Your front page diary about the New Hampshire recount sounds just like the Republicans talking about the Ohio vote in 2004. Alternet has an in-depth discussion of the New Hampshire voting situation without snark which is titled "Experts Question Clinton's New Hampshire Primary Win." Here is the link.
The article quotes Bruce O'Dell, an information technology consultant who is coordinating Election Defense Alliance's analysis, as saying that the voting results in New Hampshire were "suspect." That says neither that the vote was hacked nor that it was not. But it does say that it is worth further investigation and that is what is happening.
Kos, you are also harping on the fact that nobody has yet paid for the recount. However, the fact that the Kucinich campaign has not yet paid for the entire cost of the vote recount is irrelevant. It is not yet possible to pay the entire cost as nobody knows exactly how much it is. Even Kucinich's low-budget campaign has the thousands of dollars to cover the entire cost.