of pruning unproductive middle management that has expanded rapidly at institutions of higher education, along with making remote learning more accessible. These steps would, indeed, cut costs and increase affordability.

So, Oz repeated his answer for the benefit of Fetterman before he addressed the next question from the moderators.

Fetterman eschewed his trademark shorts and hooded sweatshirt, instead donning a suit that fit about as well as if he’d gone down to the local funeral home to pick it up second-hand.

Fetterman was particularly bad on the subject of fracking, insisting he was in favor of it to produce hydrocarbons, despite a quote the moderators displayed that had him saying he was against fracking.

The moderators called Fetterman on the outright contradiction and he had nothing for them.

Dr. Oz had some awkward moments and didn’t remind anyone of noted orator Williams Jennings Bryan with his performance. But he was up against such weak competition, he should be nominated for a Golden Tonsil Award.

Oz repeatedly made Fetterman uncomfortable by forcing him to defend his pro-criminal, anti-energy, pro-socialism track record.

Oz also brought up Fetterman’s shotgun detention of a black jogger, just because he could as the lead law enforcement official in the thriving metropolis of Braddock.

Fetterman’s summation put a weak exclamation point on his decidedly uneven performance, citing a lot of vague concepts. It was basically vote for me because I have tattoos and I’m one of you and we have to hold back the Republican hordes.

Oz, meanwhile, used his summation to reach out to both sides in promising unity and progress for Pennsylvania by working together.

It may not have considerable effect on the election outcome, but Oz won this debate. Thanks to the even-handed moderators for allowing that to happen.

I’m hoping against hope that tonight’s Pennsylvania Senate debate between Dr. Oz and John Fetterman is an even-handed example, but I’m not holding my breath.

Too often these allegedly non-partisan events are highjacked by leftist moderators, with hardball questions for the Republican candidate and softballs for the leftist Democrat.

Truly, this is an example in which each candidate could, and should, face tough questioning.

Begin with Dr. Oz. It would be perfectly fair to ask him about his past shilling and benefiting from marketing miracle cures on his television program.

It also would be fair to inquire how he came to relocate to Pennsylvania, which just happened to have an open Senate seat.

No supporter of Dr. Oz should bristle if these legitimate lines of questioning are broached. Oz has some explaining to do.

But we’re all about equal opportunity here, so Fetterman needs to answer some unpleasant questions, too.

I’d love to hear him explain living off his parents until age 49, as the one political ad notes, with documentation.

Fetterman also should be called to explain his penchant for putting criminals back on the streets, particularly at a time when rampant crime is at or near the top of citizens’ concerns in numerous polls.

Fetterman might need to explain if potential voters for him are selecting the big bald guy or, due to his impaired physical and mental state, are instead voting for his wife to take office, she being a former undocumented immigrant from Brazil. I’m thinking DR. JILL BIDEN!!!!! here in terms of the woman behind the throne.

And Fetterman has other unpleasant baggage he’d like us to allow him to carry to Washington, D.C., including past problems paying his taxes and that 2013 incident in which he erroneously held a black jogger at bay with a shotgun because he thought he had heard gunshots.

One final thing: Fetterman takes credit for ‘rescuing” Braddock, Pa., during his time as mayor. I’ve driven through Braddock in the not-too-distant past and it still looks to need a lot of rescuing.

Interestingly, there is a substantial number of people in Braddock who don’t get the Fetterman credit grab. And at least one lifelong resident called Fetterman a “carpetbagger,” ironic considering this is a characterization Fetterman’s campaign has used on Dr. Oz.

In summation, ask tough questions of both candidates.

Let this debate not devolve into some syrupy ooze of praise for Fetterman overcoming a stroke. It should be about his credentials and ability to fulfill the duties as a U.S. Senator, not a pity party due to his health setback

This baseball postseason is testimony to the 162-game regular season, by far the longest among professional sports, having been rendered somewhat inconsequential.

All you season ticketholders take note.

Consider that the National League Championship Series was contested by Philadelphia and San Diego, two teams who slipped into the wild-card picture late, with a combined record just 28 games over .500.

Meanwhile, the Los Angeles Dodgers, whose regular-season dominance produced a final record of 111-51, 60 games over .500, sat and watched.

None of the NL division champs from the regular season made the NLCS. The New York Mets, a 101-win wild-card team, also fell into the no-show category.

Baseball used to be the purest sport in terms of its postseason. A team won the National or American league title in the regular season and advanced to the World Series.

There were no do-overs for the also-rans.

