The reason the campaign came up short has a pretty simple explanation.

Over the last couple months, I've heard from lots of people who had an interest in signing the recall petition, but were never given the opportunity.

No, Jasun: it's not because of a fear of retaliation. And no, Kari: it's not because there aren't enough Portlanders who want to sign.

Wurster, you took on a huge job. Now just accept it did not go as you hoped. It's a humiliating feeling, but don't let your fear of failure cause you to say even more things that will embarrass you far into the future.

Poorly managed,imho, from the start.

Wurster does nothing but spin conspiracy theories. He gives recall contracts to his business partner, he gave a stack of recall petitions to a church (and if you think that was an accident you're only kidding yourself), and he's been used like a tool by Lars Larson and Victoria Taft.

He will do anything other than admit that maybe Portland just doesn't want to recall the mayor and they can see that behind Wurster were a bunch of bigoted conservatives. Anything but the failure of the recall campaign. Watch out though...if you don't agree with the recall campaign or disagree with him he'll tell you you're not politically engaged.

Yikes...here is the link to the article where he gives a petition to a church.

http://www.oregonlive.com/portland/index.ssf/2009/07/campaign_to_recall_mayor_sam_a.html

Maybe Sam was behind this recall effort. He couldn't have scripted it any better himself......

Pretty sure these type of efforts lose support of the public as they try and try again.

If it turns out the new-new recall effort is really a few wealthy business owners with an axe to grind and the public realizes they're footing the bill for a special election it will only erode support further.

Bemused: If by "lots of people" you mean 7 and if by "never given the opportunity" you mean couldn't print, sign and mail in a petition sheet then is there really a meaningful public sentiment out there for this effort?

Perhaps the 6 month lapse between the revelation of the alleged acts and the petition being able to begin was also a key here. People had a chance to "get over it". Personally I am glad that I don't have to worry about Sam Adams as my mayor and would advise Portlanders to let it go. vote him out in the next election cycle if you are not impressed with his work as mayor.

Just a thought -- with Jason Wurster's engagement of a professional signature gatherer to start Recall Part 2, does anybody else think he might be angling to fill Bill Sizemore's shoes as Portland's own electoral racketeer?

Just a thought...

Jonno: what makes you think that? Many groups "we" approve of engage the pests who get John Hancocks for pay.... enlighten us: why do you think this fellow is taking over for Sizemore?

First they ignore you, then they laugh at you, then they...oh wait, we skipped number one and got stuck on number two.

What Sizemore did was offer big-money players the chance to influence Oregon politics outside of candidate elections. Bill got paid and the big-money boys got to muck around with our laws, corrupting the initiative system at the same time.

Just seems like there's a similar process here -- Wurster is now engaging professionals in another (likely to fail) attempt to bring down a duly-elected mayor through the recall process. I wonder if he's planning to offer the same pay-to-play deal to Adams' potential enemies in a similar way to what Sizemore did and if it will have a similar effect on the legitimacy of the recall process.

At any rate, if he is, he's been pitifully bad at it so far. Time will tell if he can actually affect any change other than to his own reputation.

Like I said, just a thought...

It's not a conspiracy theory. It's the same tactics people have been using to derail honest debate. Criticise Adams and his despicable tactics, you must be a gay bashing homophobe (depsite both 'Just Out' and 'Mercury' calling for his resignation). The people that signed were brave, those trying to collect feared abuse* from the types that cannot comprehend corruption when they see it and blindly follow it right off a cliff.

Abuse both mentally and physically. Nobody wants to spend their day being called a homophobe just for standing up to their belief in a more accountable govt. Remember the guy that scribbled all over the collection sheet screaming at the collector?

Most of the people who were making the most noise when this whole brouhaha started were residents of Lake Oswego and other surrounding communities. Honestly I'm glad to see it fail, just to prove that actual residents of Portland weren't the driving force behind this campaign.

Jagermeister makes a great point above.

