My unscientific thought is that when it comes to purely local endorsements Forum seems to not really care, but endorsements for Federal level elections seems to go universally to Republicans, which does raise the specter of outside influence. It amuses me that they endorse Cravaack on one hand and Reinert on the other.

I believe they endorsed McCain and Caribou Barbie in '08.

My understanding is that when it comes to endorsements, the members of the editorial board each get 1/2 vote and the publisher gets 5 votes. And, as I recall, the DNT was one of only a small number of newspapers that endorsed McCain/Palin in 2008. If people don't think that Fargo is calling the shots on the endorsements the publisher cares about, they're not paying attention.

The Rubin/Ford endorsement editorial was the most schizophrenic piece I've read yet in the DNT. It basically said that Ford has done a good job, she's done this, she's done that -- but let's endorse Mark Rubin anyway. That's why we readers are left to speculate on who's calling the shots over there anyway when it comes to even local races.

The same thing has happened across the land, including the Brainerd Dispatch, owned by conservative-ladened Morris family of Georgia (along with countless banks) that emerged unscathed from near bankruptcy with skilled self-promotion and pity. But Brainerd Dispatch was fairly conservative under McCollough family, so it runs pretty deep and fits the nature of the redneck region. Duluth and NE Minnesota are a bit broader in political flavor. Progressive compared with the backwoods. Oh, for a shot of Wellstone passion!

FWIW, Chuck Frederick from the DNT editorial board told  The Uptake about the endorsement process. He "insists his papers endorsement of Tea Party Republican Chip Craavack has nothing to do with its right-leaning owners."

Don'tcha just luv this time of year? Election season, I mean.

Politiks brings out the very worst in people.

But Zra, the parties are fun.

I wonder what the DNT procedure for appointing a citizen rep is.  Beth Olsen is famous for being a super-duper progressive (and was arrested at a George W Bush rally at the DECC in 2004; the changes were dropped).  Bob Hansen is famous for being a super-duper conservative Tea Party organizer (and recently called climate change research "arbitrary" and "wasteful").  

Do they look for extremes for the citizen reps?  Is this how we get "fair and balanced"?  

Should we also get Christian Scientists (who believe the bible prohibits modern medicine) to sit on Medical Review Boards with medical doctors to balance things out?  If one extreme is right (medical doctors, for example), doesn't that make the opposite extreme (and even the middle) wrong?  

Doesn't appointing extremes like that more or less guarantee at least one person is going to be extremely wrong?

Sorry Sam, I have no clue as to why you  relate my perspective to Cravaack. Because Jimmy's a lifer and Cravaack is running against him? Maybe I wasn't clear enough for you. I'll spell it out so you can better understand. 

The socialist democratic progressives, who are in a vast minority, are losing ground. They did a good job of fooling some of the people who don't research their opinion. These ordinary people bought into the lies that you spewed. Now the truth is emerging, and these same people who were cajoled into voting for Jimmy year after year, or Hussein on the message of change, have finally realized what your true agenda is. 

The incompetence of Hussein makes Bush look like a genius! The Republican neocrats are laughing their ass off because now, thanks to people like you, they will have their monkeys regain control of Congress. 

See, the truth is that I'm just as disgusted with the entrenched Pubs as much as the likes of Jimmy. I can't stand either of them. And it's because of people like you Sam, who continually put them in office. 

Cravaack, in my opinion, is a constitutionalist, or at least close to one. That's a bad thing to socialists, but a good thing to those of us who believe that it was a timeless document that is as effective today as it was 200+ years ago. The more we stray from its intent, the more we will be in trouble. If I have to choose, I'll err on the side of Republican, as the left-leaning progressives will destroy this country more quickly than the likes of McCain or Palin.

Oh, and yes, the middle name, in this case, has a lot to do with the character of the man. Fact: He's changed his name. Fact: He considered himself a Muslim at one point in his life. Fact: He has denied that, which makes him a liar. Fact: He followed religious radicals, and quoted them in his own book as those who had a great positive influence on his life. Fact: He had 143 days of experience before bamboozling the public into putting him into the most important position on the globe. I've had cereal sitting in my cupboard longer than that. 

Fact: Jimmy has been in Washington for over 45 years. Opinion: Close to 50 years in Washington is about 32 years too much. He's gotten rich off on the public's dime. He's completely lost touch with reality, and his constituents. Watching him on television made me cringe. He's a bitter old man that needs to retire gracefully, and hand over the reigns to someone who has fresh energy and the willingness to return the seat to the people. And that doesn't mean his choice, much like Blatnik did, or what wonderboy Donny is hoping to do when it's time to cash in his chips (pun intended).

