Disclaimer: The one and only time I met Sam, I wasn’t sure who he was or why he “had to go work the room.” Sam did strike me as exceedingly bright and a good conversationalist. After he got up, I asked the colleague on my other side who he was vis-a-vis his need to “work the room.” I learned he was a city councilman, though it hadn’t come up in our conversation. Since then, I have neither been party to, nor have I been involved in any of his campaigns, official work on behalf of taxpayers or his public/private website activity. I speak only for myself.

"Is there an emotional difference between a 15 year-old, a 16 year-old or a 17 year-old?"

Yes. And 18 year olds. And 19.

It was a long time ago, but at 18 I owned my own business, attended college, lived alone, and (gasp, wait for it), was somewhat active in politics, sought out sexual activity with people not just around my own age, but older than me... even one of whom I actually knew, but did not have sex with, prior to my turning 18.

The mentoring relationship adds extra wrinkles and would should have been a factor, but to make a blanket assumption that 18-year-olds who were once 17 cannot have sex with adults they already know is silly and demeaning to plenty of competent, emotionally mature 18-year-olds out there.

Kelly you have no idea whether he had sex with an underaged person. No one knows that but him and the person he had sex with until such time as an investigation occurs.

Until it's proven that he did it's none of your damn business.

As far as I'm concerned the situation would be the same if it was a young woman. Since we have applied this arbitrary number of 18 to something defined as "adulthood", as long as each person is over 18 then it is no one's business but there's.

Some people want to be judgmental about the age difference but they are just being puritanical in their own way and since this is, happily, a free country their opinion has no bearing. Up until very recently old men were paired up with much much younger women as a rule. There was nothing wrong with it then and there's nothing wrong with it now. No matter what you think.

If a 42 year old and an 18 year old can find some happiness together, if even for just a short while, then who the hell do you think you are telling them that they are wrong?

Hear hear.

Monica Lewinski was in her 20's and made it known before leaving Portland that she planned to don her "presidential kneepads." She was not a teenager.

To be clear, I was voicing support for the original post, not the moral relativism and blatant disregard for public opinion that has been expressed by others.

Actually, you can, provided the two (or more) parties are consenting adults. It's not for any of us to say what's appropriate, no matter what the age difference.

"blatant disregard for public opinion" ???

So now only Sam critics are allowed to post an opinion? If people speak up with even mild support of Sam, it's "blatant disregard"?

Save me from the herd.

I think it's just hilarious how so many of those who still support Sam are trying to paint this as an attack on sexuality and sexual behavior.

It's not about sex. It's about lying politicians. We're supposed to be trying to turn the page on that, nationally, I thought.

But I guess it's OK if it's a liberal Portlander...

Somehow I bet that the majority of those defending Sam voted for Obama and his anti-partisan message, and yet appear to be practicing partisanship in its worst form.

For the record, I voted for both politicians mentioned in this comment. I'm just disappointed in the former, and don't feel like I can trust him anymore. Not because he's gay, but because he orchestrated a series of lies and smears.

This would have played out very differently if Bob Ball had not been the source of the original rumor. Not only was he considering running againt Adams, he is well-known as a notorious and unreliable gossip, always telling stories about people that aren't true.

Is Mark Wiener going to testify under oath about his cover-up work for Adams? The probable cause is pretty clear. http://wweek.com/editorial/3510/12093/

Sam Adams needs to resign. Now.

I'm disgusted by the apparent willingness to just let this one go. As if it's not that bad.

As if we can criticize Republicans yet defend Democrats for the same morally depraved conduct and then be surprised to be called hypocrites.

As if we keep lower standards for our own, or for gays, or for people we like. As if that is doing them any favors.

I have never believed the first defense of every molester - the claim that they waited until he or she was 18. I believe it even less coming a man who deliberately and systematically lied about everything else surrounding the relationship.

And even if 18 is a magic number where sex with someone three times your age becomes socially acceptable, it is not socially acceptable for someone in power to abuse his power and authority as a mentor to encourage or extort a sexual relationship and then lie about it, deliberately and repeatedly, to the people he has sworn to serve.

I liked Sam. Thought he was charming and smart. Now I think he is charming, but not so smart. Now he's an embarrassment to the Democratic party, to Portland, to Oregon, to everyone who has ever worked with him, and to the ideals that we stood up for just two days ago - ideals of honesty and transparency and government that we can trust.

Sam Adams needs to resign. Now.

Sam Adams relationship with Breedlove was one of a mentor. Political mentors are like teachers, consular’s and members of the clergy. They cannot become sexually intimate with their charges. Mayor Sam Adams violated that trust relationship and like a pastor or teacher that has intimate relations with their parishioners or students, he must go.

Forget about the alternative lifestyle and the age difference. Focus instead on the dishonesty, and particularly on his grooming of an otherwise honest scout to lie for his mentor's career. How can one in public office function effectively without credibility and public trust?

...and was, in fact, a predator...

Why is it when a teenage guy wants to date a teenage girl, the girl's parents -- knowing full well he'd probably fuck a balled up pair of socks if it came down to it -- are quick to warn her that "he only has one thing on his mind"? Yet in this case the teenage guy's attraction and desire could only be evinced under "predatory" duress? Please. It's this kind of bigoted and puritanical attitude that absolutely justifies Sam's actions.

The fact that hardly anyone calling for Sam's head because "it's not about the sex, it's about the lie" can stop themselves from mentioning the sex over and over again only magnifies that, yes, it really is about the sex.

Uh, the "teenager" was an adult at the time. And it's said that the "teenager" initiated the relationship.

The headline to this post could just as accurately read, "Memo to 40-something pols: you can’t f&k adults." Which is absurd. You can f&k whoever is willing, as long as they're of legal age. If you don't like 18 as the age of consent, then lobby to get the law changed. Otherwise, all this whining is pure h&p*cr!cy.

And as for the horrid lie, no one owes third parties the truth when it comes to love and sex. Sam's big mistake was apologizing for it.

Just a reminder. When someone says,

It's not about sex. It's about lying.

...it's about the sex.

We went through this in 1998. You're not going to fool us with that one again.

I give this fake sex-scandal until Valentines' Day at the latest, by which time the anti-Democrat media will have found some other whipping boy to chase. Then, if not before, Mayor Adams can settle down to the hard work of leading the city.

Assuming, that is, his own party doesn't feel obligated to through yet another rising star to the wolves in order to appease the Neopuritan chickenshits.

This is getting old, sticking an inflammatory phrase in the title, after the issue has been hashed out on another thread, though the motivation eludes me. Memo to Kelly: It was about lying, not screwing.

If you're giving us a lecture on anthropology or sociology or psych, introduce yourself properly. Otherwise, you have no business or qualifications to be saying who can have sex with whom. Cody stuck to something we can speak to: blatant dissembling and poor judgment in his handling of the matter, after the fact.

At the end of the day, this is about the "tyranny of the majority" that progressives so often disparage. What you're saing is politically valid. We're going to cause trouble for you if you do this; it is unacceptable. This is one of the few times that that tyranny explicitly raises it's head and shouts, "yo, here I am; you had better do what I say, or else...". You just don't like it, so he had better not do it.

Note to Americans in general: if you don't know what you're talking about, shut the f*ck up! The era of "but I can say it louder", or, "I know this much; I can hurt you", is over.

Anne, I'm having trouble seeing you up there on top of that horse.

I think T.A. nailed it. Sam doesn't need to resign. I'm 30 and if any of my friends asked me if I screwed an 18 year old I'd probably lie about it too if I had done it. The only people who would freak out would be the women I know who would tell me I was creepy or something along those lines. The men would probably chuckle and congratulate me when the women aren't around. I'm not weird either, go type "Barely 18" into your google search bar and see what I mean.

I don't care if he lied about sex. Everyone does it. If I ask you something about your sex life I don't expect an answer. If you'd like to prove me wrong Anne I'd love to find a lie detector machine and hook you up to it one afternoon and answer questions about your sex life, what turns you on and who you've had sex with. Then we're going to put the entire interview up on every news station in Portland. You cool with that?

And I don't want to hear any of that, "he's a public servant" whiny BS. Bedroom details are off limits.

And no this is not like Mark Foley. Mark Foley sent sexually explicit text messages, e-mails, etc... to verifiable underage boys. What we know of this so far is that Sam did nothing inappropriate to Beau before he turned 18 according to both of them.