Much of the anti Sam crowd is opposed to any openly gay person in an elected position. It speaks well of Portland not to have signed those petitions.

I am not impressed with Sam as Mayor. I expected much better. I'll be looking at other candidates when his term expires. No matter how much I disaprove of his leadership or disagree with him on certain issues, I will never sign an anti-gay petition to remove him from office.

bemused observer says: Over the last couple months, I've heard from lots of people who had an interest in signing the recall petition, but were never given the opportunity.

That doesn't sound right to me. I don't see how anybody who bothered to leave their house over the summer could avoid running into recall petition signature gatherers at least a dozen times. At farmer's markets, outside libraries, at strip malls, it seemed like they were everywhere. -Jay-

Posted by: CorruptPortland | Oct 5, 2009 4:18:06 PM

The Portland Mercury did not call for Sam Adams' resignation.

'Mercury' calling for his resignation)

When? I wasn't aware of that. I believe they wanted to pants him for a week. The editor did write a little piece about how the media and voters would have crucified Sam had he told them to mind their own business when it comes to his personal life.

Those trying to collect feared abuse* from the types that cannot comprehend corruption when they see it and blindly follow it right off a cliff.

I've noticed these talking points coming out of the recall campaign. This is just my interpretation of what comes out of that camp. "If you don't agree with us you have no morals, are an idiot, not politically involved, insert something about you being too uninformed to form an opinion that differs from ours here _"

I also hate to point out the obvious here...the recall campaign was championed by the likes Lars Larson and Victoria Taft. So maybe this is a rhetorical question, are you really surprised that people would accuse signature gatherers of being homophobes with people like Larson and Taft getting their sycophants to sign onto the campaign?

Then you have the whole "intimidation" excuse. This is the biggest turd coming out of the recall camp brain-trust. First of all, if I feel strongly about something you bet your ass I'll stand up and say I'm for or against it. If you don't do it and just hide behind an organization you're...well...I guess I'm saying at least Wurster has the balls to stand up and say he wants to recall the mayor, which is more than I can say for most.

The spin is that if you work for the city then the mayor might try and get back at you if you signed on to the recall. Uhhh...please. That's a talking point that was made up way back when Katz was the mayor by the people that kept losing elections to her and disagreed with her in general. I guess you would feel intimidated if you had to admit that not enough people agreed with you like the recall campaign supporters are having to deal with now.

Is it legal for the failed initiative organization, led by Wurster, to give the signatures collected, but not filed, to another organization? Basic privacy principles prohibit information collected for one purpose to be used or disclosed for another.

What does Oregon law and rule say?

The recall petition has lost its steam, and voters should just wait for the next election if they want Sam gone. To suggest there would be some sort of retaliation against those who signed this petition is pure paranoia, and absolute poppycock. On the other hand, to suggest those who signed this petition are homophobic or anti-gay has shades of McCarthyism written all over it.

Look, the guy lacks real leadership, and he's a pretty slimy dude. That's really what this recall stuff was all about. There is no better solution to voter apathy than to watch the city implode.

Actually, Sam had some basically correct things to say when the cameras rolled today. He did not wet his pants ACTING humble, but his words were correct for how it is. He knows he lost trust, and he'll have to do his best to correct course and hope to win trust back. Spoken with humbleness - that is, energy and demeanour the correct size and magnitude to appear to be authentically chastened; and, he straightforwardly said what we all know our mothers and grandmothers always told us: you cannot control what the other guy is going to do. So look to your own personal business and do what you know you should be doing. The rest is going to take care of itself with you or without you.

Not saying I want him back. But I who usually have a bitter jaundice streak a mile wide found his utterances to be genuine - rare experience for me when regarding politicos on TV.

Here's another thought: I believe in my heart that if this was a straight White guy who'd fecked up like that, he could survive it and keep going. We have lots of those. You might not make it into office with that upfront (witness Edwards and others of our acquaint), but once you are in, you have to really slime it up uber-stoopid to be kicked out.

