I've been following this debate very closely in your pages for a while and I had to chime in. It seems to me that Mr. Manjoo is reduced to sophistry at this point in the debate and it's hard not to award the win to Mr. Kennedy (though I think he should drop the "downticket" issue as it's indicative but not conclusive).

Mr. Manjoo does not appear to have addressed the primary issues at hand: that voter lists were purged, and voter lines were unreasonably long, in far more Democratic districts as opposed to Republican. Mr. Kennedy has fairly systematically estimated the numbers of missing votes; it is up to Mr. Manjoo to present his own model of the actual votes cast that agrees with his theories.

Whether or not these tactics were effective -- and it appears to me that Mr. Kennedy has proved this quite well -- the fact remains that the Republican used utterly illegal tactics to attempt to change the outcome of the 2004 presidential elections.

Mr. Manjoo also misuses statistics. Mr. Kerry was leading exit polls "within the margin of error" in four states that he later lost. This is less likely than flipping a coin four times and having it come up heads every time, i.e. a one-in-sixteen chance: less likely, because in each case the poll indicated that the "coin" was biased towards Mr. Kerry. While not conclusive, taken with the clear evidence of actual fraud and the other statistic anomalies this improbability is a red flag to any unbiased observer.

Give it up, Farhad. Take another look at the statistics, make a realistic estimate of the numbers on what really happened, and then write an article recanting! It might sting for a bit but you'll get really amazing press for it -- "Holocaust denier weeps at Auschwitz" sort of idea.

In fact, I have a proposition for you two gentlemen (and I mean "gentlemen" literally -- I've read Mr. Manjoo's writing for years and Mr. Kennedy's exemplary work on the Hudson River alone can't help but make a long-time New Yorker very respectful of him).

I will create a spreadsheet with the official voter totals for the states in question.

I will send it to both of you and you will edit it to give me your story, in numbers or number ranges, with footnotes.

Both sheets will be put in a public place and everyone can discuss them, the two of you can amend them if needed, and we can at least come to a point where everyone's position is clear, and decisions can be made based on the clear light of full information.

I have held a gun precisely once in my life.

I can't imagine attempting to resist arrest with a gun.

I can't imagine shooting at a person in anger.

That said, Susan, by the time these two people two took up arms, their lives had been irrevocably ruined by the government though no fault of their own. Nothing was going to fix things up for them.

It can be argued that this was in fact the best of a lot of bad choices for them, their reasoning being that if they killed a few of "the government", the next time that "the government" decided to, in essence, kidnap someone's child and steal most of their possessions, "the government" might remember the cost of the previous episode.

The reason that, say, Gandhi's strategy worked is that the British in the homeland at the time were civilized enough to be outraged at the treatment given to non-violent protestors. Unfortunately, no one cares what happens to a few pot-smoking hippies, violent or non-violent. Justice isn't a big pre-occupation with America these days.

He also concludes that given how cash strapped AT&T was in 2002 and 2003 when the expensive changes and additions to the system were made, it is "exceedingly unlikely" that AT&T financed the project on its own. "I therefore conclude that it is highly probable that funding came from an outside source, and consider the U.S. Government to be the most likely source," he writes in the document.

...and aren't you morally sure right now that AT&T marked it up through the roof and made a tidy profit at the taxpayer's expense?

[spits] If everything came out there'd be a lot of rich men and politicians languishing in jail.

I find myself unable to read this article in detail as I have no confidence in Mr. Manjoo's reportage.

The fact that Mr. Manjoo never responded to the serious criticisms of the numbers and methodology in his voting series that surfaced after the first go-around makes him deeply suspect before we start.

The fact that Mr. Manjoo does not apply the same critical tools to the government's official story of 9/11 as he does to the deniers makes this article more or less useless.

The fact that Mr. Manjoo cannot see how the Bush government benefitted from 9/11 is such a jaw-dropper that I'm wondering how it got past the editors.

Let us choose our own battlegrounds.

If we refuse to oppose it, the amendment will fall because no one really cares about it.

It's a complete waste of the taxpayers' time and money, when soliders are dying in Iraq and New Orleans is still in ruins. This reasoning should appeal to all; that's all we should say and then refuse to discuss it any more. "Waste of time and money."

Personally, I care a little bit, but I'd give up any rights I ever had to burn any flag ever, in exchange for seeing Bush and Cheney being taken to jail in handcuffs.

Let's not be diverted. Ignore this issue.

"Two weeks later, Ali began to nurse. The day I took him home in his oversize blue-striped onesie, I knew God had heard me."

A God who causes awful things like children dying to happen unless you beg him not to do it is a petty God -- to you, Allah said, "You kissed ass, so now I won't kill him".