Where in the hell is Bemidji and why should I even care?

Do you own a car that starts and operates in a reliable way in cold weather? If so, waft a small thanks to the special test bed in Bemidji Minnesota, where all cars undergo such stress tests.

The editorial writer could have stated it better, than to suggest that the appeal process itself is ridiculous because, after all, how many of these things does anybody ever win (not to mention, that he/she conflated Coleman with an ax murderer!)?

The appeal process certainly is legitimate. The problem is not the concept of actually using it; the problem is Coleman's cabal of Republicans who, as the author rightly perceived, is pulling this nonsense for the most crass and anti-democratic (small "d") reasons possible.

Had Coleman been denied an appropriate recount, or had there been any legal issues whatsoever, where he could have received relief from a Minnesota court, that would have been remedied long ago; had the process (e.g.) somehow been politicized to deny him justice, he most certainly would be entitled to take it to Scalia and the boyz.

But as that is simply not the case here, and because Coleman received the most fair review possible of all his bogus claims, even the Bemidji Fishwrap can see that there can be nothing gained by stalling, when you and the whole country already know you've got zero.

But to suggest that because the Supremes routinely have no problem executing people, appeals are therefore silly, is about the dumbest rationale there is for... rightfully... calling upon Coleman to cut the crap.

(There's a reason that editorial writer works in Bemidji :-)

Barry; conflating Coleman with an Ax Murderer does a disservice to ax murderers. They do honest work with their own two hands, and hey, maybe the guy deserved it.

I was sitting around with a couple of other longtime Minnesota DFL hacks the other day and we were kind of marvelling about this whole episode.

I always use the "if the shoe were on the other foot" test and realize that Coleman is doing everything that we would want Franken to do if he were trailing by 300 votes. I think the big difference is the Republican hierarchy would be screaming bloody murder if the roles were reversed, while I believe Franken and company has been remarkably restrained.

merlot is likely right, but I've long learned that being "right" and "meeting with court approval" are two entirely different things. From its previous rulings in the case, it would appear that Coleman is sunk. If there were any indication that there was a pattern to the rejected ballots, he may have a straw of hope, but there isn't, so he likely doesn't.

Where the fun comes in is that the make-up for the five justices on the Minnesota Supreme Court who will vote on this matter, given the recusal of Magnuson and Anderson, makes for an odd melange. Two Pawlenty appointees, two Ventura appointees, and a Perpich appointee. One of my legally learned cohorts speculated that you could actually see five separate opinions and a close vote.

In the end, Franken should be seated. There is no real question about it. A statewide standard should be established for the rejection of absentee ballots, but given that there is no discernable pattern to the rejected ballots, Coleman really has no leg to stand on.

The thing I find most ironic is that those who decry activist courts are now hoping the Minnesota Supreme Court goes activist. Delicious.

I used to love Alan Page when he was a linebacker for the Minnesota Vikings. You go get em Alan