"Political mentors are like teachers, consular’s and members of the clergy."

I call BS on that one.

Besides, someone just told us that this is about the lying, and not the sex. Someone just told us that those of us who are willing to forgive Sam, that when we point out the prudish sex attitudes some critics have, that we're avoiding argument.

And yet here we have another critic opening with the argument that the sexual relationship was inappropriate. If you want to make that argument, fine, Sam himself has now stated it was inappropriate at the time. But please will people stop whining that this is NOT about sex?

"Mayor Sam Adams violated that trust relationship and like a pastor or teacher that has intimate relations with their parishioners or students, he must go."

I know of at least one pastor who married a parishioner, and at least one teacher who married a former student. They are fine upstanding members of the community, and nobody thinks they should resign from anything. So there must be at least some gray area in these absolute rules you insist upon.

Wasn't this supposed to be about the lying?

It's not that Sam had an 18 year old boyfriend, I couldn't care less. The guy's done a lot of great things in his career and nothing about his personal life should change that.

It's that he lied to cover it up. I don't think the guy should resign, but I don't know if that apology is enough. He led me to believe that he WAS being smeared by bigots, and it makes me feel like a sucker for believing him. I, like most people, don't like feeling used like that.

Adams has already admitted he lied, also, about the "Mentoring" thing. He was simply trying to hook up with Breedlove. Before or after the 18th brithday doesn't matter.

And there's little doubt sex was at least discussed prior to the implementation before or after the 18th birthday.

Not unlike an adult pursuing a minor on the web.

All told Adams is unfit.

The only way he could possibly justify not resigning is with the public making it clear he would still be elected today.

THAT is clearly preposterous.

It quite possible that Adams will face criminal charges soon after he resigns this week.

As if we can criticize Republicans yet defend Democrats for the same morally depraved conduct and then be surprised to be called hypocrites.

It's called LOYALTY. Familiar concept? Dancing with the lady who brung ya? Rooting for your own team? As if we can throw our own people under the bus, and then be surprised to be called traitors and Liebermans.

I liked Sam before, and I like him now. He'll still be a good mayor, and he'll do Portland proud. Watch and see if I'm wrong.

The fundamental question here is whether following the legal standard is enough. Is simply following the letter of the law the ethical standard for elected officials? The answer is a resounding no. We look for more in public servants than skirting the law, we demand leadership. While it is perfectly legal, who among us would vote for Mel Gibson, even after all of his assurances that his drunken, vitriolic screed was a one-time mistake? His inexcusable conduct is enough to disqualify him for office, although I support his right to such outrageous statements.

Adams was within his rights (according to his version of events), but that does not make his coduct right. To, as a 40+ year old man, engage in a sexual relationship with an 18 year old is questionable. To begin such a relationship after a courtship that began when the boy is 17 is galling. And to engage in a cover-up, which includes shouting down those who attempt to discuss the relationship as spreading the worst kind homophobic lies, is downright dastardly.

Are we not well within our rights as citizens to expect better from our leaders?

Kelly Steele, your comment about Nigel Jacquiss, "a former Pulitzer Prize-winning egomaniac" is very questionable. First, he still retains his credit as being a Pulitzer Prize recipient. Secondly, from my experience I do not find Nigel at all egocentric. If anything I would judge Adams more egotistical than Nigel. I've been around both, besides familiar with their quotes, written words, etc. But I am glad you posted and it is insightful and mostly correct on the real issues.

"I don't care if he lied about sex. Everyone does it"

But that does not entitle someone to betray their common sense and judgement. Everyone does NOT do it - only those who have misguided judgement and values in the first place. I pity those who would congradulate anyone over 26 who 'did' an 18 year old. If one is that bored in thier lives to have sex with someone that young, they definately need either serious pshyc help, or a more engaging, and constructive, activity to fend off the destructive boredom.

Eric Parker helpfully reminds us yet again that, for many of the more vocal critics, this is about sex.

In Eric's world, sex between adults where the age differential is less than 8 years is OK, but 9 years differential or more is the result of people being "bored in their lives".

A modest proposal: Criminalize boredom!

What is it with our culture?

Why the fascination with personal integrity? Dignity? Why are we so obsessed with dignity? If we expect politicians to have a moral compass, how will we get any good candidates?

All politicians, from the former "I'm the decider" down to Sam, should be able to decide when we can handle the truth & when we can't. Lying about sex, weapons of mass destruction, whatever...as long as it serves your purpose, who are we - the lowly electorate - to quibble with your decision about when we can or can't trust what comes out of your mouth.

We worked for & believed in Sam & now we feel totally betrayed. I can appreciate that some think Sam shouldn't resign. I'm absolutely stunned that some have said "he should have lied & I'd lie too."

Remind me not to use you - or Sam - as role models for our kids.

Of course Adams is going to resign. Having this debate is a bit silly.

Eric Parker...you're so amazing...I'm so glad you pity me and my friends. You're like a little angel here on Earth...phwabaaaa

My 33 year old cousin married a 51 year old man. Is that gross and creepy? Is it even grosser and creepier that they now have 2 kids, a dog and a house?

Although I've met 17 year olds who seemed fully capable of judging and accepting the consequences of a sexual relationship with someone 20+ years senior AND were eagerly seeking such a relationship such as Beau appears to have done... 18 is the law. That's just the way it is.

If Sam had a relationship with Beau when Beau was 17 and 364 days, then Sam broke the law and should resign. If Sam waited til Beau was 18... then Sam was guilty of having the poor judgement to have sex with an immature but legally adult individual. I personally defend Sam and urge him not to resign if he waited til Beau was 18.

Anybody think otherwise? Post the details of your sex life and the choices you have made and defend all those choices from the mob that will immediately gather to pass judgement on you.

Sam lied about whether he had EVER had sex with BB. Bad move. He hasn't lost my trust, because I don't think politicians sex lives should be part of the political discussion -- unless part of their political platform includes speaking out and legislating against a practice that they conduct themselves. I'm disgusted by the people who spent $70 million of my tax money investigating Clinton's sex life. I'm disgusted by the muckrakers who didn't bother to interview BB before airing these accusations about Sam.

But since Sam chose to lie AND encourage BB to lie, he dug his own grave. He should have come clean about his sexual relationship with a consenting adult and left it up to the rest of us to ridicule the bejeebus out of the scum who made it part of the political discussion.

It's the coverup. It's always the coverup.

It's pretty obvious a super majority of Sam's base wants him gone immediately. Along with just about every other Portlander. The micro minority who cling to an imaginary ability that Sam can retain any trust may not be much larger than the number of people Sam has dated. Their upcoming support rally's should be interesting to say the least.

After his resignation, what's the next step? How soon to an election?

No Howard, it's not obvious a super majority of Sam's base wants him gone. What's obvious is that there are a bunch of completely non-scientific TV polls that show those kinds of results. That doesn't mean anything. It only means that people who are willing to go out of their way to go to the TV stations web site have that opinion. And maybe not even that if they can mess with IP detection which is very easy to do.

The only way we will ever know if a super majority of Portlanders want him gone is if we have a recall vote in six months which is the legal time limit on that particular solution. Or if we have a normal re-election vote in 4 years.

It cracks me up that someone knows what "a super majority of Sam's base" is thinking. Howard, now that you've spoken up for the rest of us, don't be afraid to speak for yourself.

To the folks who think that politicians need to share their sex lives with us, I hope you don't mind sharing all the details of your sexual choices so we can decide whether you're fit to comment here? The LEGAL details, of course. :)

The fact that Sam Adams could have been – should have been – a mentor to this young man, and was, in fact, a predator, says something incredibly meaningful about his character and his judgment.

Did I miss something? Predator??

I want to think that this should all be a private matter, but its not. And if it was a 42 year old woman with an 18 year old guy she was mentoring, there would be incredible outrage.

I really feel that I need to know more about the sexual choices that commenters here have made. I hope that none of you will mind sharing this information? This is a public forum and the privilege of commenting here is a public trust.

Only the LEGAL details of course.

OK Ben. I am game. I will bite.

45 Married Only with my wife.

Some would call me a prude, but that doesn't bother me one bit.

And 18 year olds do not excite me - they sometimes annoy me.

This isn't just about the lies.