The homophobes will have their day yet. Them and those of us who just want to see a COMPETENT [gay or lesbian] in-house if we're gonna see one. This falls under the rubric of "Dammit, how offensive!" when McCain did the "any chromosomally female counterpart will do" approach.

While the haters ensure he would never have another chance for THOSE reasons, a fair number of us who were hopeful will ensure he does not get in there and embarrass and trainwreck us furhter/again. We want a competent, REPRESENTATIVE politician if one such can be found. Of any stripe.

On the other hand, to suggest those who signed this petition are homophobic or anti-gay has shades of McCarthyism written all over it.

I don't remember hearing a lot of calls from the recall camp telling Lars Larson and Victoria Taft to kick rocks. Type either of their names and the word homophobe. Read the direct quotes you get from them. Tell me why you think it's a surprise anyone would suggest there is an element of homophobia in there somewhere.

A recall effort has been abandoned. Interesting, I would expect it to fail or succeed, but ducking responsibility speaks volumes.

RW,

You bring up an excellent point. Yes, if it was a heterosexual, White male engaging in a kiss with a 17 year old girl, then it would not have blossomed into what it was.

I believe it was and still is a big deal because the United States does not have a history of electing Gay/Lesbian/Bisexual/Transgendered (GLBT) individuals to Executive branch positions such as mayors and governors. Furthermore, we have scant history of GLBT individuals serving in the legislative branch.

That lack of history combined with a sexual scandal and what you get is a scandal on the scale of a nuclear explosion where geiger counters are ticking off the tock.

You don't hear about many GLBT elected leaders getting into trouble for sexual scandals. Hell, we have not had that many GLBT elected leaders, thus as a novelty to the scene, they are unfairly treated with a set of higher standards than all heterosexual, male or female elected leaders.

That is my read on the whole Sam Adams affair.

There are claims that some 15 or so businesses in Portland are backing the second recall effort. Can we have the list so a boycott of those businesses can be started?

"Claims". Show me the list.

It seems like 32K signatures is a pretty low bar, that the effort failed indicates a low level of enthusiasm. They couldn't find enough volunteers to look under every slime-encrusted rock for teabaggers just-a-waitin' to sign the petition. The fools who would try again should be encouraged, better their money spent on this than some Sizemore-like initiative.

I was for the recall but I think enough is enough. I am offended that it's being spun as the work of homophobes although I'm sure that's an element with some recall advocates.

   If anything I enjoyed the fact that Sam Adams was gay. Anything to piss off the religious right I always say.

   For me the problem was the cash envelopes in city hall and the Mercury reporter. I saw that as corrupt and an abuse of power.

  I will also admit that I was angry at the Mayor for one reason that had nothing really to do with the case. Let me explain:

  I literally counted down the hours of the Bush administration for 8 years. I regularly checked the website with the countdown clock and it was the longest 8 years of my life.

  I had a cable show for 4 years with the late great James Shibley specifically to battle what I saw was an outrageous era of treachery in Washington. We hung it out there as far as we could calling out this bunch and I'll always be proud of that. Just a few days ago, a nice looking woman was mailing some letters across the street and she yelled out to me, "I loved your show." Then as I was walking away she said, "It helped me get through the Bush years."

   It's been an emotional year seeing as how my co-host died last October 27th at the age of 39, right before the election of Barack Obama. Hearing this woman say that the other day made me feel that if helping her was all we did, then it was all worth it.

 I look back now on the Bush years and I can't think of anything else I could have done. As a national comedy writer I celebrated anytime a joke of my mine was on television or the radio that made fun of Cheney or Rumsfeld or any of the others. I had a joke in Time Magazine questioning the Iraq War. These are proud moments for me. Did I mention I really, really didn't like the Bush administration?

   It's crazy. W turned me into an activist for a while there and I took it very seriously as did many of you. I have to admit, in a crazy way, W made me a better person.

Nobody in all my years ever brought out that level of citizen involvement from me. There was the Portland Freelancer blog, the columns in the Tribune before I got canned, and the jokes - many of which went on in 70 countries.

