These times demand the Times, and I think we should demand that the Times editors be encouraged to read their own newspaper.
From the Sunday editorial titled "About Those Election Results":
There have been a flood of reports, rumors and theories over the last 12 days about problems with the presidential election. The blogosphere, in particular, has been full of questions: Why did electronic voting machines in Ohio add nearly 4,000 phantom votes for President Bush, and why did machines in Florida mysteriously start to count backward? Why did the official vote totals for Ohio's largest county seem to suggest that there were more votes cast than registered voters? Why did election officials in yet another part of Ohio lock down the building where votes were being counted, turning away the press and public?
Defenders of the system have been quick to dismiss questions like these as the work of "conspiracy theorists," ...
Actually, defenders of the system have been quick to dismiss questions like this as "wrong", as the Times itself reported in an apparently-overlooked front page story from Saturday.
Vote Fraud Theories, Spread by Blogs, Are Quickly Buried
...the blogosphere, as it has come to be known, spread the rumors so fast that experts were soon able to debunk them, rather than allowing them to linger and feed conspiracy theories. Within days of the first rumors of a stolen election, in fact, the most popular theories were being proved wrong - though many were still reluctant to let them go.
MORE: Pejman would be thrilled if the Times editors would even flip on the news or glance at Drudge.