Sam Adams, the mayor of Portland, asked (I will refrain from saying 'pressured') an 18-year old working in a political job to lie on his behalf to protect his own reputation.

Then he decided to come back to Portland and protect himself, thereby sacrificing an opportunity to speak to congress on behalf of the city while congress is considering how to allocate $250 billion in infrastructure funds.

Sam put himself ahead of the city. He put his own interests ahead of those of someone who was looking for guidance. That's the beginning and end as far as I'm concerned.

And Sam's behavior in the whole matter is very reminiscent of his predecessors and the people he learned politics from=- the ones who governed this city out the back door- Neil Goldschmidt (everyone knows his scandal) and Vera Katz (who regularly covered up the shadow govt. she established with the PDC).

Portland has had 30-plus years of this. Are we going to sit back when confronted with it and say that this is OK?

I'm not.

"This isn't just about the lies."

But someone else was just insisting that it was JUST about the lies!

And Sam's behavior in the whole matter is very reminiscent of his predecessors and the people he learned politics from=- the ones who governed this city out the back door- Neil Goldschmidt (everyone knows his scandal) and Vera Katz (who regularly covered up the shadow govt. she established with the PDC). Portland has had 30-plus years of this. Are we going to sit back when confronted with it and say that this is OK?

Everything you just said about his predecessors was known/alleged/discussed/debated openly before the election.

@Admiral:It's called LOYALTY

Just curious, what would Sam have to do for you to call for him to leave office?

This story was about sex when it first came up. Sam Adam chose to make it about his actions when he entered into a conspiracy to lie and cover up his lies.

Bob Ball initially went to Randy Leonard about this. It was Leonard and Adams who went to the press to stop these "rumors." They brought this on themselves because they chose to lie.

If Sam Adams is a rising star in the Democratic Party, then the Democratic Part is in a shitload of trouble.

Demcorats are in power now for one reason only, the incomeptence, arrogance, negligence and overreaching by the Republicans.

The Democratic shills who are now enabling Sam Adams deceit are leading the Democratic Party toward the same kind of implosion we just witnessed among the Republicans.

Nice work, you blinded partisan hacks.

Great post Kelly.

"Just curious, what would Sam have to do for you to call for him to leave office?"

I'll answer for myself -- I'd call for him, or anyone, to go if they do something like: Start a war, take a bribe, harass constituents, constitutional violations, withholding evidence in a court of law... you know, the things that go along with actual government behavior and policy. It wouldn't necessarily have to be an illegal act, but it would have to be of greater relevance to the office than the current scandal.

Is immediate resignation really the only remedy at this time?

"The Democratic shills who are now enabling Sam Adams [...] Nice work, you blinded partisan hacks."

So is everyone who thinks that Sam shouldn't necessarily resign over this a shill / partisan hack, or just those who speak up about it?

Are those talking about the 'mentoring' aspect of this relationship forgetting that Sam has confessed that there was no mentor-protege relationship - this was just more cover-up for the organized lie.

http://www.oregonlive.com/portland/index.ssf/2009/01/adams_lied_about_mentoring_you.html

Let's try to get our facts straight before we run away with emotion.

@Bob R.

So you are okay with lying?

The worst kind of Democrat: Partisan enablers who refuse to hold their leaders accountable.

Sam Adams lied in order to get elected, by his own admission. His election was a fraud. The position of mayor in Portland in now a moot position. Who's going to believe anything he says? Yesterday Adams cancelled his speech at PSU on the topic "Ethics and social responsibility". This is just the most obvious of situations where his opinion would have been met with scowls and laughter. What business seeking to uphold its good name would want "Portland, Oregon" on its letterhead while Adams is mayor of Portland? Will the Portland School Board demand that Adams not enter Portland Schools unless accompanied by a monitor? Do you believe anyone in this country will take Portland seriously as long as we allow Adams to be our elected leader? Each day he continues in office the black eye on the face of homosexuality gets blacker. If Sam doesn't quit, he will be recalled. Why do more damage to Portland and the gay community in the meantime? You people supporting Adams slay me. You're playing the "gay card." It's not right to play victim when you are the perpetrator. If you support Adams now, please support any future politician who grooms underage kids for sex, slanders those (Bob Ball) who tell the truth and lie in order to get elected - that includes conservative Republicans. Adams admitted to grooming the 17 year old high school student. He says he waited until the kid was 18. I don't believe him. Adams hired Amy Ruiz to a city job to shut her up. Adams coerced the kid to lie - nice role model. Adams is scum and those of you who still support him are tainted with scum. Bob Ball for mayor!

I want to think that this should all be a private matter, but its not. And if it was a 42 year old woman with an 18 year old guy she was mentoring, there would be incredible outrage.

You've just described the "Mrs. Robinson" fantasy in which a younger man gets to get it on with an older and more experienced woman. I don't remember a whole lot of rage about the inappropriateness of The Graduate. So no, I'm not going out on a limb and saying there would be incredible outrage. There wouldn't.

For me, it's not that Sam had sex with an 18 year old.

And it's not that he lied about it.

It's that he aggressively went on the attack against Bob Ball playing the victim card to great effect to destroy Bob Ball's reputation.

Sam Adams had an easy answer when questions circulated about this originally. "I've never broken the law. And I won't answer any questions about my sex life. They're none of anybody's business."

Or he could have just lied about it and moved on.

It's the aggressive attack against Ball that leads me to think that Sam doesn't have the ethics to be Mayor or have my trust again.

George W. Bush was responsible for the deaths of hundreds of thousands and injuries to many many more. He decimated the Constitution and tortured in our name.....and served out his term. It's not a crime to think with your dick. Keyword: Barney Frank.

So you are okay with lying?

No, I'm absolutely NOT OK with lying. I am, however, willing to consider the complete circumstances and reach a level of forgiveness in some cases. In this case, I don't see immediate resignation as the necessary remedy. I also don't particularly care for the expansion of this issue beyond the lie and into prudishness/homophobia, which it appears many (but not all) of the vocal critics are doing.

How about censure and move on?

Which brings up a question: How many people currently calling for immediate resignation are members of the group MoveOn.org? Should such persons renounce their MoveOn memberships before demanding Sam's immediate resignation?

It IS about sex. Let's face it, we live in a very puritanical society that illogically gets completely bent out of shape over sex.

He lied, true. And so will politicians from now on in to forever until people stop reacting the way many of you are to the simple reality that our political leaders have sex lives.

I did not vote for Adams, I've never met Adams, and I don't even live in the city. But I'm not embarrassed that he is a fellow Democrat, nor do I believe he is an embarrassment to our party. I'm embarrassed by all of the Democrats who are reacting to this like it is the world's greatest evil that has ever been afflicted upon us all. Be outraged about something truly garish, like our 9% unemployment rate.

Bob R., Admiral Naismith and all the other liberal apologists,

Where was your willingness and readiness to forgive when it came to Larry Craig?

Where was your willingness and readiness to forgive when it came to David Vitter?

Where was your willingness and readiness to forgive when it came to Mark Foley?

Your continued apologies for Sam "Chicken hawk" Adams displays just how hypocritical and how bereft of morals each and everyone of you is.

I see you guys bearing the torch to call for resignation when it is a Republican, but you hypocrites call for time, willingness to consider the circumstances, and a readiness to forgive when it is a Democrat.

Do yourself a favor and recuse yourself from this discussion or continue with your modus operandi:

Lynch the Republican in a scandal, but never hold the same standard for your own.

To "YoungOregonMoonbat", since you asked me specifically by name:

Where was your willingness and readiness to forgive when it came to Larry Craig?

I never demanded that Larry Craig step down. I don't care what he does in private, and I don't think the penalties for foot tapping should be so grave. I do take issue with his continued support of bad policies, including anti-gay policies, but that's not sufficient for me to demand his immediate resignation.

Where was your willingness and readiness to forgive when it came to David Vitter?

I never demanded that David Vitter step down. I don't care what he does in private, and I don't think the penalties for diaper hookers should be so grave. I do take issue with his continued support of bad policies, including anti-gay policies, but that's not sufficient for me to demand his immediate resignation.

Where was your willingness and readiness to forgive when it came to Mark Foley?

I never advocated that Mark Foley be given a chance to stay in office. Mark Foley was caught soliciting illegal activity, while on the job, with multiple subordinates working in the same setting, with congressional pages coming forward alleging offenses over a period of 10 years.

