“Portland has been reduced to a punchline,” says KPAM host Victoria Taft, who repeated the joke about minors enjoying a Sam Adams in Portland, before telling the mayor, “my kid is almost the same age as that kid you had sex with. You’ve got US senators who don’t want to be in the same picture as you. Your staff are leaving. You said you’d leave if it were in the best interests of the city, but you’re still here.”
TAFT: DANG, THAT’S A BRIGHT RED JACKET!!!
Taft also criticized Adams’ fellow city commissioners for “standing silent” alongside him. “I’m here to hold a mirror up to Sam,” she said. “But you commissioners should be ashamed. Look who’s behind Sam in that mirror.”
Hold on…is this the set-up line for another joke?
Adams also got himself into hot water with the council audience this morning, after it vigorously applauded a statement by Cheryl Dilman. “Mr.Mayor, how do parents explain this to their children?” asked Dilman.
“The way we show appreciation in council is by waiving our hands in the air,” said Adams.
“Point of order,” interrupted an audience member.
“We’re in citizen communication right now,” said Adams. “I’d ask you to honor the time of the person speaking.”
“They applaud when they want to applaud,” said the man, gesturing to council—referring to a decision by City Commissioner Amanda Fritz three weeks ago to suspend council rules on applause so that those who organized the city’s response to the snowstorm could be recognized. As a result of Adams’ admonishment, the audience erupted in longer applause after Taft’s speech.
AUDIENCE: FILLED OUT WITH ANTI-ADAMS PROTESTERS THIS MORNING…
But we all know that REAL Portlanders support Sam no matter what he does, right guys?
All these citizens put together can’t hold a candle to one Storm Large or that bow-tied wierdo!
“But we all know that REAL Portlanders support Sam no matter what he does, right guys?”
There’s a perfect example of a straw man argument — I expect nothing less from you these days, Blabby. Hint: I don’t know anyone who supports Sam “no matter what he does”.
“All these citizens put together can’t hold a candle to one Storm Large or that bow-tied wierdo!”
Or the hundreds of others, including myself, wearing business and business-casual attire, who are willing to forgive Sam, who don’t think immediate resignation required at this time, who also showed up at the big rally?
In any case, I’d rather listen to Storm Large than Lars Larson or the usual assortment of foaming-at-the-mouth bible-thumpers any day.
You guys are going to hang your hat on that one rally for the next four years aren’t you?
We’ll just settle for humiliating him before every council meeting.
By the way, Blabby, just a couple of days after the scandal broke and Sam was back at work, he went to a neighborhood association meeting and spoke and took questions for half-and-hour, and dozens (possibly more than a hundred) of people were in attendance. They could have asked anything, or shouted anything… but instead all the questions centered around neighborhood and city issues. Nick Fish was there too, for an even longer period, and was not asked about the scandal.
Perhaps the “real Portlanders” aren’t has hyperactively-concerned as the talk radio hosts at city hall?
Real Portlanders (or people who aren’t anonymous commenters) support a human’s right to make a mistake that hurt no one.
Neither of is in any position to claim what Portlanders feel. It’s likley we generally are around people who enforce our own opinion on it.
A recall vote is the only way to find out where people stand on it. If they agree with you, so be it.
But I definitely reject the assertion that because the same 6 usual suspects at Blogtown adamantly support Adams, that somehow that means that most of Portland supports him. There’s no proof of that.
Are you a Portlander kiala?
Let me take that one step further: Bob, Graham, Garrett, kiala, anyone else who has lectured me about what Portlanders are all about.
Are any of you actually from Portland? Were any of you born in Oregon? How long have you lived here?
Why are all the talk radio hosts who decide to address the City Counci and Mayor Sam Adams, completely disreputable? Can’t the RecallSamAdams folks get someone who isn’t charitably described as “a right-wing maniac” to address the Council? Where are the moderates?
God, these people are embarsassing to themselves and to the idea of political process.
Where do these people find the time to sit around City Hall raising a stink? Don’t they have jobs?
Blabby, I live in PDX, I work in PDX, I pay taxes in PDX, I’m registered to vote in PDX. I’m a Portlander
What are your criteria for being a Portlander? Are they outlandish and outdated in a method to try and exclude those who disagree with you? I bet they are.
I live in SF now but I voted for Sam Adams. I lived in Portland for 15 years.
“Let me take that one step further: Bob, Graham, Garrett, kiala, anyone else who has lectured me about what Portlanders are all about.”
You started this line of inquiry, Blabby, not me.
“Are any of you actually from Portland? Were any of you born in Oregon? How long have you lived here?”
Now the inquisition begins.
I’ll bite:
1. I was born in Oregon, in a Portland hospital. Says so on my birth certificate.
2. I grew up in the suburb of Oak Grove, visiting Portland (city of) very frequently, as many of my relatives were in the city limits.
3. My first job was in Portland.
4. College took me to Corvallis, where I stayed for an extended period of time after starting up a business with one of my instructors.
5. I have lived nearly 7 years in the same NE Portland home, which I own.
6. My folks are still in Oak Grove… so it’s fair to say I have close ties to both Portland and Clackamas County, as well as an affinity for Benton county.
Am I Portland enough for you, or did Corvallis ruin me?
PS… Before I turned 18, while working downtown, I sold a Commodore 64 to Neil Goldschmidt, although I didn’t know who he was until he was leaving the store.
Crap: “Really?” is the new “Got _____?”
I mean, one doesn’t replace the other, but it’s the same stupid.
I see that the domain name the recall crowd promotes all over the place, RecallSamAdams.com, was registered (anonymously, apparently) on January 19th. Can anyone from that group tell us who registered it on the very same day the WWire started posting about this, even before Sam’s press conference?
The phrase “rush to judgement” comes to mind.
Blabby, I’ll bite. I don’t need to answer any of your questions about how “Portlandy” I am. I’m probably Portlandier than you are. I’m so Portlandy I’m even wearing my Portland uniform. Hello black hoodie.
Typically you’re one of two or three trolls that comment about wanting Sam out. So we’re in the same boat sort of. You think the whole town wants him out and I think an anonymous website that claims over 700,000 hits and only manages 300 registered members is a joke.
They look so grumpy!
There’s only one thing that can fix this: kittens! Just let dozens of kittens roam about city hall, mewing and attacking pant legs. I don’t think they’ll be worried about much else with little kitten paws batting at their shoelaces.
One lie is a mistake.
Two lies is a serious screw up
Three is a pattern
Bob R
“The phrase “rush to judgement” comes to mind.” – the phrase ‘inside job’ comes to mind.
Can you get time of registration as well as date? then we can compare with first web items about it. if this was someone from Adams office there is a LOT to tlak to Mr Nkrumah about.
Thank you for your answers. Bob and Kiala pass the test with flying colors. (Though at some point, your license to lecture on our civic affairs from thousands of miles away is going to expire Kiala.)
Graham, you avoid the question. I’ll assume you aren’t from around here. Incidentally, I agree with your comment on the caliber of speaker who has been challenging Sam at these meetings. Radio hosts don’t bring a lot of credibility.
Perhaps Matt can find out who some of these people in the audience are, if they’re actually from Portland, etc.
Blabby, there are in my experience perhaps 18 people living who are “actually from Portland’. your resume questions are a straw man. he carries a sharp knive that could ‘actually’ cut both ways should adams supporters or Matt Davis choose to pick it up & swing it but its stupid. who the fuck are you or anyone else to say whos Portland enough.
Recognizing the caliber of most radio hosts = +1 BTW
“he carries a sharp knive that could ‘actually’ cut both ways should adams supporters or Matt Davis choose to pick it up & swing it but its stupid.”
Whuh?
Blabby: “Typically you’re one of two or three trolls that comment about wanting Sam out.”
Can’t fall into the trap of thinking everyone who disagrees with us is a troll. That’s not the definition of “troll.”
“You think the whole town wants him out and I think an anonymous website that claims over 700,000 hits and only manages 300 registered members is a joke.”
