I'm just waiting to read another angry comment from the recall folks directing people to their terrible website that is updated once a month or so. It's also pretty funny that Sho "The Mumbler" Dozono finally comes out and says he's for the recall. It's important to understand why guys like Sho Dozono and Tom Potter don't like a guy like Mayor Adams...simply put Mayor Adams makes stuff happen whereas guys like Potter and Dozono do nothing but sit around and allow the status quo to be acceptable and they're unwilling to do anything let alone step out on a ledge and try something new.

Being on the other end of the state, I have no dog in this fight. But I do have to wonder why it took this guy so long, especially since the recall effort has been pretty well abandoned.

You quote the op-ed in the Oregonian and say, and I agree, " 'Wielding the recall against them in such fashion has a corrosive effect, discouraging people from running for office and unfairly punishing those willing to stick their necks out and serve.'

Exactly."

I fail to see much difference between this discouragement of running for office and the vile attacks of candidates of either side. It is obvious that anyone running for office will have their life turned upside-down and have every corner of it exposed. Namely Barack Obama and Sarah Palin. Their families and past history is all exposed for the world to see. How many people out there are unwilling to serve for exactly this reason? To say that it was justified in Palin's case, but not justified in Obama's case is purely partisan and patently wrong.

When do we stop making personal attacks of candidates? Yes, the blue and the red. Both. But to deny that it's a problem is interesting to me.

"But let's not recall him because you don't like his policy choices. That's a poor precedent to set."

Isn't that what elections are for?

Again, to repeat myself: You want to recall the Mayor because you think the Breedlove incident rises to the level of official malfeasance? Fine. But let's not recall him because you don't like his policy choices. That's a poor precedent to set.

No, that's a fantastic precedent to set. I'd much rather recall someone because of the way his policy decisions affect his constituents than because he lied about sex. You do recognize you sound like a Republic with that statement, right?

Garrett:

simply put Mayor Adams makes stuff happen

Bob T:

Did you like how he made that sports corporate welfare happen, and actually wanted the deal to be much larger?

Millions of tax dollars for a multi-millionaire. Did you want him to "make that stuff happen"?

Bob Tiernan Portland

Kari says, "Now, we can all disagree about whether a consensual affair between unmarried adults qualifies as that sort of serious ethical breach -".
Kari, Sam Adams engaged in sexual contact with Breedlove before Breedlove turned 18, he's admitted that much. He says that they did not have "sexual intercourse" until after he turned 18. In Oregon, sexual contact with a minor still qualifies as Sex Abuse (which is the term Oregon's criminal code uses for Statutory Rape). Labeling what Adams did as merely a "consensual affair between unmarried adults" is absurd...Adams is a child rapist, at least under the terms of Oregon law.

Sorry all...but as I see it, Sam's culture got in the way of common sense when it came to Breedlove, and that same culture may be having an effect on his decisions in regards to Portland as a city - whether we know it or not. Even good ideas he has, we have to ask if that idea is really a result of common sense, or part of his culture.

He still has got to go.

Kari:

Now, we can all disagree about whether a consensual affair between unmarried adults qualifies as that sort of serious ethical breach - but let's not set a precedent that it's OK to recall elected officials for run-of-the-mill political disagreements or typical complaints about job performance.

Bob T:

I agree but only up to a point. I'd support recalling any mayor who attempts to give millions of tax dollars to a multi-millionaire who doesn't want to use his own money and that of any investor friends to build a sports stadium for his privately-owned team.

I'd support a recall of the current mayor of Beaverton who is trying to do that same, with a plan in the works that will involve abusing condemnation powers by sweeping away about 50 small businesses (who'll have their business severely disrupted and some won't survive in this frail business climate) so that he can have a "legacy" - oh that New Urbanist lunacy!

Bob Tiernan Portland

Kari:

Now, we can all disagree about whether a consensual affair between unmarried adults qualifies as that sort of serious ethical breach - but let's not set a precedent that it's OK to recall elected officials for run-of-the-mill political disagreements or typical complaints about job performance.

Bob T:

I agree but only up to a point. I'd support recalling any mayor who attempts to give millions of tax dollars to a multi-millionaire who doesn't want to use his own money and that of any investor friends to build a sports stadium for his privately-owned team.