I'm sorry that your little fishing expedition for ideological inconsistency / hypocrisy on my part didn't bear any fruit. Better luck next time.

I've got no idea whether Adams had sex with a minor. I know that if Bob Ball and others had this suspicion they should have presented their concerns and their evidence to the police for a proper investigation. The fact that these allegations were made to the public during a campaign throws that whole lying part of it into question. Ball's decision to go public was sleazy. Had Adams told what he now says is the truth during the campaign, he may well have lost because the investigation would end after election day and enough voters would have assumed his guilt, as many seem to be doing now. If he did have sex with another consenting adult, then no one should have asked the question in the first place. Frankly, I'm not sure if his public position requires he tell the truth when faced with scurrilous accusations.

Let's let the AG do his job and investigate this. If he had sex with a minor, then he's a disgusting nasty man who should go to jail. If not, then we need to wonder why we are so ready to burn him for behavior that, judging from the women on the arms of national politicians and media figures, doesn't seem that rare in the straight world.

Where was your willingness and readiness to forgive when it came to Larry Craig?

Where was your willingness and readiness to forgive when it came to David Vitter?

Where was your willingness and readiness to forgive when it came to Mark Foley?

Larry Craig actively pursued and voted against legislation that would give homosexuals equal rights. He was a HUGE proponent of anything anti-gay while being gay himself. That's why he got crucified...big fat hypocrite.

David Vitter is a moralist. He tries to force his evangelical moral views onto everyone else. He espouses to be a devout and moral husband and viciously went after people who did not share his morals. The whole time he was buying hookers. That's not very Christian of him.

Mark Foley got a number of bills through against exploiting children, particularly child pornography. He was just sending sexually explicit text messages and suggestive e-mails to underage boys (that's under 18 for you) that worked on the hill and asking them for pictures. He had been doing this for 10 years and the Republican leadership had known about it and swept it under the rug. So they had a exploiter of children in their midst, knew about it and didn't do anything about it.

Sam Adams did it with an 18 year old man who didn't work for him. Yeah Moonbat...none of your examples are anywhere near the same thing.

Bob R. and Garrett,

I was wanting your reaction to get a full grasp of the depth of double standards that you both have. What I have learned is this:

1. If you hold yourself to some sort of ethical or religious standard, then you are guilty from the start.

2. If you are a gay, agnostic, atheist or a combo of the three who doesn't believe in being held accountable to U.S. majority standards then U.S. majority "neopuritan" standards do not apply to you in the midst of a scandal.

I appreciate your responses. It helps those like me who do believe in creating a set of standards that we can hold politicians accountable to.

Questions:

1. As partisans should Republicans always be guilty before proven innocent?

2. As partisans should Democrats always be presumed innocent before being proved guilty?

3. If you hold yourself to a set of ethical standards should society treat you any differently, then another who has no set of ethical standards or a set of ethical standards that is contrary to the majority of U.S. citizens?

Thanks.

I give this fake sex-scandal until Valentines' Day at the latest, by which time the anti-Democrat media will have found some other whipping boy to chase. Then, if not before, Mayor Adams can settle down to the hard work of leading the city.

This is not about Repubes whipping up angst against a gay Democrat. I am a progressive Democrat who wants Adams to resign now. He is unfit for office. His ego is alarmingly large. Listen to him talk about how he will be the one to decide whether it's the best thing for Portland for him to resign or not. Add this latest problem to the long list of Sam Adams goofs and character flaws: his fiscally irresponsible support of the tram, his betrayal of Tom Potter, his support for moving the old Sauvie Island bridge to a new home over the 405 freeway, his constant angling for the media spotlight, his temper tantrums at the office, and so on.

Watching him these last few years, it was apparent he was running for the Mayor's office from the moment he took office as a city councilman. Portland needs as its mayor a man of integrity and balanced good judgment. Sam Adams is neither.

Resign today, please!

Why do politicians get hammered over having sex. Simple.

Democrats = liars Republican = hypocrites

Moonbat, you clearly didn't read my first sincere reply to your interrogatives closely, or you are incapable of comprehending it. Either way, your subsequent nonsense doesn't follow at all.

Nice poll. Just the way Sam would want it handled. Manipulation to mislead.

Here's the one from bojack

Should Sam Adams resign as mayor of Portland?

Yes 83% 754 No 17% 154

For resignation Oregonian Tribune Just Out WW Portland Police Association Marc Abrams 80% of voting Portlanders

Howard, since you just copy/pasted your entire comment from a different (and more relevant) thread, I'm sure you won't mind if I paste my reply in here as well.

<hr/>

Thanks, Howard, for commenting on one baseless, unscientific web poll, by referring us to a different one.

How useful. How enlightening. How did we ever get along without web polls?

Here's the one from bojack

Should Sam Adams resign as mayor of Portland?

Yes 83% 754 No 17% 154

The only thing that's funnier than this poll is you thinking Jack Bog's readers are a fair sampling of Portland. That's like putting a poll on a Sarah Palin fan site and asking who they think should have been President. Obama or Sarah Palin...

What's sad is that we (still) live in a society that is so puritanical/hypocritical that Sam had to lie about a legal sexual relationship. If the law says 18 is legal that should be the end of it. But it isn't, is it? The world will be laughing at us again...

I beg to differ with your Headline.

You can f#$% teenagers, as long as they are 18. Or 17 or 16 in many other states.

The worst kind of Democrat: Partisan enablers who refuse to hold their leaders accountable.

Another wee hint: failure to call for the death penalty for parking violations is not refusal to hold people accountable.

We hold our elected officials accountable at the polls. If a better Democrat wanted to primary Adams next time around, I'd consider voting for the new candidate, depending on everything Adams does during the rest of his term.

On the other hand, a candidate who chooses to run on the anti-worker, anti-choice, anti-science, anti-freedom Republican Party ticket reveals a character flaw more irredeemable than any private sexual behavior.

Someone serves his city, and its people with great loyalty for 16 years, makes one doozy of a mistake, and there are those of you who immediately throw him to the wolves... Why?

Because he had sex with a legal adult. Yes-I do think there is a serious double standard here. OK-I'm going to say it.. If Sam Adams were hetro, and the same occured, yes there would be alarm about the deciet, then it would fade away, and like Clinton, he would leave office with a 65% approval ratng.

I've known a number of self proclaimed liberals, who are democrats, who are really cool on the issues, until it comes to the gay issue. Their progressive side ends there...

Think about it, Sam Adams waited until this young man became a legal adult. No law broken there... After 16 years of service and he was about to become mayor, he screwed up-he lied. He didn't screw a minor, he didn't commit the act of pedophelia-(something one of you made sure to mention in comparison) he made a human error. Under pressure, he made a judgement error-becuase he knew the puritanical crowd would go ballistic-guess he was right. I wish everyone screaming for his resignation would take an inventory of their own lives, and determine if all decisions you've made have always been that outstanding.

For the value judgement crowd, if you don't approve of the age difference-can you keep it to yourself-because its really none of your business. Seriously, whats with the moral majority stuff? You clearly have no idea how many 18 year old men pursue older men. If they were 17, 16, 15, or so on this would be a major issue, and then the term pedophelia would apply. It does not apply when the 18 year old man is of voting age, or old enough to run off and get himself killed to "protect our freedom".

So-no Sam Adams should not resign... He messed up, and yes he lied. He lied about who he slept with, and the nature of a relationship. Most people want their privacy respected, yet those calling for his head are upset becaues he did not come clean about who he slept with. He slept with a legal adult-its not like he got a blow job in the Mayors office. Yet many of the resign now folks, defended Clinton when he did the same. I guess thats different...

I think your arguments are mostly subjective moral judgements and I think you're wrong. But thanks for playing!

I have been all over tha map on this, but I have finally decided that while I did support Adams initially, I think he should resign.

Ironically, it has everything to do with what I feel is a new chapter of political accountability we are entering with President Obama. This smacks of the old days when we support our party before our country (or in this instance, community).

Adams' crime, I feel, is this: he asked that young man to lie for him and it may well be an abuse of power. There should be ZERO tolerance in this new era we are entering.

Yet many of the resign now folks, defended Clinton when he did the same. I guess thats different...