I’ll tell you what’s a joke: people who say things like “don’t resign Sam, because you have 4,123 supporters on facebook!”
There are a lot of people who support Sam who didn’t go to the rally. There are a lot of people who don’t support Sam who aren’t going to bother registering on some website. In the end, there’s only one poll that is going to matter.
“Whuh?”
is that a word?
Blabby its as pointless to demand resumes / bona fides of anti-Adams folks as it is to demand resumes of pro-Adamsers. sorry if the image of a straw man w/a knife boggled your mind.
By complaining about the same thing at city council for six months, it seems like RecallSamAdams.com is the impediment to city business, not Sam. At some point, RecallSamAdams.com seems to be trying to create a problem in order to justify their solution to it.
To clarify, now that the inquisition is over (?) — I fully support the free-speech rights of anyone who wishes to express an opinion, regardless of where they live. If people from Vancouver (or wherever) want to make the trip to city call and speak up (as part of _relevant_ agenda item) for their 3 minutes, that’s fine by me.
Similarly, it is my right as a citizen to give little or no credence to the bloviatings of outsiders, should I so choose.
Billy –
The timestamp on the registration is:
Record created on 2009-01-19 22:38:50
Now, if that happens to be UTC and not local time (it wasn’t indicated explicitly), that would put it on January 20th local time, about 5:38am or 6:38am, still well before the press conference.
I’m pro forgiving someone who made a mistake that didn’t hurt anyone. I was born in a Portland Hospital, raised in Portland, lived in the burbs for a short time, graduated from Portland State U. and I was nourished off of Bull Run water. Is that Portland enough?
‘well before the press conference’
wow
Clearly started by someone inside the story then. Nkrumah? Jacquiss the little moralizing shit? Breedlove himself? his family?
::: imagination running wild :::
“Clearly started by someone inside the story then.”
Well, not necessarily — it would have been anyone jumping-the-gun after reading WWeek’s initial coverage… but it does seem premature and a bit opportunistic to me.
It could also be a case of domain speculation. (I’ve done some of that myself, but it seldom proves worth the effort.) If this is a case of domain speculation, how much did the RecallSamAdams folks pay the speculator?
Which raises another question: At what point does RecallSamAdams become a bona fide political campaign, subject to campaign-finance disclosure laws?
“Well, not necessarily — it would have been anyone jumping-the-gun after reading WWeek’s initial coverage…”
on THAT day Bob? just coincidence?
there are no coincidences
Bob: “I fully support the free-speech rights of anyone who wishes to express an opinion… (as part of _relevant_ agenda item)”
That actually sounds like a bit of a cop out meant to disqualify this subject from discussion. Am I reading this wrong?
Website: This story broke on Jan. 19th, by that evening someone had started a RecallSam site. Why does that require conspiracy theories?
I am not a troll.
I live in Portland.
I am well known in liberal political circles.
I would never ever associate myself with Victoria Taft or Lars Larson. But I do read their blogs to keep up-to-date on consertive talking points.
I resent that right-wing, anti-gay groups are taking the lead on this issue and am ashamed that our liberal elected leaders have not steped forward in calling for Sam to go.
Sam Lied. Sam lied when he said he was not lying(to the O editorial board). Sam lied to his staff. He lies because he knows what he did can and will send him to jail. He can go to jail for what he has already admitted to (sex abuse III).
I don’t trust Sam Adams.
We don’t need Sam Adams.
I won’t work with Sam Adams.
Sam Adams needs to GO NOW!
“That actually sounds like a bit of a cop out meant to disqualify this subject from discussion. Am I reading this wrong?”
No, plenty of people, including Lars, have spoken as-scheduled at city council meetings. As long as such opportunities are available, there’s no need for people to turn public-comment time for _other_ city-related business into Sam-controversy time.
Similarly, (and completely hypothetically) I wouldn’t like it if pro-soccer-stadium folks were rallying for their cause during an agenda item about sewer maintenance. There’s limited time on council agendas, and there is impolite to _other members of the public_ to stray off-topic.
Next time I get a parking ticket, traffic ticket, or lie to the city about anything, I’m sure they’ll let me just move forward and make things right after admitting my ‘mistake’
“He can go to jail for what he has already admitted to (sex abuse III).”
Although this may be theoretically possible given particular interpretations of precedent, can you point to one _actual_ conviction in Oregon where BOTH PARTIES say a kiss was not intended to be sexually intimate, one party was nearly 18, and to which there were no other witnesses?
(Thanks also for showing us, yet again, why for some people it’s about the kiss. You couldn’t stop at just complaining about the lies.)
Bob and Blabby,
The time stamp on the entry is put at 22:38:50.
If that entry is put as PST, then it’s 10:39pm in Portland on January 19th.
If that entry is put as UTC, then it’s 2:39pm in Portland on January 19th.
Sam Adams made his comments to the Willamette Week at 4pm on January 19th.
So… If the registration was made in UTC, then it means someone with inside information registered the site. If the registration was made in PST, then it means it wasn’t neccesarily someone with inside information.
That is where the conspiracy theory is.
Ta-Da!
To clarify
WW broke story Jan 19 afternoon. First comment at 4.46 p.m. that date. so registration was before press conference but after Jacquiss story. COULD have been sharp eyed WW reader.
::: imagination under control :::
Good luck Vert. I’m with you. Don’t expect much support around here however. Here no one applies any standards to Adams. That wouldn’t be “tolerant.”
…and then Graham actually does the math & raises the UTC / PST question & puts me back where i started…
🙂
5$ says it was nkrumah.
You guys sound unhinged.
“‘Don’t expect much support around here however. Here no one applies any standards to Adams. That wouldn’t be “tolerant.”
SUCH bullshit. Disregards allmost a full months worth of argument & logic & hard thinking by people who disagree.
supports the suggestion youre a troll Blabby. Theres some ‘troll fever’ about but if it looks like a duck & quacks then etc.
On website issues, maybe Matt Davis the intreped reporter will pick this up & sort out the issues. Hes that kind of boy.
Your standards are boring Blabby.
Graham ,
Kindly cite your source where RecallSamAdams.com has endorsed anyone?
Also, might we mention that we have an extensive article dedicated to diffusing the misinformation that you are proliferating. Specifically:
“What are your political ideologies?
We feel that our views are in line with what some have labeled as American Progressivism. Historically it was the Progressive movement in the early 1900’s that made recalls of elected officials possible.
Our volunteer base is comprised of individuals who subscribe to just about every political ideology with the common belief that Sam Adams actions warrant him unfit for office.”
Thanks You,
RecallSamAdams.com
Jasun Wurster
Holy cow, Graham, you’re right… I was adding to UTC when I should have been subtracting… it could very well have been as early as 2:38pm Pacific time on the 19th!
See:
http://www.timeanddate.com/worldclock/conv…
Welcome back, Jasun –
Care to shed some light on precisely when your domain name was registered, and by whom? Why is the registration anonymous behind a privacy service?
Jasun are you in the right thread?
“Also, might we mention that we have an extensive article dedicated to diffusing the misinformation that you are proliferating. Specifically:
“What are your political ideologies?”
“what are your political idiologies” is not information or misinformation but simply a question. Like “who registered Recall Sam Adams Dot Com and at what time jan 19 PST’?
Jasun,
Kindly cite your source where Graham says that RecallSamAdams.com has endorsed anyone?
I never did that. You are making things up and creating paper tigers to tear down.
For a political spokesperson, you are spectacularly bad at your job.
“There are a lot of people who support Sam who didn’t go to the rally. There are a lot of people who don’t support Sam who aren’t going to bother registering on some website.”
The people that went to the anti-Sam rally were passing out right wing biblical tracts. That’s a fact. All the anonymous posts from the recall Sam site read like an e-mail blast from the RNC.
You seriously think that in a town like PDX you couldn’t get volunteers to sign up on a website? How long have you been here? Portlanders sign up in droves to volunteer for things they’re passionate about. Christ, John Kerry probably had more people volunteering for him than people that actually voted for him.