Expansion in both leagues has produced breakdowns into divisions and therefore division champions. Bad enough, but, of late, increased wild-card fields of teams who couldn’t even win a division now play on past the season’s end.

Admittedly, the postseason ran truer to form in the American League, where the Houston Astros, with the best regular-season record in their league, ended up meeting and defeating the New York Yankees — owners of the second-best AL record — in the ALCS.

That doesn’t take away from the wacky NL playoffs and their message.

Baseball’s main problem with wildly expanded playoff fields is that one position – pitching – can dominate a short series without a lot of depth beyond the top three starters and top two relievers.

Other sports are not as dominated by one aspect of the game.

As for huge playoff fields, yes, hockey floods the Stanley Cup playoffs with half the NHL franchises. But it all is contested in best-of-7 series, giving the superior team ample opportunity to overcome an off game or two.

When you are playing best-of-3, or best-of-5 series, as baseball does in its early postseason rounds, the chance for the upset increases substantially.

The early expectation is that form will hold in the World Series, with Houston favored over Philadelphia, the last team to qualify for the postseason.

That doesn’t change the fact that the baseball postseason is a flawed production. Either limit the number of teams making the postseason, or lengthen the series duration in early rounds, to restore some relevance to regular-season results.

I’m envious of the United Kingdom’s parliamentary system, which provides the ability to erase quickly major mistakes that were made.

Consider the case of Liz Truss, now the answer to a trivia question. Her 44-day reign as U.K. prime minister is the shortest in history for that nation. In that short span, there was a 10-day period of inaction due to the death of Queen Elizabeth II.

Basically, Truss resigned after being advised to do so by her own Conservative party and getting indications a no-confidence vote was all but certain.

Truss and her administration showed themselves to be financial lightweights, trying to stimulate the economy and reduce taxes even as the Bank of England was doing a Federal Reserve tightening dance trying to get inflation under control.

English bonds (gilts) went into freefall over the mixed messages as interest rates increased dramatically and the pound dropped big-time. The Bank of England had to step in to attempt to restore the system and bail out massive pension funds that were taking on water.

Truss was a dead woman walking politically, sort of like Joe Biden.

There are lots of other similarities. Biden, like Truss, seems to know about as much about economics as his average welfare-recipient voter.

The economy is great, the Clueless One bragged between slurps of an oversized ice cream cone recently.

This must amuse the respondents in the latest POLITICO/Morning Consult poll (a hard-left duo), which found more than 90 percent see inflation and economic decline as their chief concerns ahead of mid-term elections.

They weren’t talking about Truss’s economy.

Imagine if Democrats had the stones to advise Clueless Joe to move on and let a sentient human being occupy the Oval Office. Of course, this would mean bidding adieu to VP Kamala Harris, too. Talk about a two-for-one deal.

Imagine if there was a mechanism to remove unpopular, inept presidents without needing to endure four long years of their foolhardiness. We’re not talking sham impeachments.

We have to settle for hopes that mid-term elections will transfer control of the U.S. House or Senate to the opposition and effectively neuter Clueless Joe and his ability to inflict harm on the nation.

How much more direct it would be to allow for the removal of an underperforming, overmatched, incompetent president, with that president’s party taking the lead in cleaning up its mess.

When you have the temerity to disagree with the emotional, fact-less screeds of leftist Democrats, you put yourself in line for some harsh name-calling.

If you don’t believe the Earth is turning into a smoldering cinder due to carbon fuel consumption, why then you are a climate denier. Yes, the label makes no sense. One does not deny there is a climate simply because one does not believe we as Earthlings are ruining it.

This denier tag got its first wide usage regarding the morons who would argue there never was a Jewish Holocaust.

Interesting how the leftists have turned around the use of the word “denier” from being critical of those ignoring the facts, to being critical of those who cite facts.

This brings us to the subject of election deniers. The term is used with disdain by leftists and left-leaning media alike to describe any Republicans who did not see the 2020 presidential election as legitimate.

These people witnessed videos of suitcases full of ballots being pulled from under tables and run through machines after the workers allegedly had gone home for the night, as had observers. They expressed concern about it all.

Satisfactory explanations never were provided.

In other Democratic strongholds, windows were taped over to prevent observers from monitoring the ballot count, or Republican observers simply were forced to leave, physically.

Dead voters remained on rolls and the bastardization of the mail-in voting process was rampant, almost always in leftist states, or those whose election oversight fell under the control of leftists. That would be so-called swing states such as my Pennsylvania, which had some curious results from Philadelphia.

