At the risk of "piling on" (I already posted a fairly blistering response to Manjoo at 3:40 a.m. Sunday morning), I've just finished visiting three websites (dailykos, Mercury Rising and Mark Crispin Miller's blog) that are specifically addressing Manjoo's article and all 3 have pretty thoroughly debunked what Manjoo has to say.

In fact, Mark Crispin Miller is referring to Manjoo's article as a "hatchet job" and there's also a clear implication in some of the other things I've read outside of Salon that Manjoo is willfully and very deliberately distorting some of his facts.

Given the above and the number of posts here at Salon, isn't it incumbent on Salon to review the facts presented by Farhad Manjoo and review what the people have to say who are rebutting his version of the facts? If it turns out that Manjoo's article is substantially correct then I think you owe it to him to publicly stand behind him and to publish the sources you used to verify his facts. If, on the other hand, the people disputing Manjoo's conclusions are substantially correct then I think you need to decide if Manjoo's article was a deliberate hatchet job or simply the result of careless, lazy reporting. Either way, that would need to be publicly acknowedged by you as well, Salon, or you stand to lose most if not all of your credibility.

As for me, I'm not just angry about the tone and substance of Manjoo's article anymore, now I'm also angry about the number of posters who say they're quitting Salon. I obviously don't have the time to verify this, but I have to assume that some, most or all of them regularly post their thoughts, ideas and opinions here and I'm angry at what we'll ALL be losing if and when they go.

So how about stepping up to the plate, Salon (and on the front page, please ... not buried in this forum that's already up to 37 pages.)

For those who may think that all of this debate about an election that took place here in Ohio almost 2 years ago is a waste of time and energy, may I quote from an article in this morning's Cleveland (OHIO) Plain Dealer?

Blackwell gets brunt of registrants' anger

He denies trying to disenfranchise voters

Democrats and representatives of voter-registration groups accused Secretary of State Ken Blackwell on Monday of trying to rig this November's election by publishing draconian new rules governing the activities of people who register voters.

Testifying at a hearing chaired by Judy Grady, Blackwell's director of elections, lawyers for ACORN, Common Cause, the Ohio Democratic Party and other groups said training documents drafted by Blackwell's office are so vague that they subject registrars to felony penalties for even inadvertent violations.

And I'd be remiss if I didn't mention that one of the many provisions of the so-called election reform legislation (Ohio HB3) that passed the Republican-controlled Ohio House of Representatives in December 2005, was then passed by the Republican-controlled Ohio Senate shortly thereafter and signed into law by Republican Governor Bob Taft on Feb. 1st of this year, eliminates the state statutes that have allowed citizens to challenge the outcome of Federal elections within the state. The only apparent recourse for those wishing to officially question the vote count in a presidential, US Senate or US Congressional race in Ohio would be to petition the United States Congress to initiate a challenge. And did I mention that HB3 also quintuples the cost of citizen-requested statewide recounts? In 2004, the charge was $10 per precinct. Now the charge will be $50 per precinct. (There are over 11,360 precincts in Ohio so anyone wanting a recount will now have to pony up $568,000.) Clearly 3rd party candidates aren't exactly welcome here in Ohio.

This was the Republican-dominated legislature's response to all of the problems we had in Ohio in 2004. Can any of you doubt the GOP stranglehold on this state? (Did you know that since the Civil War, only one presidential candidate, John F. Kennedy in 1960, has won the White House without carrying Ohio?) I believe Bob Fitrakis when he says that this and the other repressive legislation passed by the Ohio GOP will make it virtually impossible for anyone but a Republican to carry the Buckeye State in future statewide and federal elections.

So, do you really believe Manjoo's lame hypothesis that some huge conspiracy would have been required to put Ohio in Bush's pocket in 2004? Maybe if he lived here he wouldn't be so damned dismissive and arrogant about what went on here in 2004 and what continues to go on here.

But your time is coming, Mr. M. ... by the time the GOP is done here, "stealing" elections in Ohio will be perfectly legal!