An even bigger question is how many of those 300 signed up will actually show up to gather signatures? If they do go out for signatures how deflated do they feel after getting a bunch of “fuck off” responses when they stand on Hawthorne and 37th trying to get signatures? Will they come back? For the amount of signatures needed to initiate a recall 300 seems like an awfully small number.
Bob,
I wrote nothing about a kiss, I wrote about a crime and the lies spun to cover up the crime. You put the kiss in it. This is not about a kiss.
This about lies.
It’s like I tell my Sixteen year old: “Tell me the whole truth because the lies only make it worse.”
Vert –
Where do you get “He can go to jail for what he has already admitted to (sex abuse III)”, if it’s not about the kiss?
The only contact disclosed regarding the period prior to Breedlove turning 18 is kissing.
If it’s not the kiss, then what the hell did someone “admit” to which constitutes Sex Abuse III, and again I request proof of actual convictions based on whatever it is you’re asserting.
Vert, theres no crime w/o the kiss. Dont play word games.
Here was bobs question one more time, you must have missed it on first reading: “can you point to one _actual_ conviction in Oregon where BOTH PARTIES say a kiss was not intended to be sexually intimate, one party was nearly 18, and to which there were no other witnesses?”
Vert,
You talk about a crime. Do you know what the only possible crime that might have happened is?
Sam Adams kissing Beau Breedlove.
Therefore when you say “acrime and the lies spun to cover up the crime”, you’re really saying, “a kiss and the lies spun to cover up the kiss”
Work on getting your facts straight next time. Makes it look like you’ve actually got valid points.
By the way, we’re about 4 months from the statute of limitations running out. Prosecution would have to start before Breedlove turns 22 on June 25. ORS 131.125(3)(a).
“…and again I request proof of actual convictions based on whatever it is you’re asserting.”
I love the wild goose chases that people “demand” on these threads. “You’r point isn’t valid until to go to a library and search through decades of case law.” Screw you, Bob. Do it yourself.
Guys, what Vert is saying is that he/she’s concerned about the kiss because it was a crime, not because it was a kiss.
Frankly, you guys try a bit too hard to not get what people are saying. It’s like listening to sophists in a college debate club.
pdxuser: Phew! Saved by a technicality! I feel better about our mayor already.
Yes, well in some states oral sex is a crime.
Some laws are meant to be bent or broken.
“demand”
the verb was ‘request’. somebody around here always says close reading is a virtue.
‘Guys, what Vert is saying is that he/she’s concerned about the kiss because it was a crime, not because it was a kiss. ‘
we dont really know thats true do we? prudes rarely state up front that theyre prudes. big part of my problem w/recall crowd is just that – cant always take them at face value, so what/ how do we know for sure?
“Screw you, Bob. Do it yourself.”
Blabby – Vert is making a quite confident assertion that there is a crime here… I’m asking Vert to prove it. The burden does not fall on me to prove an assertion that I didn’t make.
“what Vert is saying is that he/she’s concerned about the kiss because it was a crime”
Actually Vert now denies that this is about a kiss at all… so not only was my first question unanswered, but now Vert needs to tell us just what crime was “admitted to”.
So Kiss You, Blabby.
He broke the law:
http://badbadteacher.com/colby-molan/
Now he is gone.
Billy and Bob, I’ll just repeat my former statement:
“Frankly, you guys try a bit too hard to not get what people are saying. “
The argument that it wasn’t a crime is based on the argument that kissing isn’t “sexual contact.” You like Sam Adams and his politics and you want him to stay, so you don’t think that it’s “sexual contact.” If this were Karl Rove, you would be furious, and convinced that it is indeed “sexual contact.”
You were the ones who were obsessed with the “legality” of it all at the beginning of this. You said “he’s 18, what’s the problem?” over and over again. Well, he wasn’t 18. He was 17. But then you move the goal posts.
Just be honest: You really really like Sam Adams, you like his politics, you like the fact that he’s the first openly gay blah-blah-blah. And for those reasons, you are willing to forgive him all sorts of crap.
Vert –
The Molan case is not the same as what you are alleging in the Adams case. Molan was accused, in part, of fondling a 14-year old student. The 14-year-old complained about the fondling.
In the Adams situation, no party involved has alleged that the kiss was sexually intimate in nature.
There were also allegations of official misconduct in the Molan case for sex he was having with an 18-year-old student… but in the Adams situation, Breedlove was not Adams’ intern, employee, subordinate, etc.
Apples and oranges here.
And you still haven’t told us just _what_ it is you think has been “admitted” so far which constitutes Sex Abuse III. You’ve said it’s not about the kiss (you got quite upset that I even mentioned the word “kiss”), so please tell us just what the hell you’re talking about. Thanks most kindly in advance.
pdxuser, my reading of that ORS says that the statute of limitations is four years or 22nd birthday, whichever occurs first.
The kiss occured on 06/02/2005. Therefore that charges must be filed by 06/02/2009. Not 06/25/2009, Breedlove’s 22nd birthday.
“If this were Karl Rove, you would be furious, and convinced that it is indeed “sexual contact.””
Nope. Apparently you have no memory. We’ve already, more than once, been over a whole list of Republican sex scandals where I did not call for resignation and where those officials served out their terms in office.
You have no skills as a mind-reader or soothsayer.
“no party involved has alleged that the kiss was sexually intimate in nature.”
Are you a child? You don’t look like a child in your picture.
“Well, he wasn’t 18. He was 17. But then you move the goal posts.”
Nope, the goalposts are firmly in place. Neither party has stated that actual sex occurred prior to 18. If either party should now proclaim that they were indeed fucking at 17, that would be a different matter. But so far, no sex occurred at 17, except in the prurient fantasies of Adams critics.
“Nope, the goalposts are firmly in place.”
Bullshit. The goalposts are whatever you need them to be because you have no integrity.
So by your standard, middle-aged men can go kiss as many girls under 18 as they like, and there is nothing wrong with this behavior, because it isn’t sex?
Should 41 year old men kiss 17 year old girls? How about 15 year olds? 12 year olds? 8? What is scummy enough for you Bob?
“Are you a child? You don’t look like a child in your picture.”
Why, do you want to kiss me?
You sure do love to make things personal, Blabby.
I post with my real name and my real photo. You “demand” (by your own logic of equating requests with demands) that I share my personal details, to pass the test of being a real Portlander. You spout off with “screw you” in lieu of factual arguments.
Meanwhile, you post with a fake name, a copyrighted illustration, and no details about your Portland heritage, even after you demanded them from others.
Brilliant as troll behavior, not so brilliant otherwise.
So you’re disturbed by the fact that the Mt. Angel teacher fondled the 14 year old, but not that he kissed her?
Right out of ORS (that’s Oregon Revised Statutes, the laws of Oregon)
163.415 Sexual abuse in the third degree. (1) A person commits the crime of sexual abuse in the third degree if the person subjects another person to sexual contact and:
(a) The victim does not consent to the sexual contact; or
(b) The victim is incapable of consent by reason of being under 18 years of age.
(2) Sexual abuse in the third degree is a Class A misdemeanor. [1971 c.743 §115; 1979 c.489 §1; 1991 c.830 §1; 1995 c.657 §11; 1995 c.671 §9]
Sam admited on KGW that he broke the law while he was locked out of City Hall.
Vert, your right, but they’re hung up on the technical argument that a minute of kissing with an underage person isn’t “sexual contact.” They make this argument because it’s convenient for them.
“So by your standard, middle-aged men can go kiss as many girls under 18 as they like, and there is nothing wrong with this behavior, because it isn’t sex?”
Goalposts moved, by you, yet again.
We were discussing whether the crime of Sex Abuse III was involved, not whether there was “nothing wrong” with the behavior. In the grand scheme of things, someone who is almost 18 kissing someone who is well over 18, especially considering that the someone who was almost 18 is not some defenseless waif unknowing of the ways of the world, is not a real big deal to me.