I'd support a recall of the current mayor of Beaverton who is trying to do that same, with a plan in the works that will involve abusing condemnation powers by sweeping away about 50 small businesses (who'll have their business severely disrupted and some won't survive in this frail business climate) so that he can have a "legacy" - oh that New Urbanist lunacy!

Bob Tiernan Portland

"simply put Mayor Adams makes stuff happen"

Does "stuff" include giving tax breaks to developers to build condos that sit half empty on the S Waterfront because all the promised biotech jobs never materialized? or the overpiced condos and overpriced retail in the pearl (because $7 lattes and $500k studios are the way to go).

How about tax breaks to developers to build ugly condos like the one at 35th and Belmont?

How about spending cash on a street car which carries almost nobody and goes almost nowhere while bus routes are cut back?

How about in the 1990s when he and Vera restricted the use of big lights on broadway street because well it's only downtown....

How about taking $$ from the transport bureau budget to fund other things (see the willy week article).

I await your ad hominem ridden "reply."

Say hi to Torridjoe for me....

PS did you just forget to insult Jack Bogdanski?

"If anything, I'd say a recall has more legitimacy than a regularly-scheduled election, as it's initiated, by definition, by a broad wave of public sentiment."

I'd say the public sentiment to recall Mayor Adams is anything BUT broad.

Mr Chishom sez: Whatever your view of Adams' performance, can we at least all agree that recall should be for serious ethical breaches, not merely for doing "a poor job"?

Unless the ordinances governing recall explicitly state that recall is the local version of presidential impeachment--high crimes and misdemeanors, so-called--then Kari's objection is irrelevant. Can someone please provide the relevant legal verbiage?

Mr Chisholm also sez: It's the dismissiveness and the sour grapes.

Actually, the law governing recalls states that petitioning cannot start for SIX MONTHS AFTER THE CANDIDATE TAKES OFFICE, in order to try to get rid of the sore losers. I'd guess that a petition to recall Adams would have easily gotten enough signatures if the petition could have been circulated starting in January, right after Adams' lies were exposed. IMHO Adams ought to consider himself extraordinarily lucky.

You know, Kari, you can quit carrying water for Sam Adams now; he's all grown up. Well, in some regards, at least....

Mike sez: [D]id you just forget to insult Jack Bogdanski?

Not sure who Mike addressed this to, but allow me to state that one can be in favor of recalling Sam Adams without being one of Bogdanski's fanboys. Let me also suggest that (i) Jack Bogdanski is quite capable of speaking for himself, and (ii) Bogdanski worship will be more appreciated at Bogdanski's own blog.

Hi All,

The Recall is very close to getting our goal of holding Adams accountable. Please know that we will only submit the petitions if we know that we will surpass 32,183 valid signatures after the City Auditor's statical sampling is applied.

A lot of people fear signing the petition because of political retaliation from Adams. This is why I applaud Mr. Dozono for being a courageous leader and active citizen.

Even if you support Sam Adams you should sign the petition, as Adams' trust issues will not go away until a vote happens.

You have until Oct. 5th till noon to turn in your petitions to us.

Jasun Wurster Chief Petitioner Community to Recall Sam Adams

"A lot of people fear signing the petition because of political retaliation from Adams."

See?....Sam = Culture over Common Sense.

"Not sure who Mike addressed this to, but allow me to state that one can be in favor of recalling Sam Adams without being one of Bogdanski's fanboys. Let me also suggest that (i) Jack Bogdanski is quite capable of speaking for himself, and (ii) Bogdanski worship will be more appreciated at Bogdanski's own blog."

Addressed to those who assume there is some tiny cult of can't think for yourself Bogdanskicrats and they are the only people who don't like Sam Adam's policies.

I'm going to agree with Kari on this one. Recalling an elected official over legal policy decisions is an overreaction in my opinion. The two issues that made me want to recall the mayor were the cash envelopes at city hall left for Beau just before Beau was to be interviewed on this scandal. Given that Sam would later report financial problems, I exercised my judgement and came to the conclusion that he was not just being a wonderful human being here. In my opinion, these so-called loans were an attempt to keep Beau from turning on Sam 'til the Mayor could finesse his way through the scandal and get something on the record on Beau that would help the Mayor deal with this. Later if Beau changed his story the credibility charge could be raised, which is what happened.

