Bill Clinton is fond of saying that the difference between Republicans and Democrats is that Democrats require evidence. I am sorry to say that, based on the reponses to this article, it would seem that quite a few of us Dems aren't too choosy about the standard of evidence required.

What do Intelligent Design, Colin Powell's 2003 WMD presentation to the UN, and RFK jr's article have in common? They all start from an "obvious" conclusion, create theories to explain that conclusion, and then selectively choose "facts" to support the theories. All alternative analyses are ignored entirely or dismissed without serious consideration.

It has been clear since before the election that Blackwell was determined to use his position to effectively disenfranchise Democratic voters in Ohio. That he succeeded to a certain degree is almost indisputable, and outrageous. But RFK jr's article goes well beyond that, repeatedly misusing data in a way that supports the most negative possible interpretation. Manjoo could certainly have done a better job of acknowledging the seriousness of the abuses that did occur, but he is correct in his assessment that RFK jr used data and arguments that have been seriously questioned for more than a year - often by Democrats. See, for instance, the extensive of posts and responses on the mystery pollster site mentioned by Manjoo. Either RFK jr was unaware of these criticisms, in which case he is guilty of very sloppy journalism, or he chose not to acknowledge those counter arguments, in which case he is guilty of dishonesty. In either case, I am not happy to have his "journalism" so prominently associated with the only party I see that might become capable of effectively leading my country. And if you're going to cancel your subscription to Salon for pointing out serious flaws in a article by anyone - liberal or conservative - then I think you lose your right to complain about compliant, special-interest driven media.

This might not be so important if not for the fact that so many Dems are convinced that the election was stolen, and by implication that if we have fairer elections, we Dems will win. If you think this way, I have one piece of exit poll data that really should be taken seriously - from the CNN.com 2004 election poll. Among voters who said their vote was mostly "for your candidate" rather than "against the other candidate", voters went 59-40 for Bush in the first category, 70-30 for Kerry in the latter category. Considering that the "for your candidate" category was 69% of voters, barely more than one quarter of voters were enthusiastic about Kerry as their president. You can argue how much of that was due to candidate, campaign, party platform, or SwiftBoaters, but if you really care about who wins next time, those are the arguments to have.

I see plenty of ranting about the canceling of subscriptions, I see plenty of screeds against John Kerry's fitness as a candidate, and I see numerous, vicious tirades against Farhad Manjoo.

What I hardly see is any objective analysis or discussion of what Manjoo has to say. And I think he makes some pretty valid points in rebutting what Kennedy has written. Especially his points about vote tallies for down-ticket judges and his fact that it would have taken duplicity on the part of Democrats to alter the voting machine allocations to favor Republicans. His other point about Kennedy's selective and sometimes faulty use of statistics in the Democratic Party's own report is pretty illuminating as well.

So it's sad that after reading through all these letters, it seems that many people here have become zealots who are unwilling to be disabused of their firmly set notions no matter what the facts say. In a way, you folks display some of the same traits you supposedly abhor in people on the other side. And when you're unwilling to rationally discuss what Manjoo -- or anyone else for that matter -- has to say, then you ultimately forfeit your right to participate in the discussion. That may sound harsh, but if you're disinclined to debate facts, then you've become just another part of the noise machine. And that's the last thing we need in this country.

And lest you think I'm some kind of Manjoo apologist, which I'm sure I'll be thought of, take a look back at his piece on McCain from a few months ago. I went after him pretty hard for that piece.

So please, debate Manjoo on the facts and stop bombarding us with charged-up, inaccurate rhetoric that adds nothing to the discussion.

Wrong again, Farhad, in your interpretation of Robert Kennedy Jr.'s expose, and more importantly, wrong in your fundamental approach to dealing with the profoundly corrupt. Another election was clearly stolen, but like a tobacco executive you continue to try and convince us, and yourself, that there is no cancer link.

I will address your criticisms in a moment, but in general, given all we know of the Bush regime's propensity to bend and break any and all rules in everything they do, and having watched them subsequently lie and cover up their numerous crimes, you do your audience a great disservice to grant them any benefit of any doubt. Any at all. Shame.

As for your specific criticisms:

- You lead with what sounds like a slam-dunk gotcha, but it is in fact a straightforward indictment of your own foolishness and/or malfeasance. RFK says "In what may be the single most astounding fact from the election, one in every four Ohio citizens who registered to vote in 2004 showed up at the polls only to discover that they were not listed on the rolls, thanks to GOP efforts to stem the unprecedented flood of Democrats eager to cast ballots." You criticize this by pointing out that Republicans as well as Democrats were turned away in equal numbers. Seriously, do you really not understand this one? In 2004, Democrats in Ohio were out-registering Republicans by an astonishing ratio, so turning away *all newly registered voters* (regardless of party) greatly advantaged the Republican candidate.

- Long lines put off Bush voters evenly with Kerry voters. Please, do your homework. Machines were a-plenty in the districts that favored Bush, while they were a-not-so-plenty in Kerry districts, leading to lines many hours long for those wishing to vote for Kerry. These are the facts, as planned and implemented by a corrupt and partisan rulemaker, Blackwell, just as Harris corrupted Florida in 2000.

- "Despite the problems on Election Day, there is no evidence from our survey that John Kerry won the state of Ohio." The source for this? A survey done by a political party machine, not the mountain of actual evidence that the election was stolen. This was a SURVEY, nothing more, performed by the official voice of a powerful political party on a highly charged political issue, facing a relentless, dishonest, Swift-boating attack machine that takes no prisoners and leaves scorched earth where they tread. Let's not forget the public witchhunt that ensued against Al Gore for daring to question the rigged 2000 election, taunts of "Sore Loserman" etc.; the Democratic Party understands that the public has little stomach for the declared loser complaining about an unfair fight, no matter the evidence. It just does not sit well, politically, as wrongheaded as that may be. The public has an odd ethic.

I could go on. And on and on and on. Farhad Manjoo has again sealed his legitimacy in the bloated ranks of the untrustworthy, those that distort to make their ridiculous arguments seem true. I doubt I'll read his stuff again.