How 'bout we lay some progressive taxation on this guy . . .

Multi-millionaire software mogul Tim Gill (founder of Quark) has devoted his seemingly limitless resources to promote homosexual mainstreaming. Here's a fascinating article on Gill's strategy to nip Conservatism in the bud--(even as Barney would say) "nip it, nip it, nip it."

This is the core of Tim Gill's strategy:

Together, Gill and [former BigTobacco operative Ted] Trimpa decided to eschew national races in favor of state and local ones, which could be influenced in large batches and for much less money. Most antigay measures, they discovered, originate in state legislatures. Operating at that level gave them a chance to “punish the wicked,” as Gill puts it—to snuff out rising politicians who were building their careers on antigay policies, before they could achieve national influence. Their chief cautionary example of such a villain is Senator Rick Santorum of Pennsylvania, who once compared homosexuality to “man on dog” sex (and was finally defeated last year, at a cost of more than $20 million). Santorum got his start working in the state legislature. As Gill and Trimpa looked at their evolving plan, it seemed realistic. “The strategic piece of the puzzle we’d been missing—consistent across almost every legislature we examined—is that it’s often just a handful of people, two or three, who introduce the most outrageous legislation and force the rest of their colleagues to vote on it,” Gill explained. “If you could reach these few people or neutralize them by flipping the chamber to leaders who would block bad legislation, you’d have a dramatic effect.”

Aside from the brilliantly conceived electoral plan (by the way, I know it's a stereotype, but noone has ever accused homosexual men of lacking brilliance or creativity), this story is interesting because it shows how important money is in winning campaigns and belies the Liberal meme that Democrats don't have fat cats or Rovian schemes. It also demonstrates why squishy elected officials get no respect . . . as Gill has discerned, legislators are much more likely to legislate the way Gill wants (i.e., apparently counter to the interests of their constituents) if their feet aren't held to the fire by extreme legislators. Brilliant.