It's actually not. He got the BJ from a White House intern (Breedlove was not ever an intern or employed by the city or Adams) and he lied under oath to a grand jury (Adams lied to some members of the media who were obviously going to angle the story that he was nailing Breedlove when he was 17).

It's not that I don't agree with you about the resigning bit. I do. I just want to make it clear than many who defended Clinton were defending a guy who actually committed a crime by lying to a grand jury. Adams has committed no crime.

If people want equality, let them have it.

Were this a 40something man molesting a teenage girl whatever it was called or whatever she said he would be a scumbag, and if he lied about it he would be a perjurer.

This guy should do the right thing and resign, and if he does not then he should be booted out by the state he swore to faithfully represent. Him being gay is not a reason he is being prosecuted, nor is it an excuse. He took advantage of a kid and then lied about it. PERIOD.

He should resign. If he will not resign, he must be thrown out. The message that will be sent to other predators and their victims if that is not done is too horrifying to contemplate.

I suppose it's progress that this is basically a sex scandal, not a gay sex scandal.

Is there an impeachment or censure equivalent (similar to what was done to Bill Clinton) at the local government level? If so, let's put some kind of censure/official bad mark on this guy's record for lying and then move on.

The more people demand his resignation, the more people moralize about his personal failings, the more people claim to be personally insulted by something that has nothing to do with them, the dumber we all look.

http://www.kgw.com/perl/common/surveys/vote_now.pl

What should happen next regarding the Sam Adams scandal?

Resign immediately 66.77% 2389 votes

Investigate fully

14.81% 530 votes Stay in office 18.45% 660 votes

3578 Total Votes

In our fair (much fairer) state to the North, Washington, the age of consent is 16 years old.

Just something to think about.

Your title is not true.

Enough with the sex police.

Howard continues to post links to useless, unscientific web polls. Is the over-reliance on web polls a sign of the intellectual dishonesty of critics like Howard, a failure of the media to act responsibly, or both?

Why has nobody asked the simplest, most "normal" question about all this:

Does Sam having a relationship with an intern constitute sexual harassment?

In most places I've worked, whatever training you get pretty much says, "Consenting adults can do anything they want outside of work, unless one of them is the other's boss. Then, it becomes a potentially "hostile work environment," either for the junior partner or the other people who report to said boss. ("Gee, does this mean I have to f*** someone to get ahead in this company?")

Mr. Adams, as the boss, ultimately, of all city employees, should know what the rules are, strict and implied, that govern conduct in the workplace and between coworkers. Every manager needs to, or they are a lawsuit waiting to happen.

Now, the question then becomes, if Sam being an idiot about Personnel Management 101 is enough to justify a recall, or enough to justify not voting for him next time, or enough to make us roll our eyes and hope this is the only thing he's stupid about. Or if lying about being an idiot (and thus depriving us of the chance to vote against him for that reason the first time) is enough to justify any of the above.

Personally, I think that lying about sex is something that, as many posters have noted, is something that would disqualify a heck of a lot of us from positions of responsibility. (No, honey, I don't mean me. Really.)

But not knowing when to keep it zipped, because your that person's boss, is a level of stupidity that starts to call the fitness to serve into question, at least if basic HR is a big part of the job. For Bubba, really, it wasn't that central, but for P-town's mayor, it might be a bit more significant, day-in and day-out.

Bottom line--politicians, step AWAY from the intern. NOW.

'Nuff said.

Does Sam having a relationship with an intern constitute sexual harassment?

Not if Beau wasn't Sam's intern, which he wasn't. Beau was the intern of a Republican in Salem.

(And, just to be clear, I don't think the relationship of any person with a potential subordinate is automatically sexual harassment... it may be grounds to raise questions and be careful, but just because a power imbalance potentially exists does not mean that a relationship should never, ever take place. Circumstances and free-will matter.)

But not knowing when to keep it zipped, because your that person's boss, is a level of stupidity that starts to call the fitness to serve into question [...]

Good thing that Sam wasn't Beau's employer, then, right?

But not knowing the basic facts of a case, while pontificating self-righteously, is a level of stupidity that calls the fitness to debate into question.

Another observation about Jaybeat's comments:

Jaybeat, by primarily focusing on the sexual relationship (and with incorrect facts), shows yet again that for him and critics like him, it's about the sex, not as other critics insist solely about the lie.

It seems that every time someone comes forward proclaiming that this issue is solely about the lies (and only Sam's lies and not anyone else's), someone else comes forward with a complaint about the sex.

TA's comments resonate with me, as someone who has provided for myself since I was 17. Why should we think of an 18 year old as a quasi-child in a case like this? (Although I'm pretty sure that Breedlove does not see himself as a victim, either.) Of course, adults can be exploited for sex on the basis of power conferred to an individual by an institution. This is bad. And power is correlated with age. But an age difference, by itself, is absolutely not enough of a reason to condemn an older person in a situation like Adams's.

When I see people conflate age difference and molestation, which I've seen by an otherwise esteemed poster in this thread, I smell hypocrisy. I hear similar comments about age difference from middle aged people who explored every nook and cranny of their sexuality from the day they turned 18, and it makes my head explode.

Maybe I'm cynical, but every relationship I have ever seen (not just me...anyone's) has some basis in an attraction to some power that the attracted does not have. Maybe you think all relationships have some degree of creepiness along these lines, but age difference between adults is just one way to roll.

You can debate whether or not Adams egregiously exploited his institutional leverage. Maybe he did (I rather doubt it), but if so, the fact that he was 42 and not 19, or even 18, makes absolutely no difference.

Did Maude molest Harold? Sorry, no.

All I can say is, as a gay man, I ALWAYS have been attracted to, and, at 37 years old in a 12.5 YEAR relationship to a man 10 years my senior, older, wiser guys have been the only ones to ring the bell.

When I was 16, 17, 18, twice as much, literally.

The male sex drive is incredibly powerful, if you haven't noticed yet. Exponentially so at this age.

I guess politicians are lucky I never had the chance to seduce them, when I was seducing men 20 years my senior back then.

Does that make my desires back then wrong? Or Beau's now? Or Sam's?

No.

Just human.

It's human sexuality, and since it is just a bit different than the "normal," people are jumping all over them about it now.

Stop the sex police. Worry about the REAL issues.

Celebrate we AREN'T the Taliban, and we live in a FREE society.

BTW, Kelly, you look like a big dyke.

Maybe you could should some solidarity for sexual minorities here?

Jealous of Sam's haircut?

Breedlove's most recent boyfriend is 39. That's another signifigant age difference. Maybe the guy just has it for older dudes? Is that bad?

I say this like Kari does when he says he created a website for a politician. I'm a male 30 year old and I've got a thing for hot older ladies that can teach me a thing or two.

How gross is that? Want me to resign or impeach me? Suck it!

This is getting to the pathetic point. I'll be happy to be at the support rally tomarrow.

It is completely legal to have sex with 18 year olds in the state of Oregon. Did he have sex with a 17 year old - I don't care. The age of consent laws are ridiculously strict. 16 and 17 year olds are just as INcompetent as 21 year olds.

Memo to Kelly: it is okay. It may not be your cup of tea, but until your allegations are proved, sex with an 18 year old is legal in this state and is okay, whether you are 20 or 120.

I'm sorry, but doesn't anyone else find it extremely ironic and hilarious that the most outrage for such "morally depraved" behavior is coming from Anne? If you're calling for someone to resign from office for doing absolutely nothing illegal then you really need to look in the mirror. Glass houses, Anne, glass houses.

I don't think the laws we pass that constitute what society deems criminal behavior are the automatic standard for moral behavior and individual prudence. I also don't think that standard becomes fixed regardless of age, status, etc.

Society makes judgements about thresholds of criminal behavior because we must weight the cost-benefit to society of regulating and prosecuting behavior. I agree that nobody should be accusing Sam of statutory rape unless evidence emerges supporting that.

However, the question of judgement for a person of his age and position in the community and his service to it's people is completely relevant.

How intoxicated does a woman have to be for a man who fucks her to commit date rape? Many women are in a dilemma where they can't really make a case for criminal date rape, but does that place the scumbag who fucks the inebriated woman on moral ground?

Many of the tactics that big corporations use to bust unions and deter organization are not illegal, but does that make them right?