But I’m glad to know you do think this is about the kiss.
“you have no integrity” … “What is scummy enough for you Bob?”
Oh such biting rhetoric… an anonymous troll lecturing me on integrity and “scummy” behavior.
Blabby, Ill just repeat my former statement, “big part of my problem w/recall crowd is just that – cant always take them at face value, so what/ how do we know for sure?”
Bigots never say theyre bigots, they always have best friends who a re Jewish. homophobes w/half a brain wont say theyre homophobes. And the situation gives people who hated Adams years ago a great excuse to call for his head.
There are people who like Adams but dont like what he does & still see recall as a bad deal, too much potential good to lose for this offence. There are hotheads & dimwits at extreme fringes of both sides but most of us think things through pretty clearly. its that bell curve thing. extreme rhetoric such as MUCH of yours suggests a voice from a far end of the bell curve. I try to ignore these voices. they cant / shouldnt be taken seriously.
##########
Bob, you do my lines better than I do. Ill be in my trailer.
Vert –
Reposting the statute doesn’t prove anything… you can’t get a conviction for a kiss unless you prove that a kiss which both parties describe as not sexually intimate constitutes “sexual contact”. You’ve not shown any history of any such convictions ever taking place in this state.
(This is about the kiss, yes? You initially denied it, but keep coming back to it.)
“In the grand scheme of things, someone who is almost 18 kissing someone who is well over 18… is not a real big deal to me.”
We’re not talking about what is or isn’t a “big deal to you”. We’re talking about the law. “It’s okay attorney general! Bob thinks it’s cool. Just forget about it!”
Just keep him away from your teenagers, I guess.
“We’re not talking about what is or isn’t a “big deal to you”. We’re talking about the law.” – so it IS about legality eh Blabby? there go those darn goalposts again.
Graham: “Or, if the victim at the time of the crime was under 18 years of age, anytime before the victim attains 22 years of age or within four years after the offense is reported to a law enforcement agency or the Department of Human Services, whichever occurs first.” If the kiss occurred after Breedlove turned 18 but was unconsentual, then the clock would start when the kiss took place.
Blabby: Yes, it was wrong and stupid. So was Dozono lying about his taxes, but I wouldn’t have supported a recall of him, either.
Sure Billy, I’m a bigot. Strong argument. Whatever.
“Sure Billy, I’m a bigot.” – not necessarily but I’m pretty sure youre a liar & hypocrite based on the legal v illegal flipflopping. Law doesnt matter if were concerned about legality. Law DOES matter if it helps you get rid of Adams for whatever reasons you hold in your hart of hearts. just pointing out fact based on your own posts.
I dont expect much fro m you so Im not disappointed.
“We’re not talking about what is or isn’t a “big deal to you”. We’re talking about the law.”
Glad to see you’ve come around to the original argument.
Now pay close attention:
Under the law, a 17-year-old cannot consent to sexual contact.
The definition of “sexual contact” is where things get complicated.
There have been some rulings about whether a kiss on a part of the body which is not a sex organ, such as the neck, can be considered “intimate”. But as far as I know, this was in the context of the receiver of the kiss bringing forth a complaint and alleging that the kiss was sexually intimate.
To my knowledge, there is no record of any case in Oregon where a solely a lip-to-lip kiss, where both parties do NOT allege intimate intent, has been held to fit the definition of sexual contact. I’ve looked around, and could not find one. I am sincere that I’d like to see examples of such a precedent, and go over the details.
But at this time, I do not believe that the Sex Abuse III statute applies to the known facts, and it would be unprecedented to charge someone in such a situation.
[hai, guise. it’s A cat. I stepped back from blogtown to let you serious grown-ups have your serious discussions, and this is what happened. well done.]
So if Sam did nothing wrong. Why Lie? Why lie when he was given a chance to come clean? Why lie to your own staff, the people who can help you out the most?
Because he knows he broke the law.
That’s why.
Bob R
Have you ever kissed your mother for a minute or longer?
I don’t actually care about the legal or illegal standard. I think he should go because he’s demonstrated a deficient character and I don’t believe anything he says.
I’m talking about legality here in defence of Vert, because others are making the facile argument that it’s “about the kiss.” My point is that it’s not about the kiss, its about the fact that the kiss was probably a crime. That’s why I’m discussing legality.
I saw a parent kiss their child before sending them to school the other day. Lock them up, make them lose their job, spend hundreds of thousands of dollars doing it, it’s a crime. And the kid was waaay younger than 18 years old.
Hang on, I’m not winning the argument by talking about the kiss, let’s go back to pretending it’s about the lying instead. Whatever it takes to get Sam recalled, because that’s obviously far more important than anything else happening in the world.
Bob: “Now pay close attention…”
Bob, none of your arguments lose me, believe me. I see you coming a long way off.
I understand that you don’t think kissing minors is sexual contact. I’m just curious if your neighbors know this.
pdxuser, you’re right. Damn stupid commas and compound phrasing. Thanks for clarifying that for me.
NOT A CAT, did you see this? http://www.faceofthecookie.com/2009/02/17/… What’s that remind you of? Boxxy, maybe?
Watching blabby bob & weave & wrestle to make a coherent point is like watching a monkey fuck a football.
theres no conversation here. at least blabby notes opposing points & tries to spin around them before lurching back to the far right end of the bell curve.
I look forward to jasun’s reply on the time of registration. Other than that – ’tis too starved a subject for my sword.
Thanks, Graham. Shooping in progress.
Billy, I’ve made plenty of coherent points – you just can’t follow them. Or do you mean coherent like you:
“he carries a sharp knive that could ‘actually’ cut both ways should adams supporters or Matt Davis choose to pick it up & swing it but its stupid.”
You have no idea who I am. Only in this town would anyone accuse me of being on the far right. Increasingly Portland is where idiots come to congratulate themselves on being brilliant.
“I don’t actually care about the legal or illegal standard.”
That much is quite evident, and has been so for a long time.
“I understand that you don’t think kissing minors is sexual contact. I’m just curious if your neighbors know this.”
Goalpost moving by Blabby yet again… I didn’t say all minors, and I didn’t say all kissing. Specific circumstances matter, just as appellate courts have ruled. For this particular set of circumstances, there has been no precedent that I could find.
In any case, my neighbors do know my views on the Adams situation. I’ve discussed this with numerous people in my neighborhood.
I see you’re still making this personal.
“You have no idea who I am.”
But you sure do enjoy demanding personal facts from others, don’t you?
So who are you then? Real first name, real pic, real Portlander qualifications?
Yes, Blabby, straw man w/ knife was clearly unfair imagery, using metaphor & carrying it across TWO whole sentences. Graham did a ‘paper tiger’ reference upthread & that sound i heard was probably your head exploding.
“You have no idea who I am.” Oh WHY pray tell should I care. you are just another voice crying in the wilderness full of sound and fury
and you know how that quote ends
Trolls always get the last word so go for it.
Bob R,
I have fought hard to protect children from people that think like you for nearly 20 years. It is obvious that people like you share a perspective on sexual abuse that is not held by most adults in Oregon.
Sam Adams lied because he knows he has committed a crime. The crime does not need to be a felony in order to destroy the political position he has worked so hard to attain. Sam Adams knows he groomed this child for sexual activity and regardless of how willing Mr. Breedlove was at the time. Oregon law is clear Breedlove could not give such consent. Breedlove was not raped, but he was wronged and is a victim of sexual abuse by the Mayor of Portland Oregon.
Do you feel it will be possible for Sam Adams to convince a jury of his pears that kissing a 17 year old boy in the mens room of city hall for a minute or longer was not a sexual act or an act during the courting process in which he hopped would end up with sexual intercourse with Breedlove after he turned 18? What could be the reason Sam Adams kissed a 17 year old boy in the mens room of City Hall other than for sexual gratification for himself or for the child he was pursuing?