I've tried to ignore Jim's ignorant comments, but I lost that fight, so here goes.  First of all: where is this "fact" that Obama considered himself a Muslim at one time, and has denied that recently?  He did attend a Muslim school when he was a child and lived briefly in Indonesia.  Does that mean he converted?  I don't think there's any evidence of that.  However, the real point is: so what?  If he was Muslim or is Muslim (which he's not, so calm down) so what?  How is that an issue any more than someone who claims to be a born-again Christian, a Catholic, a Jew, or a Hindu?  What about someone who does not believe in God at all?  What possible difference can that make?  

Most of the self-proclaimed Christians running around in Washington and St. Paul sure don't seem to follow the teachings of Christ when it comes to feeding the poor, loving the sinner, and turning the other cheek.  So, regardless of what religion, or none at all, it doesn't seem to impact anyone's political decisions.

Jim's rant makes me think of the LTE in today's DNT, in which the writer points out that the Tea Partiers are all for free speech -- except when they disagree with the speaker. Then they'll do anything to shut that person down, because they can't stand dissent.

With the proliferation of media and information, I am less concerned about the DNT's editorial endorsements, their process or the composition of their board.

Forum is a business, and they will endorse candidates that they believe are good for their bottom line. If people will stop reading DNT in significant numbers because of their political leanings, then I guarantee DNT/Forum would endorse different candidates.

As a wise politico told me, "in politics, red and blue do not matter. Green matter$."

I have it from a very good source that the Knight-Ridder run newspapers virtually NEVER dictated an editorial board endorsement, although many (on all sides of the fence) thought so. 

The important consideration for me in this is in Oberstar's response to the DNT endorsement (that was not published in the DNT). He referred to the changes in the selection process that disturbed him. The DNT has chosen to not continue the KR format of individual interviews of all candidates prior to making endorsements. This was an attempt to be open from the start and use, in the privacy of the editorial offices, a planned interview session for each candidate, with a subsequent evaluation based on answers to those questions. It took time but it was a wonderful system.  

Now they choose to use methods that seem unclear (no real rubric) for decision-making that seems destined toward weighted decisions. The chaos of the DECC debate was no way to get good information in which decisions are made. And... a question to ask that board is if the publisher has a stronger vote in the mix, especially when employees are part of the board decisions? 

I think they all are probably good people, but they need to make their process more open and even and at least try to be objective or forget about it and just come out and be clear so we know. If Fargo isn't calling the shots directly, then are they putting forth indirect pressure when they've been so obvious about past partisan support of candidates? I give credit to the DNT though for a very complete and well-done voter summary to prepare voters and I recommend voters take a look at that.

@ Jim: supporting links, please. Otherwise, you're just another Orly Taitz.

Zra, I'm assuming you are asking for links referring to Hussein's school records. Barry Soetoro, AKA Barry Obama, AKA Barack Hussein Obama is a flim flam artist of the highest order. Feel free to throw the likes of Orly under the bus. Bottom line is that there is way too much smoke to blame it on the gas coming out of some Pubs. Here's a link to a quality image of one of his school records, back when he was Barry. I know it's tough to admit to something that you had believed in so strongly, so I won't hold it against any of you. He's put it in print himself, and has been quoted. He's done some switcheroos before, and I'm sure they will continue, as long as it can keep him in office... 

http://mcnorman.wordpress.com/obama-hussein-barack-birth-certificate-forgery/

Sorry, Jim, I really don't give a shit if Obama said he was a Wiccan or even a Martian way back when. My college roommate was Muslim -- so, unlike you, I get it that not all Muslims are wild-eyed terrorists. Just like I know that not all Christians are proselytizing hypocrites.

Jim,
When was the last time you heard of a child enrolling themselves in elementary school?
I'm pretty sure it's a parent that does that and fills in the paperwork. 

It would actually be kind of hard to figure out how Obama would/could even practice the Muslim religion as a child. Clearly his mother wasn't Muslim and even though his step-father was born a Muslim, the fact that he drank alcohol and married an American woman would pretty much indicate that he wasn't practicing that religion as an adult. 

As far as name changes, aren't your claims/accusations kind of silly?
A lot of children take the last name of a step-parent, even if they aren't legally adopted by them. 
And the fact that someone named Barack used Barry isn't any more strange than a Harold using Harry or a Robert using Bobby.

Claire... I don't know for sure that Oberstar or Kravaack were not interviewed personally by the DNT but Oberstar claims, in his response to their endorsement, that he was not. Oberstar indicates that he misses those old KR candidate interviews. Someone would have to check it out with Chuck Frederick if they do those any more. It's my impression they gave those up.  They likely ask candidates to fill out questionnaires or determine the questions and asked at debates will give them the information they need... but no more of those interviews for any candidates. Guess it would need checking out. 

