We were just trolling around Salon and came across an article entitled, "There is a gay agenda - winning elections." Obviously there's no way in hell we'd pass on that, especially when we saw that it's penned by none-other than Kerry Eleveld (the same homo-journo who blessedly used our name in conjunction with The New York Times.)

Anyway, Eleveld takes a meticulous look at the who and - more importantly - how much money went into ousting anti-gay politicos. Pivoting on the necessity of financial involvement, Eleveld's piece reads like a Fortune article, lauding the success of big money in gay politics. For example, she highlights Adam Rose's $500,000 contribution that may or may not have helped oust New York Representative Sue Kelly (pictured).

While reading about the power of the pink dollar certainly gives one hope for a viable pro-gay political future, where does that leave the people on the ground, the less fortunate. The fact that money wins elections has been made painfully obvious. Yes, it's great to encourage people to give to the candidate or cause of their choice, but what about alternative routes to power? A reading of this article suggests that there are none. You're either spending the money or distributing the money.

So, does this exclude the masses? You be the judge...