It's technically legal for banks that lose billions and go to the government asking for taxpayer dollars to bail them out to give their senior execs $100M bonuses, but does that make it right?

I agree 100% with Kelly Steele. Is it criminal for a mayor to fuck a teenager? No. Does that make it right? That's up to we the people to determine and it isn't as clear a distinction as that second at midnight when Oregon law says we're old enough to fuck. That argument is soooo Neocon/Republican.

Following on my previous comment...

Enter Tort Law

Can Breedlove sue Adams and the City of Portland for emotional damages, because he was 17 and Sam (in his own words) used his position of power and "mentor" to seduce him, even if the sex act didn't happen until he was 18?

Damn right he can! Will he win? Who knows? Can his family sue, since he was a minor? Damn right! I bet Breedlove is already getting calls from PI lawyers willing to take this one on contingency.

And who will pay for that?

Am I the only one who finds the idea that the most rage against such "morally depraved conduct" is coming from Anne extremely ironic and hilarious?

Glass houses Anne, glass houses.

And I don't want to hear any of that, "he's a public servant" whiny BS. Bedroom details are off limits.

Great. When asked, he says, "that's off limits; it's not relevant". No prob. He didn't do that, so it is on the table.

People in this society just don't get the F word. The real, society dominating F word: fraud. It's not just dissembling. It's doing it for consideration. Fraud is always relevant to public service. Rephrase the dominant question, "when does fraud mean a pol should leave office" and I think you'll have a more useful answer.

It's not his first count. Explain to me why his handling of the OHSU tram isn't a case of the exact same behavior. Explain to me why those still supporting him, almost to a person, starting talking about his running for mayor as soon as he was elected to the City Council, with no track record. Explain how that unconditional support hasn't caused this problem.

This is a real defining moment for the left in Portland, imo. A large section of the left are, well, reality testing challenged. They have little sense of the difference between an idea and what is actually happening. Sam Adams continues to be a nice idea. What kind of government do you think we're going to have in the future, if we let it be known that that's all you need to become and stay Portland's mayor?

Well, color me ignorant. NOWHERE, in all the 24/7 coverage, have I heard, until now, that he wasn't Sam's intern. That DOES change this, a bit, doesn't it?? Funny how a key detail like that could be made so NOT obvious.

Bob R. said,

And, just to be clear, I don't think the relationship of any person with a potential subordinate is automatically sexual harassment... it may be grounds to raise questions and be careful, but just because a power imbalance potentially exists does not mean that a relationship should never, ever take place. Circumstances and free-will matter.

There, we disagree, and I think the law is with me on this one. It doesn't matter if everyone is perfectly happy with the boss sleeping w/his or her charges. It creates the potential for people to think that sleeping with the boss is a part of the job, necessary, a good idea, whatever. That's all that's needed, I believe, for a finding of a hostile work environment. If employee A wishes he or she were sleeping w/the boss, instead of employee B? Bingo. If one employee out of hundreds is an uptight prude and thinks its creepy? Done. If everyone is OK with it, and a new employee comes on who isn't? Buh-bye.

In this case, it sounds like Sam knows which interns to sleep with (not his). Do you?

Are we not well within our rights as citizens to expect better from our leaders?

Apparently not if you are a "Loyal Democrat" in Portland.

Tell me this, if the elected Mayor was a Republican, would all these loyal followers of Sam feel the same way? Somehow I doubt it. Just shows how much ideology runs this city. Its why I became an Independent years ago. I like to think for myself.

As for the lying..like was said above, he lied (and convinced another to lie) to protect his reputation. And to keep himself electable as mayor. And if this wasnt a big lie, why did Breedlove apologize to Ball?

I would like to state that I have nothing at stake in this as I live outside of Portland. That said, I state that I do not think that Mayor Adams needs to resign. It seems that the "open-minded" people of Portland/Oregon are so upset that Mayor Adam's lied to them yet the conversation turns consistantly to the sexual aspect of the story. This was a PRIVATE relationship between these two men. What do people not get about that? Calling Mayor Adam's a predator & saying that this furthers the myth that gay men are pedophiles is completely irresponsible. When I was in my late teens & early 20's I admit that I dated older men. It was who I was attracted to. Why is it people can't comprehend that in this situation age is irrelevent? People need to get over themselves and their own hangups. Ask yourself this, if Mayor Adam's had admitted to this relationship before the election would you have voted for him? If the answer is yes, then this relationship doesn't matter, you're most upset by the lies that were told. If the answer is no then you should probably sit down and think about why the sexual relations of other folks affects the way you vote. No matter what, Mayor Adams's should not resign. Perhaps he could be censured by the council, but let him do the job that he was elected to.

You have some good points, but let's please stop giving Dateline even an atom more undeserved credibility with the continuing vast overuse of the word "predator."

Posted by: Kevin | Jan 23, 2009 12:10:55 PM

That's a reasonable argument, IMO. But to be fair, the soundness your own judgement to fairly judge him then becomes every bit as fair game and for the very same reasons.

Goose, Gander, etc.

Kevin -

Thanks. At least we're having a valid debate, as opposed to political opprobrium and hyperbole. However, I would argue that I am not the person representing the City of Portland or the one who made this indescretion. Despite how much political hype the Republicans and Ken Starr gave to Clinton, society said that it didn't care. Portland is a very progressive city. I think I am more progressive than most self-styled progressives, and I am disgusted by this. ...And for the record, I spent a year living with an openly gay roommate. I was fine with that. The court of public opinion is not being kind to Adams for a variety of good reasons--the age, the lies, the arrogance, the lies, what it says about other Adams' controversies, etc.

If Adams really puts community over personal vanity and ambition (IMO), I think he needs to resign.

I am shocked that the only persons that have commented on this article appear to be untrained and emotional politicos. Let me set straight for the record, that I am a 35 yo, MWM, married for 6-years to a person 3-years my junior, abstained from sexual activity till the age of 22, had only 4 partners prior to marriage, all four of them in hindsight being train-wrecks – all of them within a 5-year window of my age.

Unfortunately, sex and sexuality are hot buttons – everyone has an opinion even if they are not vocal about it. I have friends both sides of the sexual isle that have had committed relationships of 10+ years and I applaud them. I am vocally opposed to any friend or acquaintance that lives an outwardly promiscuous life-style. This may be prudish, but psychologically promiscuity is not healthy. It is a lonely and abhorrent lifestyle choice.

I was very active in Stumptown politics in the mid-nineties, and know Mr. Adams by reputation and via a circle of acquaintances. I will make a personal statement here, he has never struck me either as the Machiavelli type – he comes across as a nice guy, but a bit of a droll bore. Not overly bright, not well read classically, just a person who was in the right place in the right time that everyone seems to like. I would say that his election was more of a why not, then a: Yes He Can.

When you reach this sign-post in the road, you have two possible paths to go down base upon the poorly present facts of this case. It is easy to jump to defense or accusation. Both, however, end in the same conclusion. Either Mr. Adams took this young man under his wing to talk to him / mentor and something flourished during this initial and brief interaction, or Mr. Adams and this young man just spontaneously ended up in bed.

If Mr. Adams did take this young man under his wing and had a overtly friendly relationship with this minor at the time, and then together with this minor jointly agreed to NOT have sex until the minor’s 18th birthday – as the story kind of implies … believe it or not this is an actual crime in most of this country’s 51-leagal state entities. This falls under the legal definition of either: Enticement or Luring of a Minor. These crimes are “incomplete” crimes as they do not require the act to happen prior to the 18th birthday, just the intent. It is immaterial if they waited; the criminal endeavor was planned when the second to the act was a minor. It is not OK for an adult to go scope out the local High School, find and court am adolescent mind and place it lay-a-way to let it ripen like a bottle of cheap wine; unless you prescribe to the opinions of fringe elements of “gay culture.” Emotional maturity is not material to this Crime. To me this type activity is morally repugnant, and again most states have these laws to stop this activity.

Remember that Mr. Adams says he met this young man in the 2005 State Legislative Session; this relationship would have developed quickly since the important date is June 25, 2005. I know that Oregon does have a Luring Statute on its books. I am by no means a criminal attorney, but the facts in one of the scenarios could have lead to a criminal act. Additionally to the Luring charge there would other criminal charges, potentially levied against the adult predator of this Sex-Crime against a minor.

