Electronic Voting - what is wrong with this picture

I have read A Damaging Paper Chase In Voting three times since yesterday. Something about it still sticks in my craw. Particularly this paragraph:

Paper verification looks good on, well, paper, but it is not the cure-all some of its proponents believe it to be. More than two centuries of U.S. elections have shown us that paper is at least as susceptible to chicanery as electronic records. Paper ballots can be modified, counterfeited or destroyed with relative ease. It is not at all clear that they constitute a more reliable medium than electronic records

The whole article misses the point that bothers me most about electronic machines: the evidence of electronic manipulation is far harder to discover than with a non-electronic voting machine. That paper receipt does provide a starting place for finding any kind of digital manipulation. More importantly, it give us voters some confidence that Diebold or someone else cannot change our votes.