I was born and raised here. I’ve lived here 25 out of 33 years. I don’t give my name on the web. Why would I? You assume that with your photo and initial that I know who you are. I have no idea who you are. I go anonymous because it’s foolish to have a bunch of material on the web with your name on it. People can and do search that stuff.
But let’s explore the boundaries of your position here: do you think that a middle-aged man who kisses a 15 year old should face no consequences for that?
“he carries a sharp knive that could ‘actually’ cut both ways should adams supporters or Matt Davis choose to pick it up & swing it but its stupid.”
VanSmack, do you’d be OK with this if Sam had kissed Beau in Vancouver, WA?
“do you think that a middle-aged man who kisses a 15 year old should face no consequences for that?”
It depends on the circumstances, doesn’t it? A relative kissing another relative goodbye shouldn’t land someone in jail, should it?
“I have fought hard to protect children from people that think like you for nearly 20 years.”
When I was 17 I owned my own business, held a separate job, and had already operated a nuclear reactor years earlier, even had an introductory flying lesson. I made field calls on my own to tech clients. If you think a 17 3/4-year-old legislative intern fits the common connotation of a “child”, that’s your misapprehension, not mine.
“jury of his pears”
I know that Sam has put on a little bit of weight in recent years, but there’s no reason to bring that into this discussion.
“A relative kissing another relative goodbye shouldn’t land someone in jail, should it?”
Trying so so hard not to get the point. And succeeding I guess.
How about a middle aged man kissing a 13 year old for a minute? Depend on the circumstances? Go ahead and pretend not to understand the question.
Oh, I don’t think it would be that hard to figure out who Blabby is…if anyone cared enough to do so.
Knock yourself out Kiala. The answer would be “some guy we’ve never heard of”. A big shrug, I assure you.
Or girl.
How about a middle aged man kissing a 13 year old for a minute? Depend on the circumstances? Go ahead and pretend not to understand the question.”
I’m not pretending to not understand the question. You left out details, and in the past you’ve misconstrued my remarks to apply to very broad sets of cases when I’m referring to narrow sets of circumstances.
But in our new scenario (more goalpost moving), in just about any circumstance I can think of, that would be bad, yes.
So it’s a good thing we aren’t dealing with that particular scenario in the Breedlove/Adams situation.
Sure. Why not.
How about a 41-year-old male non-relative kissing a 15 year old for one minute? Should the law get involved in such a case?
Let me put it this way: laws have to be written to cover general cases, not specific cases, so should there be a law trying to prevent or discourage the above general scenario, or should the law never become involved in such cases?
“Let me put it this way: laws have to be written to cover general cases, not specific cases, so should there be a law trying to prevent or discourage the above general scenario, or should the law never become involved in such cases?”
That’s the crux of the matter, though… laws are written to cover general cases, but there are always cases that don’t quite fit the general criteria.
The law refers to “sexual contact”, and courts have expanded that definition to include kissing under specific circumstances… but those specific circumstances are not the general rule.
That’s why I requested specific precedents that fit the facts of the current situation.
So far, none have been provided. If it were so cut-and-dried, you’d think the Adams-critics would have a laundry list of court precedents to back up their allegations.
Instead of being given such examples, my own integrity has been called into question, and I’ve repeatedly been asked to respond to completely hypothetical examples.
I want proof that this situation, right now as known to us, constitutes Sex Abuse III as previously upheld be Oregon courts.
That’s the allegation being bandied about by critics — not your hypothetical situations.
I’m not a lawyer. Here’s what the Oregonian says:
“The issue of whether a kiss amounts to sex was decided by the Oregon Court of Appeals in 2001. A panel ruled that lips can be considered intimate body parts, and that a kiss can be considered sexual contact under certain circumstances.”
Since 17-year-olds can’t consent by law no matter what they say, I think the burden is on Adams to prove that their two admitted kisses were not sexual in nature. If they want to claim they weren’t sexual, I’d love to hear their explanation of what they were.
This is ridiculous.
No goal post to move.
In Oregon, if you are 42, you CAN NOT HAVE SEXUAL CONTACT WITH 17 YEAR OLDS.
I don’t care if the kid is a has three of their own kids, You can’t do it. It is the law. No bend, no loopholes, no exceptions.
Was it sexual contact? Breadlove told KGW that it was.
Now you are going to make me look up the interview aren’t you? I’m not. Look it up yourself.
Kiala,
You are right.
Sam should just leave.
From KGW:
“Experts point to a specific case, Oregon v. Woodley, in which “intimate parts” was defined according to the victim.
The Oregon Supreme Court devised a two-step analysis to determine whether or not a body part is intimate.
If the victim feels he or she has been touched in an intimate area or with intimate intent, then intimate touch has occurred. Both parties to the touch must consider the touch to be intimate; otherwise, a reasonable person must consider the touch intimate, according to the court’s test.”
Yes, I am aware of Oregon v. Woodley.
So again I ask if there is a conviction with this specific set of circumstances found in the Adams situation? A case where BOTH parties did NOT state there was intimate intent, where only lips were involved by both parties, and where a jury found nonetheless, in absence of any other evidence, that such was sufficient to convict?
Oh, and it’s spelled “Breedlove”, not “Breadlove”, Vert. Between that an VanSmack’s “Jury of pears” I’d say there’s a bit of a food fixation going on. Go eat a late lunch, everyone.
I guess not. But there’s always a first time.
“otherwise, a reasonable person must consider the touch intimate”
Breadlove, Ouch, I am soooooo embarrassed, I will never post again.
OK, back to the important stuff.
My question stands; if Sam Adams did not do anything wrong — why did he lie?
Bueller?
Hi All,
Sorry for not responding to the Domain registration question sooner.
The times for the whois are not in UTC for the hosting company that the Domains are registered through. I personally did not register recallsamadams.com, however I did register recallsam.com.
———————————————————
Here is the email when I registered it:
from DreamHost Registration Service
to Jasun Wurster
cc recallsam.com@proxy.dreamhost.com
date Thu, Feb 12, 2009 at 4:50 AM
subject [jaswur 23823259] recallsam.com registration success!
mailed-by dreamhost.com
Hello,
Your registration of recallsam.com for 1 year has been processed.
It will probably take 1-3 days for your domain to begin to work as the new dns information propagates across the Internet!
This registration expires 2010-02-12 04:50:57.
Thanks for choosing DreamHost!
The Happy DreamHost Domain Registration Team
———————————————————
Here is an abbreviated whois:
whois recallsam.com
Whois Server Version 2.0
Record created on 2009-02-12 04:50:57.
Record expires on 2010-02-12 04:50:57.
———————————————————
Hence, time are converted to local and recallsamadams.com was created on 2009-01-19 at 22:38:50.
For me it was the following post that got me involved with the recall effort:
http://bojack.org/2009/01/sam_the_tram_lied_about_the_in.html#comment-83716
As for cloaked domains I will refer to Dreamhost’s reason why they recommend and offer this service for free:
“This is so spammers/scammers/crazies don’t see your personal info in the public WHOIS database!”
Again, I do ask all to review the front page of http://www.recallsamadams.com and know that our goal is to hold Sam Adams accountable for deliberately lying to the public, orchestrating an elaborate cover-up in which he subverted the 2008 mayoral election and abusing the power that the people entrusted to him. The people of Portland and surrounding communities are the unwilling victims who are paying for his deception and betrayal.
Please stop making this issue about those volunteering their time to make our government better and focus the one who is at the core of this: Sam Adams.
Sincerely,
RecallSamAdams.com
Jasun Wurster
Jasun, you still haven’t answered this question:
“Kindly cite your source where Graham says that RecallSamAdams.com has endorsed anyone?”
Or are you just a big fan of baseless accusations?
Also, why are you up at 4:50am registering domain names?
Vert,
“…if Sam Adams did not do anything wrong — why did he lie?”: CRAP this is tedious. Asked and answered REPEATEDLY the past 30 days. DO try to keep up, there’s a good lad.