  Cash envelopes at city hall changing hands in a scandal. Not directly, mind you, but through a receptionist and a security guard. It reeked then and it still reeks.

   The second reason was the hiring of the Mercury reporter. Mayor Sam reassured us that it had nothing to do with the scandal, yet when WW interviewed Sam, the new hire was there.

  Either one of these charges would - in my opinion - be enough to bring indictments against Sam but Kroger chose to see nothing but Sam's magnificent personality throughout. That's on him. I honestly thought a deal would be reached where Sam printed out his resignation letter and signed it, in exchange for no charges. These people who say there is nothing to this have to admit Sam wrote that letter for a reason.

  In my opinion, the lying stuff is not enough to recall Sam. Politicians lie all the time. I loved Sam's little life lesson where he learned that lying was bad. Even that had the ring of BS to it, but this is not a reason to recall. Yes, the voters learned some things later after the election. That happens often - I'd even guess every single time.

  So the lying was no big deal.

Unless of course the lying was done under oath which Kroger never bothered to pursue. Maybe he was too busy writing press releases.

  I am at peace with whatever happens. I saw what I perceived to be injustice, abuse of power, etc...and I did what I could to deal with it.

  The policy stuff isn't enough - in my opinion - to recall an official unless of course that gets criminal and we had an official who wasn't too busy advancing his own career to take it seriously.

 Cash envelopes changing hands during a scandal at city hall. And Kroger's supposed to be some big-time guy from the East Coast? How dumb does he think we are?

Yes, JJ. Kissing a 17yo = child rape. Just like abortions = baby murder. Hyperbole much?

Your "point" depends on an extremely precarious interpretation of state law.

Keep posting though. You demonstrate how completely off-the-deep-end most recall supporters are, and how little substance there is to the case for recall. Recall supporters are limited to: a) political opponents and those who stand to make lots of money from conservative city policies, and b) anti-sex crusaders, religious zealots, and homophobes.

Obviously you're a "b", which is the most entertaining of the two. My heart does go out to you people though. It has now been eight months since we heard about the kiss, and some feel we should still be talking about it! I swear we are all going to be riding around in flying cars someday and you'll still be going on about this kiss. I have to assume your life is so devoid of joy that you are driven to this maniacal obsession with other people's sex lives. I hope you get some help (sincerely).

I do think at this point the unseemliness of Adams' behavior with Breedlove has been more than eclipsed by the behavior of Adams's critics.

Bob T:

I agree but only up to a point. I'd support recalling any mayor who attempts to give millions of tax dollars to a multi-millionaire who doesn't want to use his own money and that of any investor friends to build a sports stadium for his privately-owned team.

torridjoe:

Whew! Good thing that's a flatly false interpretation of any thing that's happened in Portland recently.

Bob T:

Not that Adams didn't try. The deal fell through (the new stadium part) not because Lents people objected to sports corporate welfare, but because they were against this happening in their neighborhood. It's really disappointing to see that this went as far as it did in a city where this should be a non-starter. I'm quite certain that had we a Republican-type mayor pushing this through, we would see wall-to-wall objections to this "big business" influence at it again. But it was progressive Sam Adams, so it was "Oh well, I disagree with him on that one, but hey, isn't it great that we have a gay, progressive mayor?"

Sam Adams is all about playing the Fat Cat game, using poor people's money so he can brag about what he's "doing for Portland". Wake up, fool.

In Beaverton, I hope the bulk of the residents have the guts to prevent their city government from screwing over about 50 small business people in favor of a multi-millionaire son of a mega-millionaire. But they'll probably fall for all of the same old bullshit government intervention in the market ot "bring pride" to Beaverton.

By the way, didja ever see Torrid Zone (1940)? Great comedy.

Bob Tiernan Portland

I do find it a bit disingenuous Kari, that you get many contracts from Mark Wiener, Sam's political consultant, and you are bashing Sho and supporting Sam....fruit doesn't fall very far from the tree.

Did you like how he made that sports corporate welfare happen, and actually wanted the deal to be much larger?

Millions of tax dollars for a multi-millionaire. Did you want him to "make that stuff happen"?

@ Bob T.

I, unlike many others here, don't care about facilitating a plan to borrow money using the city's credit to update a city owned stadium that the renter of said stadium will pay back over time.

