Okay, sort of an old article (from the 23rd), and I'm embarassed to link to it, but I didn't catch it earlier, and thought it might warrant some press. Hope I didn't just miss it the first time around- I apologize if I did.
In brief- they've announced two precincts, but counted four. They won't announce those other two till they figure out why the count is so off. Here's the link to the full article. More below.
It's buried in there, on the second page, but after the assurances that everything is on the up and up, there's a paragraph that reads:
Nonetheless, when the counters return after Thanksgiving, they'll still have some technical problems to resolve. The hand count of a third precinct showed roughly 100 fewer presidential votes than the optical-scan machines had, and will likely have to be recounted yet again. And in a fourth one, a local Republican candidate being recounted was awarded 105 more votes than he had before. Was the problem Diebold or somebody in the counting room? The answer will soon be clear.
Technical problems. Sure, the recount's going fine with no anomolies. Except in 50% of the precincts we've counted.
Eventually, if it's not human error, they'll have to announce those numbers, no matter how many times they recount. And, if we do our job, some dinky little New Hampshire paper won't be the only place covering that story. Sure, the naysayers can dismiss it as "anomolies" and "isolated incidents", but every further incident discovered takes another chip out of that wall. Eventually, the dam's going to burst, and everyone will see that this nation is flooded with defective voting machines. How embarassing.