Luring and Enticement laws, however, have very limited statutory authority. Please remember that if these are the facts of this case, whether the young man was 18 years-old or not in 2005: this relationship was a criminal Act. The majority of the states with these laws, have a hard and finite statute of limitations for criminal any charges to be filed – for example 2 to 3 years. When this story first broke in 2007, Mr. Adams now only 2-years removed from this illicit relationship, may have faced criminal prosecution for his promiscuous behavior with this young male.

The statutory window was still open, any investigation that might lead Marion or Multnomah County prosecutors to pursue charges of: Luring and Delinquency; would have absolutely destroyed his chances for anything other than a behind the scenes policy job or a gopher. Whether convicted or not, this would be true. Mr. Adams would have been guilty in the eyes of the morally outraged Public. One can see why if this scenario is true that Mr. Adams would knowingly suborn false statements from his circle of friends and deny everything. At the time this course of action, with a befuddled and inept local media, no one picked-up on it, and Mr. Adams now has skirted the statutory limitation, and avoids any criminal wrong doing. Very crafty – way to stay out of jail, however, do not pass go and do not collect your $200 just yet.

Now, in 2009 there should be little to any fall-out from any criminal prosecution. The specifics action of Mr. Adams behavior is now beyond statute, however, it was still: illegal, predatory in nature, morally repugnant, and borders on pedophilia. For the repugnance of this please remember your reaction to Woody Allen and his marriage to his long-time companion’s daughter Soon-Yi Previn. This type of activity is rarely a single event, and speaks to a major defect in a person’s moral character. If this scenario is true, Mr. Adams is damaged goods. For the good of the City of Portland, and the Community – Mr. Adams should resign and get out of public life – before more dead bodies come back to life to roost in City Hall. New York, Illinois, now Portland; who knows what is next? What else is he lying about or covering up?

Let’s look at this plausible second scenario. A young man coming into his own meets a nice likeable, openly gay politician. The two individuals hung-out and developed a Mentor / Pupil relationship. Mr. Adams and the young man in question talked about politics, that Mr. Adams had a odd / curious attraction to him, that Mr. Adams was having a mid-life crisis, that they ended up in bed together after a “night,” that it really wasn’t Mr. Adams idea for the relationship in the firs-place, and that Mr. Adams felt guilty about it and kept the young man around like a puppy for a few months; is actually a little more believable. Too bad it wasn’t the story originally. This story would never have had to be covered up. It is speaks to a slight miss-judgment of a middle-aged man, in a Society that generally now publicizes and praises “Zipless” promiscuity. In Portland, it would have been water under the Brig.

Personally my first impression is: Yuck, he had sex with a kid. At this time with the facts presented, I have a hard time believing that Mr. Adams’ action were in anyway: predatory or that Mr. Adams covets the attention and romantic affections of “Young Males” in a repetitive nature. I would be willing to chalk it up to a mid-life crisis. So I am not overly concerned of seeing him show up on Dateline, either as a child predator or as client number 5 or some escort service. Mr. Adams just comes across as very boring. Keep in mind, however, that is always seems to be the: quite, boring, good neighbors; that get 15-minutes of fame and a state issued orange jump-suit. I would be more inclined to believe this second scenario, but for the end-game that has played from Mr. Adams’ Office from the outset. It makes it hard to follow anything, it is virtually impossible for an observer to determine where the Truth is in this story of rumor and innuendo. Mr. Adams’ team screwed this one up.

First, the media articles and their statements support fact the Mr. Adams contributed to the delinquency of this minor and encouraged that staff at several Portland eating establishments to allow this minor to sit in OLCC prohibited establishments for person under the age of 21. OLCC establishments do not let employee’s under the age of 21-years, to hang out on the premises unless this is to fulfill a work requirement (like turn in their monthly Tip Allocations). Although this is a victimless crime and a common occurrence, for Mr. Adams this would have been an abuse of power, and contributes to a perceived hubris that is not tolerated in West Coast politicians. Second, there was a cover-up to defray additional investigations. Mr. Adams entered into a deceitful enterprise and spun an intricate web of lies. When you involve more than one person to lie for you this is a conspiracy … and Americans love “Conspiracy Theories” no one is ever right but everyone has their own onion. Just Google: Booth, Oswald.

If scenario number two is closer to the Truth, it was a stupid and foolish way to handle – a harmless but embarrassing situation. If it was scenario number one, one word … help. Help the City of Portland, and Help Mr. Adams as an individual. The original lie wasn’t very good. In his latest defense now he state’s the relationship was legal based upon age of consent. This defense is: weak, inappropriate, and insufficient in the light of the previously stated legal premises of: Luring and Enticement. It is merely now legat because it can not face criminal prosecution due to the lapse of the statute of limitations.

Unfortunately, Mr. Adams seems to have gotten poor legal and political advice the entire way. This adult has surrounded himself with “Friends” to be his trusted advisors, and this should be applauded at one level. However, there are few true friends to a politician. Few politicians have a Teddy Sorensen to watch their back, take exams for them in college and write a Pulitzer winning book and say they only did a little editing for them. Most friends are just political opportunists trying to keep their job and their name in the mix for a bigger and better position. Note: to Mr. Adams … fire anyone on your staff who was your “Friend” the day before the election.

The real problem is the further away you get away the event, the further down the road you get from the original lie the kernel of truth is lost. When you encourage others to become part of your lie, proctor denial after denial, coach witnesses, you are encouraging a conspiracy. Add to the stew: employing one of the investigative journalists to an insider job, not to mention some old-school Chicago shenanigans / electioneering to get your opponents discredited or disqualified; and you sour the normally fair political air of the Rose City. You don’t smell like roses, but the rose-bed before the flowers bloom. Mr. Adams is now just another politician full of promises that are hot air, not a person of firsts or changes – but rather a politician that is looking out for their own selfish interests first.

The state of Oregon and the City of Portland got caught up in the Big Blue Wave of 2008. True, politicians are human – subject to the same frailties as all of us. This election, however, tried to make people believe that you can be more that this. We expect them to embody the best of us, but more than naught we the People are always disappointed. This is an unfortunate preview of all politicians, events that even touch the highest office in the country.

The record should be set straight. Mayor Adams, needs to explain in detail in a public forum the nature of his relationship. A media briefing or release is not a sufficient public forum, a 20-minute interview or so with one or all of the networks would be. An omission to scenario number two, and this will all blow over. In 6-months Portlandians will be wondering why things are worse off June 20 than they were Jan 20 – as a global melt down in the financial sectors hits home. If scenario number one is true, and there are other boy toys around – he would be best to hold-up in his office for 6-months and see if he can weather this out. Otherwise, get out before just the Police and Fire Unions ask him to leave

Friends, this is now playing out like a Greek Tragedy. Let us not forget a famous portion written by Sophocles in the “Tragedy of Ajax.” This passage is between Odysseus and Agamemnon, when Agamemnon did not want to ensure a burial to the great warrior but rather feed his hated enemy’s remains to the birds of the sea. “Do not let the Violence or Passion of hatred push you into trampling that which is: Just, Virtuous, and Honorable. I (Odysseus) had reason to hate him more than any of us, but keep in mind that save for brave Achilles he was the best of Us that went to war in Troy. It is wrong to injure this brave man when he is dead. I too hated him when living and it was decent to then hate him. You can do him no harm now that he is dead, only infringe on the Virtue and Just laws of the gods. He was indeed our enemy but also a man of great worth and with me his worth weighs more with me than my hatred or passion. Remember my friends Ajax’s own words: no man is good all the time – today’s friend is often tomorrow’s enemy and today’s enemy is often tomorrow’s friend. Rigidity and unceasing hatred or passion is not admirable – Honor, Virtue, and Justice are to be admired, I ask you to permit this burial of our brother Ajax … because I too shall come to this end.”

Oh Death, is thy Sting quick – how long will this play out for us. This story of the Passion that consumes men in times of war was beyond poetic for its time – it was epic and promoted an ideal for humans to ascribe to. Honor, Virtue, Justice, Nobility – are these things that are unattainable for us flawed mortals, perhaps. Americans place Hope that we can elect officials that will live up to these ideals. Oregonians until recently have not had to face the coming questions too often. Is it too much to ask for a flawed, but smart public official or does stupidity and a lack of any moral compass the only remaining characteristics of those who yearn for politics? What is next.