The election-year rumors had to do with SEX WITH A MINOR. Assuming Adams was smart enough to wait until Beau Breadloaf was 18, sex with a minor didn’t happen. Adams said he didn’t think he would be believed if he told the truth. The comments here & elsewhere bear that out. Legal sexual congress is not the business of the press or the electorate. So: His political career was at stake because of a false rumor he couldn’t effectively deny about something that was NOBODY’S GODDAM BUSINESS — a lose-lose predicament — and he lied. I can see why he lied. And while the coverup was a bit over the top, I can give him a pass on that lie. Unique and extenuating circumstances.
Putting the moves on a 17-year-old darkens the picture. I would like to know how old Adams thought Bo was that night in the second-floor men’s room. I’m also eager to see how the kissing-equals-intimate-contact question proves out from a legal standpoint.
This is too nuanced and tl;dr for some folks, Vert, but that’s how I’ve worked it out, and I think it’s how a lot of Portlanders will work it out if the recall gets to the voters, which I don’t think will happen. A roomful of noisy jaspers at City Hall with commercially printed signs doesn’t mean it will.
Graham,
I was referring to your comment where you typed:
“Can’t the RecallSamAdams folks get someone who isn’t charitably described as “a right-wing maniac” to address the Council?”
Sorry, I though you were associating them with the RecallSamAdams.com and our recall campaign. We did not ‘get’ them to speak at city council.
As for your question about why I was registering domain names. Can you tell me what bearing that has on the fact that Sam Adams deliberately lied to the public, orchestrated an elaborate cover-up in which he subverted the 2008 mayoral election and abused the power that the people entrusted to him.
Hi Guffman, It is reported that Mr. Breedlove told Adams he was 17 at there meeting at the Macaroni Grill, prior to their first kiss. I beleive he mentions the time line in his 30 min interview with CBS.
Though RecallSamAdams.com is not affiliated with the group at City Hall today, there are a lot of groups that we will talk to as long as they strictly focus on making this recall about Sam Adams resorting to lies, cover-ups and abusing his power to get elected Mayor.
There will be an interview in the the next issue of Just Out where we focused on the ethos that guide this recall campaign.
Thanks,
RecallSamAdams.com
Jasun Wurster
“my kid is almost the same age as that kid you had sex with.”
At least it’s not at all about sex or morality.
TO EVERYONE THAT SHAT BRICKS LAST FRIDAY:
THIS THREAD IS THE CANCER THAT IS KILLING BLOGTOWN. NOTHING I COULD POSSIBLY DO IS HALF AS TEDIOUS, SELF-SERVING, MASTURBATORY, POINTLESSLY DESTRUCTIVE, AND DOWNRIGHT BORING AS WHAT YOU FUCKERS HAVE DONE HERE.
EVERYONE THAT CALLED FOR MY BANNING AND THEN CONTRIBUTED TO THIS GOD-AWFUL SHIT STORM NEEDS TO GO EAT A BOWL OF DICKS. TROLLING I CAN ABIDE. DOUCHEBAGGERY I CAN ABIDE. PASSIONATE DEBATE WITH IDIOTS I CAN ABIDE. THIS SORT OF CATATONIA-INDUCING NAVAL-GAZING, HOWEVER, IS NOT FUCKING OK.
BLABBY, GUFFMAN, BOB, CHUNTY, JASUN, VERT, VANSMACK, BILLY: YOU ALL DESERVE A SLOW AND PAINFUL DEATH.
I hate to say it, but…
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eALrmZCHwlU
Thanks, Alison. I’m glad someone hasn’t lost their fucking mind.
Are we here for your entertainment? Must have missed the fine print.
Don’t care about local politics? Stay off threads about local politics. Clearly you don’t need the grief. Bad for the ol’ BP. Stick with “Sexy Portland” or “A Very Special Pants-Pooing Edition of ‘E.R.'” Or get a new hobby. I hear Sasha dolls are fun.
I care about local politics, therefore I put in my 2¢ on the issue. I feel that this sort of shit-heap masquerading as semi-acceptable political discourse is just embarrassing, and not in any way furthering the public good.
I’ll repeat that what Sam did was wrong and stupid. Regarding Blabby’s “It’s the law” argument, that’s true. It’s also victimless. And it requires Breedlove, not a judge or jury, to declare what of his or Adams’ “parts” are “intimate”. See Davis’ earlier post on the legal aspects of this. This case is at least more difficult without cooperation from the person you’re calling a victim, assuming the AG bothers to do something before June 25.
Another victimless act I’m not inclined to prosecute is Michael Phelps smoking a bong. You know he first tried to lie about that, right? He even made his poor publicist lie about it for him, compounding it all.
If Sam Adams did nothing illegal why did he not say “what I did was not illegal and furthermore none of your business”? But he didn’t.
Sam Adams lied.
Sam Adams lied to us.
Sam Adams lied to the press.
Sam Adams lied to his supporters.
Sam Adams lied to other politicians.
By doing this Sam Adams has proven himself to be morally bankrupt and untrustworthy. The mere presents of lies suggest that there is more to this story. The citizens of this city deserve better, we deserve the respect of the truth.
If you are fine having a mayor who lies to everyone.
If you are fine having a mayor who admits to breaking laws.
If you are fine about having a mayor who slanders his former supporters.
You need a gut check.
I, as a citizen of Portland, will be very happy to sign the recall and vote this BS artist out of office.
All the best,
Vert
That’s quite a politician-free world you’re envisioning there, Vert, with all the people who have lied about something being thrown out of office.
Dear Pdxuser,
It is a common misconception that what Adams did was victim less. More so, this is a well placed and scripted narrative that Adams paid political consultants are using to absolve him from having to claim reaponsibility of subverting the 2008 mayoral election.
We believe that Sam Adams deliberate deception and betrayal resulted in many victims:
1) The people of Portland are victims of having an informative election stolen from them. Sam’s deliberate and repeated lying made it impossible for the citizens and media to fully vet his character.
2) The people of Portland are victims of Sam’s through his calculated charterer assassination of a potential political rival, thus preventing other viable candidates from entering the race. This also prevented new ideas from from being presented for citizens to consider, which is vital for our Democracy.
3) The surrounding cities and state of Oregon are victims. Face it, when the rest of the nation and world think of Oregon, they associate them with it’s largest city. Sam Adams has transfered his trust issues to all Oregonians. Perception is everything.
4) The LGBT community, like many other communities, are victims of Adams. They specifically went to bat for him when he lied. They associated their good name and credibility with Adams, only now to unfairly be associated with him. Sam played the bicycle community in a very similar way over the Sauvie Island Bridge / Flanders Street crossing. My point that Sam Adams has fragmented and weakened many communities for his political gain.
You are engaging in an ‘apples to oranges’ comparison. Michael Phelps is not an elected official who deliberately and repeatedly lied to get elected under false pretenses to repersent the citizens of Portland, Oregon. Sam Adams is that person and will be held accountable by his victims, who are now are the ones paying for his deliberate acts.
With much respect,
RecallSamAdams.com
Jasun Wurste
“The people of Portland are victims of having an informative election stolen from them. Sam’s deliberate and repeated lying made it impossible for the citizens and media to fully vet his character.”
So, Jasun, you believe that from the very beginning, the rumors about Sam and Beau were fair game for media attention?
“The people of Portland are victims of Sam’s through his calculated charterer assassination of a potential political rival”
And what his rival did, spreading rumors without evidence (and if he had evidence, he failed to report it to the proper authorities), wasn’t “calculated charterer assassination of a potential political rival”? Please.
“The surrounding cities and state of Oregon are victims.”
Wow… you’re not hyping this at all, are you… nahhh, no hyperbole there.
“The LGBT community, like many other communities, are victims of Adams.”
The “LGBT community” is not a monolithic whole, and *you* don’t get to decide whether any of its members are “victims”, thank you very much.