To answer your question...yes I did want him to make it happen. I'd also like someone to bring a MLB team here and I'd be completely fine paying for a portion of that as well.

This is how it works. I like sports. I like playing them and I also like watching them. I consider a city that has spectator sports to offer a higher quality of life. That's fine if you don't. I know you don't like taxes of any sort anyway.

Yeah, and ALL anti-war protesters are anarchists intent on the destruction of civilization as we know it; ALL opponents of Obama are racists; und so weiter......

Yes, and ALL blog posts that ignore substance to turn the conversation to nitpicking and semantics are a waste of bits.

It never fails, Blue Oregon never writes anything critical about Sam. In fact, isn't this only the second post that even mentions the recall of Mayor Adams? It isn't even asking us to think critically about the recall. All I hear is Kris slamming someone for offering their thoughts on a city issue. Thoughts that were asked for by, not only the Oregonian, but numerous citizens and publications.

Kris, I know you speak for only yourself, and that this website simply reflects the opinions of the individual writers, but it is ridiculous that everything concerning Sam Adams is so one sided.

It is also unfair to think that this Op-Ed piece is anything other than what it really is, an opinion from someone named Sho Dozono.

"But let's not recall him because you don't like his policy choices."

Why not recall him for any reason the majority likes? Politicians seem to forget they serve at the voter's pleasure. THey are not in a position they deserved or earned.

I read his main point as being that people deserved the right to vote on this. I'm hard pressed to disagree. The affair was consensual and between adults, but Mayor Adams lied about it. He didn't have to say anything, of course, and absolutely should not have. "Ain't none of your business," should still be an acceptable answer to inappropriately personal questions in politics. However, denying it, falsely, in the public eye casts his character and truthfulness into doubt. I think that's something that the voters should get to weigh in on.

Furthermore, as I've written in these pages innumerable times, we should be the party in favor of direct democracy. We will not be successful if we try to be more republican than the Republicans.

"It would seem that Dozono can't even let the words "Mayor Adams" cross his lips, as if somehow the Mayor is illegitimately holding the office."

Of course, this ignores that there is a very good argument that Adams is holding office illegitimately, since he responded with a cascade of lies, attacks on Bob Ball, and invented fictions about "mentoring" Breedlove rather than a simple "no comment." Adams clearly calculated that the truth meant he lost the election; therefore he went into full Nixon mode and lied, lied, lied, and kept it up for months (meanwhile hiring a reporter for a job she was totally unqualified for as a way to shut her up and take her off the story).

If his hold on his office is so legitimate and he's such an effective leader "getting stuff done" then he should be eager for a recall election to remove the taint of his lies. Instead, he will be damaged goods forever before he slinks off into ignominy. Unless he survives a recall, we will continue the status quo, where no politician of integrity will appear with him and he has alienated Salem totally. Not good for the poor people he abused with his lies.

Garrett:

I, unlike many others here, don't care about facilitating a plan to borrow money using the city's credit to update a city owned stadium that the renter of said stadium will pay back over time.

Bob T:

So soon after the last taxpayer-gets-screwed job over this stadium, with Erik Sten taking $35 million tax dollars for what turned out to be a flop? Anyway, this is a net loss, because there are only about 15 or 18 or so home games, whereas there were 70 or so home baseball games. For those who were saying that all that activity in the vicinity of the stadium is always a bonus (not to mention the paychecks for people working those 70 home games etc), a loss of 50 or more events is serious. But then, Paulson would have left anyway, maybe.

You also need to consider the strong possibility that if the Beavers stay out of Portland, and soccer flops, we'll get stuck paying for the removal of the seating structures that will be in what is left and center field on the baseball configuration if we are to try to lure baseball back. Great thinking.

Garrett:

To answer your question...yes I did want him to make it happen. I'd also like someone to bring a MLB team here and I'd be completely fine paying for a portion of that as well.

Bob T:

And you can do that by buying tickets to see the games. I don't care if you're "completely fine" using your own money to halp make this happen, but you have no business using any of mine, nor anyone else's.

Garrett:

This is how it works.

Bob T:

That's not how it used to work, and it's not how it's supposed to work. This is how it how it works only because too many people fall for all of the slick salesmanship and have misguided priorities. The owners laugh all the way to the bank, and the politicians get more power on your dime.