The noblest thing to do would be resignation. What would history say? The 2008 Election echoes of figures like: Cincinnatus, Marcus Aurelius, Thomas More, Horatio Alger, and James Hinton; are now quite. There is no Hero laying down the Crown to return to the farm. No warrior-poet, waxing philosophically as to the nature of how best a government can embody: Justice, Hope, and Prosperity for all. No more rags to riches stories or discoveries of a political Utopia left for us, the living to enjoy.

Instead we have been left with the inept political machinations of Richard the III and “nothing, no matter what” will salvage this half of that which might have been. The Tragedy of Ajax was not Ajax’s tragedy but the tragedy of Human Nature – the near triumph of: Greed, Avarice, and Hubris. It took the hero Odysseus to bring things to perspective. Who will stand up to help bring this to perspective? Why must we the Public be forced to watch this tragic political event?

Mayor Adams can stay in office if he likes, with little to -0- respect. He might even do a good enough job to get re-elected, as impeachment is not something in the charter and a recall is 6-months out. Do not confuse re-election with continued approval of the body politique. But why do this? What point is there to prove? Who will this benefit? When does his credibility return? How does this shape the things that his administration can do in the community? Where do we go? Let the man say his peace, in a public forum. Let then his conscious be the judge. Let us get all the facts. Let us hope this man can reclaim his Honor – and do the right thing. My opinion is to close this chapter of Portland politics and move-on to new leadership.

As a matter of principle, I think politicians and other public figures should be allowed a private life. If they make a private mistake and then lie about it, as Adams did, then their constituents have every right to demand that they step down. If that's what the majority wants, then he should go. Personally, I'm not sure this transgression, from what I know of it, merits his resignation.

On a larger point, everyone should be held to the same standard. I'm really sick of seeing Republicans attack errant Democrats and vice-versa, while ignoring the mistakes of people in their own party.

This debate may succeed in putting me off politics permanently. I know I need to take a vacation and get away from this country. Hmmm. Like I would have been thinking that this week, without Sam's teaching the electorate the difference between throwing and catching. Seems you held Lieberman to a higher standard, for a moment, given his effect on the Party. How about a contest? What could right-wing radio have done to ruin the week as well as Sam did?

This subject is really allowing generation X to gain some ground in the "we lie; get over it" department. During the debate, a constant minority of the aforementioned have moved from, "So? He's a good Mayor", to "It was a dumb question; it's OK to lie if it's nobody's business", to........TADAAAA:

Posted by: bradulio | Jan 22, 2009 3:54:09 PM

What's sad is that we (still) live in a society that is so puritanical/hypocritical that Sam had to lie, emphasis added.

Now, sit down, take a deep breath and consider the most radical thing you've ever hear in your life. You.don't.have.to.get.your.way. "But if I tell the truth, stupid people will withhold what's rightfully mine, and I know it's rightfully mine because I really, really want it".

Baby boomers, do you really think society is going to accept wholesale these walking con artists that you've been so careful to insulate? Does it bother you at all that the ONLY thing they have ever returned to you for your investment of lifestyle, and income is to defraud you with tobacco? The generation of blanks you have shackled us all with will drag us all down. How can you complain about Sam? Is there supposed to be a permanent class of people that are better than your whelps? No. You make room for their behavior in society, you make room for it in society, period. Sam is at the cultural frontier. People don't play nice on the frontier.

Someone asked earlier, "what does a 40 year old man and a 17-year-old talk about"? A lot, if the 40 year old man is Sam Adams, I would suggest. He's a X man in a boomer's body.

Like anyone is reading the "More Comments" pages anyway. Definitely worth being the one that posts that #60 in each thread.

Transportation is an issue.

Jobs are an issue.

Healthcare is an issue.

And you people want to focus on a man's private sex life.

K at 12:42:24 is absolutely right and the first comment I have seen saying what I have been thinking. A fortyish woman and a 17-18 year old boy ? The woman would be drawn and quartered by now and her future job prospects would be nonexistent. Sam Adams is not only playing the gay card for all it's worth, he is also playing the male privilege card which is so taken for granted that no one even notices it . . .

That's funny. Someone back up the thead (or another of the Sam Cluster) said that would be something society would cheer. That's the worst part of this debate. It shows how everybody feels threatened and like the other camp has it made.

Personally I would come down on the side of everybody's threatened, full stop, so work for a more just society in general.

I disagree completely

First of all - Breedlove was 18 when they had sex, this according to Breedlove's own information.

Also according to Breedlove's information it was consensual and a good thing. He has reiterated repeatedly that he wasn't and isn't a victim. The Willamette Week even tried to scare some outrage out of Breedlove's father and couldn't. There was no victim here.

The idea that there is always a victim in an older/younger relationship is simply untrue. You say that "no one would defend this" if it was a man and a younger woman, etc. But that's not true either. There are many of us out there (and you'll find us all over the comments section of the latest New York Times opinion piece) who find it ridiculous that a "one-size-fits-all" label is put on teenagers' ability to consent to sex. Even the United States legal system acknowledges that there is no absolute age of consent, with different states allowing sex at 16 or 17. In Europe consent age is even lower in some countries, with appropriate extra safeguards in place if a youth changes their mind after the fact.

There are, in fact, several separate disagreements going on between those who support Sam and those who don't.

There may be some knee-jerk people on each side - those who would oppose Sam no matter what and support him no matter what, but from speaking with people at the Sam Adams support rally on Friday I found that no one was there from a knee-jerk perspective. Here are some reasons we support Sam Adams:

• Instead of bowing to the legal construct of age of consent we believe that the people involved in the relationship are/were capable of consent. In this view we are joined by Breedlove himself, many other states and most European nations. We also keep in mind that the sex took place at 18, which would make it nobody's business if one does really care about the law here and not simply their own judgments of older/younger sex.

• We believe that sexual life should not be the media's business unless that sexual life is harmful. Sam Adams' and Beau Breedlove's relationship would have harmed no one if it had been left private. I think it would be difficult if not impossible to dispute that. And Portland would just be carrying on its business, loving its gay mayor.

• We believe that policies, ideas, vision and experience matter more in our elected officials than a difficult to define/quantify concept of "character." Obama can be "transparent" about his sex life because he has followed a very narrow path. People with interesting sex lives, however, often also possess great minds, valuable experience and the best policies. If the media had been this ruthless throughout American history we would have lost Jefferson, Roosevelt and Kennedy, at least.

• We don't think lying about sex=lying about things that really matter. And really, if Americans are so up in arms about lying, where is Bush's head on a platter? And why is lying about sex invigorating people more than, say, the war crimes committed by the last administration. Two wrongs may not make a right, but seriously! "Scale", people!

In short, since we couldn't see how anyone would have ever gotten hurt by any of this had the media kept its nose out of Sam Adams' private life we support Sam staying in office.

Since we can understand why a gay man living in a homophobic, sexphobic society would lie about sex to the media, we continue to support him.

And since we want the best man for the job, we support him. Did you really vote for his moral spotlessness back in November? Or did you vote for a set of policies that Portland needs for the 21st century.

It's not a question of whether "Sam can still do his job" either. Clearly he can if Portland calms down and those who aren't behind him right now and are asking that question, get behind him and start getting city work done.

If you want to punish him, he's been punished already. Do you think he'll ever live down the jokes? Do you imagine this is pleasant for him?

But can he do his job. You bet he can, and he already is.

I understand that there are those who disagree. Honestly, however, I question whether they have the best interests of Portland or themselves or Beau Breedlove at heart or if they're bringing their own baggage and judgments to the table.

You are assuming he had sex with a minor. That is not proven, only alleged and alleged without attribution in the manner of back-fence gossip.

My opinion is that every single one of us has a moral obligation to lie about our sex lives. We know that saying "it's not of your business" is perceived as confirmation although "none of your business" is the only answer these bottom-feeding media hounds deserve. Please don't call them journalists, journalists have more important work to do than sniff people's sheets.

Somewhere in Oregon State law there is a code where it says: {I missplaced the paper, but it is true} A person can not kiss a minor with the intention of causing sexual excitement.

Breedlove has said as per his interviw to KGW TV that is what the kiss at age 17 did while they were making out in the city hall bathroom.

<h2>Its a a second degree felony in the state of Oregon.</h2>