“Sam Adams is that person and will be held accountable by his victims, who are now are the ones paying for his deliberate acts.”
The only thing I feel like I’m a victim of is your senseless, increasingly unhinged rhetoric.
I fall into categories 1, 2 and 4, but I choose not to claim victimhood. I was talking about the “it’s the law” argument anyway, which you are not. You’re using the “it’s the lies” argument. To that, I say, I wouldn’t have favored a recall of Dozono for lying about his failure to pay taxes, either. And that really did have direct victims who were materially damaged, financially. And I really did not want Dozono to be mayor. And I thought his failure to pay taxes was wrong and stupid, and so was his lying about it. (He claimed it was in protest, even though the thing he claimed to be protesting occurred after he failed to pay, and even though he never declared he was protesting before he was caught, meaning he wanted to go unnoticed, an ineffective way to “protest”.) All of this said, I still would not have supported a recall.
I would support a recall if Adams were caught accepting bribes for city contracts, or if he embezzled city funds, things that do real professional damage. Or if he were attacking his staff, or blackmailing opponents… these things are all reasons for a recall. Thinking he’s icky or a liar or whatever doesn’t quite move me to recall.
A follow-up:
I asked DreamHost tech support to comment on the domain registration timestamp situation, and their reply was:
“The time on the whois information is Pacific time. Here is the information we have: requested 2009-01-19 22:34:40, completed 2009-01-19 22:38:51, 1 years”
So the domain was registered the day of the WWeek allegations, and the day prior to Sam’s press conference.
My characterization of “rush to judgement” stands, but the “insider conspiracy” idea, although not impossible, seems less likely given that timeline.
Bob R.,
Will I ever be able to give you an answer that you will be happy with? Honestly, you are a well meaning and intelligent person who I feel is so dug into your positions that sometimes I get the impression that you will throw any out there then demand a response. Only to knock me when it is not “good enough”.
You were wrong about the “insider conspiracy” because RecallSamAdams started simply enough a group of concerned citizens who banded together to start a recall effort because we are tired of politicians lying to us to get elected.
The same above answer it true for your “rush to judgment” assertion.
Really folks, I get that you are so upset and angry. So are we, the only difference is that our anger is focused toward the person who started this all… Sam Adams.
Here is what I propose. Let’s set a time to meet at a bar and talk in person about this over drinks. People are way to uncivil on the Internet. I am game for this if you are. Hell, we could have a Mercury reporter cover this as well.
RecallSamAdams.com
Jasun Wurster
jasun –
“Honestly, you are a well meaning and intelligent person who I feel is so dug into your positions” – cuts both ways.
“You were wrong about the “insider conspiracy” because RecallSamAdams started simply enough a group of concerned citizens who” blah blah blah. We were ‘wrong’ because the dates allow for some doubt. SOME. Bob acknowledged that. Thats not ‘dug in’. Legit question to ask in any case. thanks for helping introduce that shadow of doubt.
“The same above answer it true for your “rush to judgment” assertion.” so a WW story is enough to merit recall / resignation all by itself? oh yes, youre the guy who was inspired to get into this by a Bogdanov comment thread. my bad.
“People are way to uncivil on the Internet.” agreed. I find however that while civility increases in person other factors like rhetoric, critical thinking, logic, common sense, active conversation rather than speechmaking, dont get much better.
i for one should not drink with these people.
“Hell, we could have a Mercury reporter cover this as well.” did they hire one?
BTW jasun, guffamn pointed out interesting fact: commercially printed signs. those arent cheap. who funded those please?
“You were wrong about the “insider conspiracy””
No, Jasun, if you’d been paying attention, I was never the one who claimed an “insider conspiracy”, in fact I initially claimed that it was unlikely — I called it seemingly “premature” and “opportunistic”, but not a conspiracy. All you have to do is scroll up.
Unlike you, I’m not in a rush to judge anybody.
billy, a stack of vinyl stickers and small signs isn’t going to break anyone’s bank, especially if one of the anti-sam crew works at a printer.
Billy,
Right not people are makingbuying stickers and signs with their own resources. The recall campaign can not accept or spend any money until a PAC is formed. Then all funds must be reported to the state and become public record via ORESTAR.
Which, if ever you are wondering who some of Sam’s supporters are, we have his ORESTAR info right here:
http://www.citizenrecall.org/data/Sam_Adams_For_Mayor_Supporters.xls
NOT A CAT, we are not an ‘anti-sam crew’. We are hundreds of volunteers who Support Portland by making our government better.
RecallSamAdams.com
Jasun Wurster
Jasun,
I wouldn’t go posting that link around if I were you. That link is actually how I was planning on taking down your site if you ever pissed me off too much. You shouldn’t host 1Mb files on your own server. 9,000 people concurrently downloading that file would crash your server and your host would charge you a LOT of money for bandwidth.
Find a remote host for your large files is what I’m saying.
Graham,
It should be noted that we do have a legal team of Portland attorneys that would be interested to talking to you ‘should’ this ever happen.
One could misinterpret your friendly, helpful advice as an attempting to induce fear to politically force one’s actions.
I totally know that you are being helpful and sincerely appreciate your advice to help with the recall campaign.
Thank You,
RecallSamAdams.com
Jasun Wurster
Jasun says: “Will I ever be able to give you an answer that you will be happy with?”
Unfortunately Jasun, the answer is no. Bob is a sophist who has high regard for his own intelligence. You won’t ever satisfy him, because he’s not looking to be satisfied.
Graham is just a young idiot.
Jasun, I come here and take these guys on for the fun of it, but if I was you, representing the recall effort, I seriously wouldn’t even bother. Heck, let them sit here spinning out conspiracy theories about Nigel Jacquiss (sp?). It will only make them look insane and us look better.
You will NOT convince these guys of anything, and they will NEVER be satisfied with the information you provide.
Jasun,
What is your “legal” team going to do? I’m trying to tell you that hosting large files on your server is a bad idea. it will crash things if people start downloading it. But please don’t take this as advice to help the recall campaign. take it as internet advice. don’t locally host large files. But maybe you should fire your “legal” team and hire some IT support.
“Bob is a sophist who has high regard for his own intelligence.”
Wow, you’re still stopping in here to insult people? Thanks. You’ve done little but make this some kind of personal battle, rather than argue the facts.
“Jasun, I come here and take these guys on for the fun of it,” doing it for the lulz. noted. thanks for clearing that up.
“You will NOT convince these guys of anything, and they will NEVER be satisfied with the information you provide.” that is bullshit. A Cat says threads like this dont serve the public good but I disagree. have picked up answerss to questions from jasun & others, logical inferences, holes in arguments, legal question marks in comment threads that havent made the papers otherwise. helped firm up my opinions on recall etc but i cant say mind is made up. Adams knew beau was 17 during bathroom encounter? that was news to me & disturbing if true & just adds more grist for the mill.
Basically I like getting facts together before deciding to burn down frankensteins castle. Others clearly dont. not much ‘dialogue’ here of course but i appreciate any source of info even if 90 per cent of it is brainless drivel.
Graham, I think Jasun and his legal team are interested in this line of yours: “That link is actually how I was planning on taking down your site if you ever pissed me off too much.”
Bob, you can’t argue facts with a sophist.
Billy, you must be the all important exception to the rule. Let me know when the facts you are gathering lead you to the conclusion that Adams isn’t a worthy person to be the “leader” and representative of half a million people.
“Bob, you can’t argue facts with a sophist.”
And you can’t stop hurling petty insults.
That line of attack doesn’t have much effect on me.
Jasun,
“One could misinterpret your friendly, helpful advice as an attempting to induce fear to politically force one’s actions.”
naive? disingenuous?
