Read other letters about this article
Whatever you think of the legitimacy of the 2004 election, most of us can agree that two very disturbing things happened:
1. Republicans "employed broad, methodical, illegal tactics" (as RFK Jr. phrased it), inappropriately attempting to influence election results -- from discarding valid voter registrations and provisional ballots, to deliberately targeting minority voters for intimidation, to neglecting to provide adequate voting equipment in good working condition; and
2. The mainstream media made no real attempt to shed light on these abuses.
So naturally, when a major article comes along (in Rolling Stone) to draw attention to these very real problems, exhorting millions of people to ask "why is this happening" and "how do we clean up the system," Salon responds by praising its author for thrusting these key issues into the national limelight, correct? Wrong.
Instead you've given us a piece (complete with hysterical headline) that "debunks" two assertions that the author never made: that new evidence has come to light, or that evidence proves that Kerry received more votes in Ohio. "You can't prove that Kerry actually won" screams Manjoo for what must be the tenth time now.
Folks, that's not the point. This problem is bigger than one state, or one election.
The real story here is the lack of adequate protection for America's democracy. Our system is vulnerable to partisan attacks, ones with real potential to change the outcome of elections. The Republican party is taking advantage of that weakness, using underhanded tactics to keep Democrats from voting, or from having their votes properly counted -- and the mainstream media has been totally averse to investigating or reporting that when it happens.
I had expected Salon to offer a serious examination of these problems. Instead, your article ignores them entirely and attacks straw men instead. I count on you for more than this, and I'm bitterly disappointed.