A million brilliant pebbles scattered all over sure could gum up the works.

Well, from the get-go, the ballot wording seemed extremely favorable for the pro-equality side. Or, rather, it seemed far more honest than the anti-equality side would have proposed.

Now, the only reason Randall could possibly challenge this is because he knows it's fundamentally impossible to both roll out the petition and get all the signatures needed in the time allotted -- even Eyman couldn't. It would just buy him time...this would give him a lot of time to raise funds for himself and Stickney.

The question is how much time they'd be willing to go for. If he pushes this into a challenge, he wouldn't have to even print the petitions, he could just as easily ask for the money and forge ahead while this trundles through the court back and forth for 2 or 3 weeks and then yank the whole thing and say "we tried, but that danged liberal media."

The sad thing is that this is legal and works. It's completely fine for him to "fundraise" for the duration of this challenge and not even run a petition as long as the money floats in the ether of his own personal PAC and not "Protect Marriage WA PAC". The money saved by not printing petitions or paying signature gatherers could easily pay himself, Stickney, Swecker and supporters while socking away some for a more toothy challenge if a marriage bill rolls through the legislature next year.

How sweet is this. The anti-gay forces might challenge their own referendum's title. It's like the Psychosis Gun.