Inducing fear is what politics is all about & it covers wide spectrum & if you HAVENT picked up on that fact yet welcome to grownup politics. Threat of recall is intended to induce fear in mayor & push SAs resignation. Calling for ‘nonbinding vote of confidence’ motion from Amanda fritz = fear of exposing SA to endless public humiliation on one side + fear of looking like hypocrite on the other = very clever fear based political bind for ms. fritz. Possibly losing your server is just another aspect of poltical fear. Balanced BTW by the fact that in a legal case youd most likely have to subpoena IP addys from every anti recall voice on blogtown who might have bookmarked that link, which doesnt make me very comfortable.
Which i suspect was intentional, but who knows. as noted elsewhere my imagination can be lively, as can my skepticism & cynicism. have found these traits valuable in political street fights & suspect you are well trained in there use as well.
Again Billy, I’d direct your attention to this line from Graham: “That link is actually how I was planning on taking down your site if you ever pissed me off too much.”
How is Jasun supposed to interpret that remark?
Hey, look at all the grumpy assholes! Can we, as a culture, please be done with the whole, “Really!?” thing? Oh wait, we are? These people are hopelessly out of touch? Okay. Business as usual then. Carry on. Pip pip, guvnah.
“How is Jasun supposed to interpret that remark?”
A response to a troll for Jasuns benefit only…
interpret the remark seriously but realisticaly.
First get the damn files into a secure online location.
Second look at post with common sense. ‘was planning’ = past perfect tense = completed action. ‘was planning’ = ‘not planning anymore’. ‘if you ever pissed me off too much’ clearly means jason DIDNT piss grahom off too much or else graham would not have given jason the tip.
3, should the server get hit the overt acts to hit it wouldnt be found in mercury/strangers computer records anyway – would be traced back from server if traceable at all – so dragging graham /blogtown into investigation would be waste of time.
jasuns crack legal team however will have figured all that out already.
Ok Ok,
I told myself that I was not going to post anymore
but just wanted to leave on two points.
Bob R. has done a great service to the readers of this blog. I feel that his perseverance has resulted in a much clearer understanding of the issues that surround Sam Adams and his actions. I get the feeling that the Mercury, it’s staff and everyone else has been helped by seeing that this issue is not just about actions, but consequences of actions, consequences that involve laws and lies. Thank you Bob R. you have done our community a great service.
I Just want ask Bob R. one more question.
Bob, you sound like a bright young lad. You sound like you get around a fair bit, likeyou have meetings around town, visit clients on location….
The next time you are in a meeting, excuse yourself and go to the bathroom. Take your time, enjoy yourself, wash your hands…then just before you reenter the meeting look at your watch, note the time. Enter the room and say “I just kissed someone in the bathroom”. Please tell us how long it took them to escort you to the curb.
“Enter the room and say “I just kissed someone in the bathroom”. Please tell us how long it took them to escort you to the curb. ” at least its not all about sex or morality.
See billy, this is why I question the integrity of you guys sometimes (okay, quite frequently.)
Grahams sentence clearly says “A”. Any english-speaking human being with eyeballs knows that his sentence says “A”. Why? Because it’s written clearly enough, and what is says is “A.”
But you invest three paragraphs, including parsing the verb tense, to claim that a sentence that clearly says “A” actually doesn’t say “A” at all.
Now, I know that you know that “A” means “A”, so when you claim it doesn’t, I can only conclude that you’re being intentionally deceptive in the service of some position you want to defend.
That’s why I question the integrity of you and others around here. You know it says “A.” I know that you know it says “A”. Graham knows it says “A.” Jasun knows it says “A.” Why do we have to go through this little dance?
Vert, your proposed experiment sounds interesting, however there are some flaws:
1. What people do in the bathroom is private, and is not usually announced, whatever it is. I wouldn’t go back to a meeting and declare “I just took a nasty dump in the bathroom” either.
2. The statement would be a lie, because it is highly unlikely that I would have actually kissed someone in the bathroom — you are asking me to lie to conduct this experiment.
3. There is a high likelihood that people would work out the context/overtones of such a remark, and treat it as a joke, in which case it would get a laugh (perhaps an uncomfortable laugh), but not an escort to the curb.
However, if you really want to know whether and if I get escorted to the curb, and how long it takes to occur, and are willing to give me your full contact information so I can share the results with your personally, I’ll try it.
Blabby, I thought billy actually quite clearly layed out my internal thought process. If I had truly been planning on doing such a thing, I would not have given the recall people a heads up on their bad website design. It was not intended as a threat.
But as always, you exemplify willful ignorance.
thanks Graham, I figured you write too well to screw up verb tenses & are too smart to announce a plan you intended to pursue. Also to subtle to use ‘political fear’ in such a ham handed way…
BTW jasun,i notice people lining up at council meetings to trash Adams in spite of warnings on your site about need for anonymity. Do they KNOW they are on therecord now? do they know mayors rep for revenge? THE CITY KNOWS WHO THEY ARE NOW. SAM ADAMS KNOWS WHERE THEY LIVE. And your PAC will bring more exposure.
if these folks know all this they are showing admirable courage.
Bob R.
As per your 11:22 posting:
1, No, not everything that happens in bathrooms are private. If you were to take a huge dump on someone else—that’s not private.
2, No, I am not asking you to lie. It is called a scenario or an experiment. Lots of people do it all the time. Fireman and EMT’s don’t show up to snap exercises and say “hay you lied to me, you said there was a fire, no fair”. Lots of people get placebos in medical trials, that why it is called an experiment. If you don’t want to run it as a blind experiment (or a lie as you put it), arrange to meet someone.
3, There is a high likelihood that even if it was taken as a joke. Protocols would be put in motion and everyone I know would be summarily suspended pending investigation or contracts would be immediately terminated. Any company the size of the city of Portland would have your ass on the street in five seconds, no exceptions.
I really want to know what happens to you if you do this and no I am not going to give you my personal information. If you feel free enough to share your opinions with us on the internet, why don’t you feel free enough to share your experiences?
BTW, I have ran this scenario past many people. In only one case did I come across someone who felt it was OK; but the Ace of Hearts had already worked out the legal problems.
Vert, I really fail to see what your proposed experiment has to do with anything.
I think you’re trying to make some sort of comparison to Adams kissing Breedlove in the bathroom at City Hall. But what does that have to do with someone announcing their personal business in a meeting?
My point is, and every single personal director will agree with me on this, even the one at the Mercury, — Kissing at the work site is not personal business — it’s grounds for firing.
“Kissing at the work site is not personal business — it’s grounds for firing.”
That’s entirely untrue — there may be rules about employee-employee kissing, but not about kissing another individual who doesn’t work there.
Beyond that, I worked at a company for over 10 years where the boss’s dad (an investor) regularly kissed and even bedded down with the part-time bookkeeper, and everyone thought it was sweet.
Ok, go ahead — do it. let us know what happens.
I double dog dare you.
Vert, you are grossly mis-informed. First, what the fuck is a personal director? Is that like a life coach?
Second, the only thing that you could get fired for is if the situation created a hostile or uncomfortable work environment. Adams’s actions at the time did not do this.
Third, Adams couldn’t be fired. You don’t fire elected officials. You impeach them or recall them.
Fourth, your entire “experiment” is bunk. What is it testing? The kissing? Or the announcing to people that you did something that isn’t any part of their business and they would never know about unless someone told them?
Hi again Vert –
Not sure if this will get posted, as it’s been a couple of weeks since the last comment, but here goes…
I actually tried the experiment at my last big meeting the other day. There were about a dozen people immediately within earshot. I exclaimed “I just kissed someone in the bathroom.” I got laughs… as I suspected the comment was treated as a joke. I did not get escorted to the curb.
Bob,
You are a brave man. I am very glad you were not shown the curb. I would have. From time to time I work at the State Capitol, I have seen the people fired for less. I almost lost my job one time for making a co-worker, “uncomfortable”. My brother, who works for the city, has almost lost his job for less and has seen other lose their job for less. Derrik Foxworth was fired by Sam Adams for less. I am very happy you did not lose your contract/job over my dare. If you worked at the City, Intel, for the State, the Mercury… you would have been shown the door. I have seen it and almost been the victim of it myself.