   In short I did everything I could think of to fight those motherfuckers.

   When Inauguration Day came and George W. Bush was no longer president it had the potential to be one of the most pure days of joy in a lifetime.

  Yet it was on this day that our sad sack little Mayor dragged his sorry ass in front of the cameras to plunge us into this mess. I maintain that he should have waited one day. This was President Obama's day and just as importantly it was the end of the Bush administration.

  Sam is an egomaniac. We all know this. But only someone who is missing a real perception of right and wrong would mar that day here in Portland with his sorry little scandal.

   For me he diminished what I thought was one of the great days in American History. That was wrong and it will always tick me off a little.

  Other than that though, I'm over it.

Abe:

There are claims that some 15 or so businesses in Portland are backing the second recall effort. Can we have the list so a boycott of those businesses can be started?

Bob T:

The guy tried to give taxpayer dollars to a multi-millionaire so that multi-millionaire didn't have to use much of his own money to build himself a baseball stadium for his team. Why are you trying to keep this jerk in office? You're all a bunch of frauds. And quit with the silly boycott stuff.

Bob Tiernan Portland

The guy tried to give taxpayer dollars to a multi-millionaire so that multi-millionaire didn't have to use much of his own money to build himself a baseball stadium for his team. Why are you trying to keep this jerk in office? You're all a bunch of frauds.

This is how sports work. If someone comes into town with a viable offer for a MLB team I guarantee you whoever is mayor then will probably attempt to generate enough to build a stadium. In a few years when the lease is almost up and Paul Allen starts talking about the Rose Garden being outdated and in order to maintain profitability he needs money to either a: upgrade or b: rebuild I promise you the mayor will throw money at him to keep the Blazers in town. Know why? The political price for running the Blazers out of town is something no mayor wants on their shoulders. Ask the guy up North about how it's treating him being known as the guy who ran the Sonics out of town. I understand your unwillingness to want to take out some bonds that the owner will pay back but you should probably save your real venom for when a really major sport comes into Portland and wants a few hundred million. If you don't think that will happen with Paul Allen or his successor as owner eventually you'd be kidding yourself.

Sam is an egomaniac

So are, in no particular order, Barack Obama, Hillary Clinton, George W. Bush, Bill Clinton, Ronald Reagan, John Kitzhaber, Arnold Schwartzeneger, Ron Paul, Dennis Kucinich, Mark Sanford, etc... That's how people who run for executive positions are. You have to have a hell of an ego to think you're the best person to run a city, state, country, or major corporation.

Bill McD: yep. Yep, yep.

Bob T:

[Adams] tried to give taxpayer dollars to a multi-millionaire so that multi-millionaire didn't have to use much of his own money to build himself a baseball stadium for his team. Why are you trying to keep this jerk in office? You're all a bunch of frauds.

Garrett in SE:

This is how sports work.

Bob T:

Wrong! This is how it works only because we let it evolve that way while the owners laughed all the way to the bank and the politicians were rewarded. You think it works this way because that's how you were brainwashed as you grew up, believeing such garbage as "stadiums must be huge", or "Sports stadiums are infrastructure just like roads and waterlines are".

Garrett in SE:

If someone comes into town with a viable offer for a MLB team I guarantee you whoever is mayor then will probably attempt to generate enough to build a stadium.

Bob T:

Sure, and I've said that many times -- apparently you weren't paying attention. But I single out Adams because I was under the impression that the so-called Left or progressive side isn't into corporate welfare (or at least for sports) and that perhaps Portland would set a good example we all need again. So what Adams tried to do (and succeeded partially in doing) is something that he gets a pass on, whereas had a Republican type mayor done the same thing he'd be labeled a stooge for fat cats.

Garrett in SE:

In a few years when the lease is almost up and Paul Allen starts talking about the Rose Garden being outdated and in order to maintain profitability he needs money to either a: upgrade or b: rebuild I promise you the mayor will throw money at him to keep the Blazers in town.