Garrett:

I like sports. I like playing them and I also like watching them.

Bob T:

So do I.

Garrett:

I consider a city that has spectator sports to offer a higher quality of life.

Bob T:

A-ha! So it is New Urbanism after all! And must be subsidized, even if a multi-millionaire owner laughs all the way to the bank. I knew it.

Garrett:

That's fine if you don't.

Bob T:

I don't know why you keep assuming these things about me. I like having at least a baseball team around. I went to 31 games two years ago, got in free, and got paid for it, too (scorekeeping - every pitch, hit location etc, for a firm in Pennsylvania). Great year.

Garrett:

I know you don't like taxes of any sort anyway.

Bob T:

Don't assume that one, either. I happen to consider sports to be part of the entertainment business, no different from movie theaters and so on, and if your city has no sports team, that's the way it goes. The worst thing that goes on is the way city governments will use tax dollars to lure teams or keep them from relocating, and the owners laugh all the way to the bank. They don't even make the first phone call - the politicians do. They want to feel like they are "managing" the free market to "make it work", because with no tax dollars, well heck, we might lose a team! But so what! If all local governments stop doing this (or forced to stop by their citizens if they lack the guts themselves), the teams will probably exist in all of the same cities anyway. Stadiums and arenas will be less expensive - they would be already if we never got into this corporate welfare nonsense. The myth spread by people is that stadiums cost too much money. Don't believe it. They'll be designed differently. And smaller. The reason they are not already is because we have morons like Sam Adams in almost every city in the country.

Bob Tiernan Portland

"Adams is holding office illegitimately, since he responded with a cascade of lies"

Oh, bullshit. You, Dozono, and WillyWeak have zero business asking Sam, me, or anyone else about our sex lives unless you and I are getting ready to slice the pork personally. Ask me about mine and I'll tell you some big fat grotesque lie just to see the reaction on your face, you window peeping pervert. Just because you can't get laid, doesn't mean you get to take it out on those who can.

If you don't like Sam for political reasons, then find a candidate who can beat him. This whole fucking recall "campaign" has gone by without one peep about who we're stuck with if you creepy-peepers win. Wurster? Talk about creepy peepers ...

Alicia sez: This whole fucking recall "campaign" has gone by without one peep about who we're stuck with if you creepy-peepers win.

Uh, that's because this is not like the California gubernatorial recall, which simultaneously unseated Gray Davis and elected the Governator. Different process entirely, Alicia, and nobody who either circulates the petition or signs it is obligated to propose an alternative to Adams. In the (unlikely) event that Adams is recalled, we'll get to sort that out, won't we?

"Oh, bullshit. You, Dozono, and WillyWeak have zero business asking Sam, me, or anyone else about our sex lives unless you and I are getting ready to slice the pork personally. Ask me about mine and I'll tell you some big fat grotesque lie just to see the reaction on your face, you window peeping pervert. Just because you can't get laid, doesn't mean you get to take it out on those who can."

Was there any substance there or just a long screed?

joel dan walls:

Uh, that's because this is not like the California gubernatorial recall, which simultaneously unseated Gray Davis and elected the Governator.

Bob T:

There was a special election following the recall.

Bob Tiernan Portland

Torrid: Whew! Good thing that's a flatly false interpretation of any thing that's happened in Portland recently.

so how is issuing debt (at a 20% higher rate than junk bonds) to finance the conversion to MLS not what happend?

"Was there any substance there or just a long screed?"

Yes. People fascinated by the private lives of public figures are perverts, and so are the reporters who feed them.

"Yes. People fascinated by the private lives of public figures are perverts, and so are the reporters who feed them."

Probably, but what about allegations he lied? Why not just say "yeah so what" to the inquiries?

I could care less over what two consenting adults do. But if you lie about that what else could you be lying about?

let's not set a precedent that it's OK to recall elected officials for run-of-the-mill political disagreements or typical complaints about job performance.

Agreed Kari; when will you come out on BO and decry the recall effort of the Clatsop County Commisioners?

Personally I think Sam Adams lied and the Portland folks who voted him into office deserve him. Just don't involve the rest of the state in your problems with the soccer stadia deal.

"if you lie about that what else could you be lying about?"