Statistical analysis showed that while Clueless Joe Biden getting all the votes he needed without any late-night and mail-in abuses was possible, it was about as likely as someone being struck by lightning – twice.

Legitimate questions were raised and never satisfactorily addressed, despite evidence that the electronic voting machines could and were, in some instances, accessed remotely, something manufacturers swore couldn’t happen.

All these alleged abuses are impossible, said the leftist Democrats, arguing in the face of the facts. Should you disagree with them, you are simply a denier.

Ironically, it is Democrats who have elevated election denial to an artform. Remember Al Gore refusing to accept his 2000 loss?

How about Hillary and her characterization of Donald Trump as an illegitimate winner?

Kari Lake, an outspoken Republican running for governor in Arizona, brought up election-denier whining by Democrats earlier this week, using a data package given to her by a constituent to note plenty of this in the past.

Among examples Lake mentioned was the continuing denials by Stacey Abrams when she lost the last Georgia governor’s race. She’d better get the denials shined up because she’s losing again, if polls are to be believed.

On the subject of polls, the realclearpolitics.com web site is chock full of polls. Despite the appearance of these, with many races leaning Democrat, the site not only is predicting the Republicans take control of the U.S. House, it also predicts a final 52-48 edge for Republicans in the Senate.

This is due to realclearpolitics adjusting polls with a four-percent or so fudge factor shown in the past to exist in polls systemically under-representing conservative and/or Republican sentiment.

If these predictions come to fruition, brace for a wave of losing Democrats claiming election misconduct.

They will not be deniers, of course, just concerned guardians of our democracy.

Blind allegiance to the religion of analytics is harming sports.

There is nothing wrong with basic statistical analysis, in any aspect of life. But, when it is taken to the extreme and viewed as infallible, that’s when the problems begin.

It was only natural that we’d get to this point. Nothing succeeds like excess, in personal life and in sports.

Many trace the birth of the analytic movement to the Oakland A’s and the Moneyball concept, in which extreme reliance on statistical measurement allowed a small-market, limited-budget franchise to win more than its share of games.

It is important to note, however, that the philosophy never produced much in the way of postseason success and more important, ZERO championships.

A lot of the current analytics stress is on taking outsized chances, like swinging for homeruns almost every at-bat in baseball, or trying to convert fourth-down opportunities an inordinately high amount of times in football.

For a real-world example of how such things can fail catastrophically, consider the case of Long Term Capital Management, which nearly brought down the financial system in 1998.

After producing outsized gains in its first three years, Long Term Capital lost $4.6 billion in four months of 1998, necessitating a bailout.

The high-leverage strategy (investing multiples of actual capital) worked until it didn’t. That and failing to consider unlikely, but possible negative outcomes, doomed Long Term and almost the entire system.

Move to sports and the failures of analytics have been on stark display recently, if one bothers to look.

It is no mere coincidence that we’ve seen the two longest scoreless games in the entire history of postseason baseball just in the past week.

First, Cleveland and Tampa Bay set a standard when they went into the 14^th inning scoreless in Game 2 of their AL Wild Card Series.

The home-run or bust strategy didn’t produce a score until the 15^th inning, when Cleveland won on a solo shot by Oscar Gonzalez.

Just two days back, the Houston Astros and Seattle Mariners went into the 18^th inning scoreless, re-setting the record. This one also ended with a solo homer.

That game was an excruciating viewing experience as batters continued to overswing, chase pitches out of the strike zone and generally try to end the game with one swing instead of taking a walk, hitting behind a runner, or doing any of the other things teams used to do to squeeze out a run in a tight, low-scoring game.

On Sunday, a highly anticipated NFL game between Super Bowl contenders Buffalo and Kansas City became a showcase for extreme analytics overuse.

Buffalo, trailing 7-3 in the second quarter, passed an a short field-goal attempt and instead tried to convert a fourth-and-goal from the KC 3-yard line, failing miserably.

Undaunted, with the score tied 17-17 early in the fourth quarter, Buffalo went on fourth-and-3 at the KC 46-yard line, and failed yet again.

Blessed with great field position, the Chiefs had to move just 28 yards before hitting the go-ahead field goal to lead 20-17.

Yes, Buffalo scored a late touchdown to win, 24-20, and along the way converted a fourth-and-1 from its 33-yard line with under four minutes remaining. But this last fourth-down gamble made sense because of the stage of the game, the score, and the shorter distance to make a first down.