And additionally.. the tenor of the conversation with Jim is lowering the  standard set at the beginning of this conversation. We might as well be at that crazy debate at the DECC.  I vote for sanity!

Voula, I'd be interested if the DNT would explain exactly how they go about the endorsement process these days -- easy enough to find out....  I wish someone like Bob Boone or Jennifer Taylor-Romme would explore it in their newspapers. It'd make for a great story, since the DNT's endorsement is so high-profile and has been so wacky the last few years.

Here is more than two hours of video of the DNT candidate forums, in which the endorsement board asks some of the candidates questions (but neither Cravaack nor Oberstar are included in the videos)...
http://www.duluthnewstribune.com/pages/ironrange

Thanks, Voula, for this info  (and Claire for asking the questions).

Has anyone noticed that with all the endorsements the DNT made, 17 of 19 were for Democrats, yet the only two candidates shown with their photo on the website's opinion page are Republicans Cravaak and Rubin? I wonder why that is?

Tony, Good to point out that party affiliation has not predominated DNT endorsements. And Paul, thank you for the earlier DNT fact checking feedback about Fargo directives in this election. As has been pointed out to me, the DNT has the right to cast opinion and favor on the editorial page. That's where they can and should give opinion. But... whether or not you support Oberstar in this race, you have to give him some credit for what he's done for our area. I'd think he deserved an interview. It's a respect thing. Thankfully, on Nov. 2, it will all be over. So all we have to do is get out and vote.

More controversy over the DNT Cravaack endorsement... 

http://www.duluthnewstribune.com/event/article/id/182424/

It seems that Don Ness sent an email to the editorial board suggesting that endorsing Cravaack was a bad idea, and someone on the board (Bob Hansen) forwarded it to other fellow conservatives (who were told to keep it confidential).  It eventually got forwarded to a conservative blog.

The content of the Ness email seems accurate enough.  He largely pointed out some of the features of the unruly debate.  But the article questions whether it is appropriate for a politician to email his opinion about an endorsement to an editorial board.  

Ness' opinion was probably obvious long before the email, and his opinion about the unruly debate is hardly controversial.  The question is whether putting his opinions down in an email to the board is appropriate.

Don Ness did not make any inappropriate demands or threats in his email to the DNT editors. He heard a rumor (we all did, I knew about the endorsement before it ran) and voiced his opinions to the two DNT editors. I actually admire Don more since reading his defense of Congressman Oberstar against the Tea Party guy. It's an excellent opinion piece, I am all for the DNT running it as an op-ed. Much, much better written and more articulate than Dennis "KY-Jelly" Fink's inarticulate rant against his opponent in today's DNT.

BTW, if anyone thinks somebody other than Bob Hansen leaked this email to a conservative blog, they're just not paying attention.  But Mayor Ness has nothing to apologize for. It's called free speech, and it's guaranteed him in the Constitution -- even if he is the Mayor.

I recommend that people pick up a copy of this week's Reader and read Bob Boone's excellent report on the DNT's endorsement of Cow Chip over Congressman Oberstar, as well as his explanation for why the Reader no longer endorses candidates. Bob, when you're on, you're good.
  
Thanks for trying to provide us with some enlightenment regarding a highly flawed process at the DNT. 

BTW, if the DNT did not bother to interview Congressman Oberstar during the endorsement process because they've met with him before and "we know what's he's thinking" as Chuck Frederick explained to Minnpost, does that mean they talked one-on-one to Cow Chip before making their endorsement? After all, this is the first time he's run for public office, and I doubt they know what he's thinking. 

The DECC forum was a disaster, and the DNT completely failed its readers if they endorsed Cow Chip on the basis of that debacle.

Excuse me, Jim, but the Reader has influence. People read it. A few years ago, President Bush came to town. The Secret Service posted photographs of three local men of interest -- two of whom were clearly identified as Joel Sipress and Joel Kilgour -- with orders to arrest upon sight. Not only did Salon.com pick up the story and run with it, the New York Times mentioned the incident in an editorial (calling Joel S a pointy-headed college professor, which made me laugh)  and the Washington Post reported on it. Other media did so as well. If you want to think no one reads the Reader, that's your prerogative -- but like many of your other assertions, there is no basis in fact. You seem to live in your own little dream world.

Oh, Claire, I didn't say no one read it. I was just claire-ifying their audience. Please, be accurate in your lies! (Thanks Yogi!)

Sheez, how do you know they didn't have hairy legs??

Suckah.