Ask me about my sex life and I'll lie to you too and hope everyone does the same. Myself, I use peanut butter and a hand blender. It's so hot.

Window-peeping perverts asking questions that are none of their fucking business don't deserve the truth.

Unlike all the republican god-squadders gone all "Ahh'm A SIHHNNER!!" out there, Sam's never pretended to be a saint, so who gives a shit how he pops a chubbie? As for Saint Breedlove, anyone young man who names his dog "Lolita" knows what he's looking for (Read Nabokov? Yeah, didn't think so.)

"trollish cowards have no business lobbing such stones"

As if I'd hand you and the attack-prudes another weapon? Everyone's right to a private life is the whole fucking point here. At least if you're looking at principles instead of political payback against a politician you couldn't even find a decent opponent for.

"Ask me about my sex life and I'll lie to you too and hope everyone does the same. Myself, I use peanut butter and a hand blender. It's so hot."

The thought of you accidentally jamming the handblender in too far and shredding your privates puts a smile on my face but....

It doesnt answer the question: people who lie about sex often lie about other stuff & it is not as easily compartmentalized as anger-management challenged trolls like you seem to "think".

"raed Nabokov? didn't think so" Yeah you know all about us -didnt think so.

"not as easily compartmentalized as anger-management challenged trolls like you seem to "think"."

Says the man (?) who just anonymously confessed to smiling about a sexually violent fantasy.

Got a cite for your "gateway lie" theory of sexual privacy? Didn't think so.

Pervert.

Got a cite for your belief that people who want to recall Sam are perverts?

no more anonymous than you....

This is the same kind of failure to comprehend the rules that led to people saying that Bush couldn't be impeached "because he hadn't committed a "crime" like stabbing someone. It's a basic failure to understand how the system was set up. In the case of the US Constitution, the House defines what "high crimes and misdemeanors" are, not the criminal code. As the Judiciary committee stated in a report just before deciding to pursue the Nixon impeachment, the President can do things that are wrong which wouldn't be covered by criminal statutes."

Exactly!

"Says the man (?) who just anonymously confessed to smiling about a sexually violent fantasy."

Says the woman(?) who took it seriously.

I suppose you take it as a serious preverted statement/insult/fantasy when someone tells you "blow me, fucknoid."

I back the recall not over Breedlove but over the lies he has been selling us over his (mis) management of city hall.

Or am I permitted to back this recall only for certain reasons?

Mike: ummmmm. Could you please tell me what that was all about? I thought MY mouth was foul.

& Alicia: such tortured syntax! Clearly you are upset and have a passionate view of this entire business.

So, Kari: I guess it was bound to happen sometime. Cali has its Schwartzenegger, them back-Easters had that SmackDown fellow. And we got us ol' Sam.

It will be a welcome thing when he's gone. I had such hopes, and, I confess, some of it WAS about finally an openly gay, youthful candidate in there making a difference and changing the tone.

Sadly, we got us a sycophant to the wealthy connected. And a twit besides. Sigh.

You're right Forsyth. The personal attack I made about Wurster at the end of my first post was wrong.

I apologize for that. I got carried away.

This whole thing makes me so frustrated. Because it's all based on the idea that anyone is entitled to investigate anything about anyone. Any reporter can ask any question no matter how invasive. And everyone must either admit confess gory detail - ahhh'm a sinnah! - or give no comment and be hung with whispers and speculative editorials. It all gets milked no matter which way it spins because people love gossip. And lot of the push is about media selling ads in a down market. Anyone with a clue knows it.

So if you look at all that instead of the gory details, it's a really creepy principle the recall crowd supports: "if you've done nothing wrong you have nothing to hide". Is that what Portland wants?

Sho "nuff" Dozonyou comes off for the recall. Yawn.

Throwing the great weight of his support and enthuz into this just about clinches it that the drive will fail.

To refer to Sho as "the mumbler" just shows how low supporters of Sam will go.

Sam Adams is worse than Mark Foley. Foley resigned after sending inappropriate emails. Even if Sam waited until Breedlove was 'legal' there is something creepy about a middle age elected official waiting to have sex with a teenager until he is legal.

If Sam was a 40 something guy and Breedlove was a teenage girl, you can bet he would have been run out of office a long time ago.