It could be argued that the late heroics would not have been necessary if Buffalo had not passed on a field-goal try earlier, and not later handed KC a three-point opportunity with the second failed fourth-down conversion try from near midfield.

If Buffalo had resisted the analytics siren call, the Bills already would have been up based on that six-point swing.

The analytic overkill in sports these day ignores two salient points.

One, sports are contested by humans, who can ride momentum, adrenaline, emotion, to performances that defy the statistics.

Two, being an analytics daredevil is akin to walking a tightrope with no safety net. One big splat on the pavement more than outweighs any previous successes.

I hear some Penn State fans are stunned by the crushing defeat Saturday at the hands of Michigan, a 41-17 spectacle that was not as close as the final score indicated. They shouldn’t be shocked.

These fans, who spend selected fall Saturdays chanting “We are” and answering “Penn State,” easily could have seen this coming if they cared to examine past and present. Let us explain it to them in a format they might understand.

We are . . . 2-14 against Top 10 competition under coach James Franklin, he of the decade-long contract extension based, apparently, on losing big games consistently.

We are . . . undisciplined, as Joey Porter Jr.’s early game personal foul penalty and numerous other miscues by Penn State players demonstrated.

We are . . . lucky to be ranked so highly (No. 10 ahead of this game) considering a lack of impressive victories, but that will change when the latest polls are announced.

We are . . . fortunate to be in contention at halftime of this Michigan game considering the lopsided nature of the offensive statistics.

We are . . . quarterbacked by Sean Clifford (The Big Red Shirt, Not Dog) who might qualify for Social Security before running out of eligibility.

We are . . . according to victorious Michigan players, boastful on social media and in the tunnel to the dressing rooms at halftime, but mute on the field.

We are . . . blessed with a new defensive coordinator, identified by sycophantic network broadcasters early in the game as the right fit for Penn State, which presumably explains surrendering 418 rushing yards and 41 points.

We are . . . unlikely ever again to contend seriously for a Big Ten title or National Championship unless both Michigan and Ohio State are put on probation — permanently.

We are . . . very likely going to absorb a similar pounding when Ohio State comes visiting in two weeks.

We are . . . able to beat Ohio University and Central Michigan, just not the two top-dog schools from those states. Michigan State tends to be a struggle, too.

We are . . . destined once again to ship off at season’s end to a lower-tier bowl game, where coach Franklin will bask in adulation over yet another successful season — if you don’t count the Michigan and Ohio State games — and will be awarded a contract extension in perpetuity.

The big news today is COLA.

Not Coca-Cola. Not Pepsi-Cola.

We’re talking COLA as in Cost Of Living Adjustment for recipients of Social Security.

Clueless Joe Biden’s mishandling of domestic energy production, coupled with macroeconomic and microeconomic issues, some of which are beyond his control, have conspired to produce inflation running at rates not seen in the past 40 years.

That was confirmed by yet another uncomfortable inflation report issued today.

Social Security payments are indexed to inflation, and so for 2023 those payments will rise 8.7 percent, the largest increase in more than four decades.

The fact that the government admits 8.7 percent means the inflation you are witnessing likely is much higher.

Still, the increase, which means the average recipient will receive an extra $140 or so per month, will help ease the pain.

Also, there will be a modest decrease in the Part B Medicare premium, dropping $5.20 from $170.10 per month in 2022 to $164.90 in 2023.

Now, for the negative of it all.

Despite all of Al Gore’s ridiculous talk in the past about a Social Security lockbox, all there is to pay the obligations is a pile of federal IOUs.

These increased payouts only will shorten the time for which those imaginary assets will be able to fund fully Social Security payments, which had been calculated to end in 2037.

What happens then? The working plan is the federal government will just issue more debt and kick the proverbial can down the road.

A problem occurs when if by that time the U.S. government is perceived as not being creditworthy and so cannot borrow the sufficient funds to paper over the shortfall.

On an individual basis, there could be negative federal tax implications before that owing to this COLA. The complicated tax policy for Social Security benefits sets income cutoff points under which the benefits are not subject to tax. This COLA increase could be enough to push many recipients into the category of having some or all of there benefits in the taxable category.

Bottom line: Enjoy the fizz of the COLA while understanding that it could cause some gaseous discomfort down the line.

You would be most welcome, Tulsi Gabbard, to join the Republican party.

Gabbard, who formally parted ways with Democrats earlier this week, has too much common sense, too much respect for the traditional values that built this country, too much overall integrity, to be aligned with that party of hypocrisy, Wokeism, open borders, and handouts for all in the name of purchasing votes.

Gabbard formerly was a member of Congress who has run for president as a Democrat, quickly being dispatched from that latter pursuit by the Democratic machine that didn’t like her independence from their hard-left pitch.

Gabbard is all that the Democrats profess to admire. She’s a non-white woman (Samoan), non-Christian (Hindu) and successful as measured by her political accomplishments. They were willing to overlook her military service, distinguished as it was.

But Gabbard ran afoul of Democratic puppet masters by decrying endless wars and adventurism. She was no fan of open borders and said as much.

For this, prominent Dems such as Shillary intimated that Gabbard was a Russian asset.

How the political world has flipped. Where once Republican Senator Joe McCarthy saw communists lurking under every bed, now Democrats’ kneejerk response to any and all critics is to paint them as Russian stooges.

They are just as wrong as McCarthy was. Perhaps, in the fullness of time, that will be realized. It is unlikely, though, because our public schools and universities are minting fresh crops of ill-informed leftists annually.

While Gabbard was running for president, I used her as an example of a Democrat for whom I could vote, even as a conservative Republican.

This is a pet peeve of mine: For all the Democratic pap about being the party of ideas, inclusiveness, tolerance, etc., Democrats simply never admit their candidate is inferior and vote for the Republican alternative.

On the other hand, on many occasions I have voted for the Democrat if that person was the superior choice.

To understand this blind allegiance that afflicts Democrats, know that even after Clueless Joe Biden has botched domestic and foreign policy in two short years, a majority of Democrats would vote for him again tomorrow.

Gabbard has been holding her nose and sticking with the Democrats for years. Now she has had enough, as she noted in her announcement, of their anti-white racial politics, constant warmongering, and unrelenting attack on American freedoms, the latter being something Gabbard fought to protect during the war in Iraq.

Congratulations to Gabbard for conceding the obvious, she does not agree with the the tenets of the Democratic policy.

Democratic West Virginia Senator Joe Manchin clearly identifies with the wrong party, although caving to Biden on the tax/climate bill has dropped Manchin’s support at home by 10 percentage points, giving him a solid Democratic look on that issue and second thoughts about running for another term.

If only RINO (Republican In Name Only) Senators Susan Collins (Maine) and Lisa Murkowski (Alaska) would drum up some courage and move to the party that more closely aligns with their policies.

We’re talking Democrat, although CCP would not be that much of a stretch.

Once an afterthought, Columbus Day has elevated itself onto my list of favorite holidays, if only due to the blatant hypocrisy on display here.

The politically correct crowd, which exists to whine ad nauseam about their latest cause (whatever happened to Black Lives Matter?), has browbeaten some states and cities into re-christening this Indigenous Peoples Day.

Clueless Joe Biden got into the act last year, with a proclamation decrying federal policies of the past that had done mean things. White folk are a bad lot, you understand. But don’t Blame Joe because, as he recently claimed, he’s Puerto Rican.

Joe is one addled aged guy

But it’s still kind of, sort of, really Columbus Day, honoring a guy critics label as the author of genocide and other nasty acts.

Federal offices, many schools and other institutions whose worker bees are overwhelmingly leftist Democrats, were all too happy to take yet another day off work, even if it was due to that Columbus dude.

Understand that fidelity to hypocrisy is the pledge one must take and abide by to remain a Democrat in good standing.

Might as well take advantage of a legitimate holiday by any name, instead of calling in sick or just going through the motions when on the job these days, a reality much to the horror of traditional Democrats, some of which I chatted with at a car cruise Sunday night.

How do I know such worker malaise is going on in various non-private industry workplaces?

Ask me about my difficulty getting mail – specifically weekly ads desired by the woman of the house – delivered by our rotating cast of mail people.

A formal complaint lodged by me – online, of course, because no one answers the telephone – worked for exactly one week. The exasperated supervisory type with whom I spoke when he responded by telephone, lamented the inability to get motivated workers.

And I ask, how motivated must one be to match the address on an envelope or mailer with the address on a house?

Ask me about the glacier pace in dealing with Pennsylvania government regarding my deceased mother. They want responses from me immediately if not sooner.

Their responses must be aged like fine wine, or whine as it were.

Ask me about trying to call any agency, be it federal, state or local, and actually getting a warm body with a live voice instead of an electronic phone tree voice on the other end of the line.

The joke is there’s nothing wrong with government that more paid holidays — more days with workers away from their cubicles — could not cure.

In that spirit, I truly hope all the left-wing hypocrites enjoyed yet another day off work today, even if it did come with that Columbus taint.