Bob T:

Again, I've said all this before. I know how it it is done. But that's how they rigged the game for us. Owners of teams seem to get all the blame by those on the Left who hate sports corporate welfare, as if they are taking your money as if they have a natural right to take it (while those on the right blame the politicians first because they are the ones with the power to do this), but as you pointed out, and owner can announce he's relocating and the politicians will be the first one to make the phone call (and the owners know this).

Garrett in SE:

Know why? The political price for running the Blazers out of town is something no mayor wants on their shoulders.

Bob T:

Yes, it may cost one lots of political points for doing the right thing. And that's what such a decision is -- doing the right thing. I'm not interested in seeing people's taxes used because a mayor and city council members want a legacy, or have an ego problem. It takes courage to say no, as opposed to promising free stuff for everyone (gosh, that's gutsy!). We need more city councils, county and state governments to do this until it is no longer the "way it works", like it was a hundred years ago. Odd, isn't it, that major league baseball was paying its own way. In your world, if we start building stores for Safeway, Albertsons, Fred Meyer and others so they can locate in the area, in a generation or two we'll have plenty of peoplelike you who'll believe that "that's the way it works -- Safeway contacts the town of X and says we'll open a store if you construct a pay for a building for us", or "We don't like the old building we're in, or the location, so we'll leave the area unless you build us a new one a half mile up the road".

Garrett in SE:

Ask the guy up North about how it's treating him being known as the guy who ran the Sonics out of town.

Bob T:

In other words, you think he should have taken taxpayer dollars, and maybe property against homeowners' wishes, in order that he and the city are able to brag that they have a basketball team? Don't forget that some unpopularity is being caused by the recent light rail boondoggle, but that's another subject.

Listen, Garrett, if no tax dollars or any kind of subsidies (fees waived, etc) are used to help sports team owners in this country, professional sports will not go away. There are plenty of people willing to play those sports for a living (even at 1/10th of the current salaries), and mega-millions of people willing to buy tickets to watch the games, buy the shirts and hats etc, and plenty of potential owners who know how to get theor shares out of this. The trick is to return this kind of enterprise back to the same playing field others are in. if your city winds up with no team, so what. The team will be somewhere, and that's what matters.

Bob Tiernan Portland

Bob T, are you being cranky because you feel nobody gave you credit and said you thought this first, and wrote thier comments as an echo to your genius? And have you not noticed that Garrett is new to this forum and may not have managed to finish reading your capacious blog-oevre yet?

Jeez, kid.

... and I meant the following:

their oeuvre

Dude should give it up - If he couldn't get it done while the details were still news - I don't think he'd get it now - let alone win in an election. If he really cares about Portland - he'd find a more productive way to expend his energies.

And have you not noticed that Garrett is new to this forum

Not new. Been around for years rw. Used to use plain old "Garrett" until I was told not to. I just haven't had a whole lot to say around here since the election happened. I aware of Bob T's style and his stance. I just don't agree with his stance. Like his statement below.

if your city winds up with no team, so what.

Hmmm...I suppose I like the city to provide a certain quality of life. When something like the MLS deal comes along I'm happy when the city approves it. Very little cost in the big scheme of things and it's a city owned facility for one of the only sports in America where most of the spectators actually make more than the majority of the players. I realize this is a no win conversation with Bob T that we've had before. I'm just trying to represent the opposite majority position and say the mayor made a damned good deal and I challenge anyone to find a better deal in this day and age.

What self respecting city should want for a major, a 46 year old person that has sexual/romantic relationships with people 17 years and younger? In the restroom of the city hall? Then after someone blows the whistle on them, tries to bad mouth the whistle blower to maintain his advantage in the mayoral election. All of that was just bad.

But...except for the somewhat mysterious and vague details of the Jantzen Beach hit and run car collision...Adams allegedly popping out of his truck with his zipper down after the collision...Adams, mayor of Portland has been mostly watching his p's and q's. He's more or less gotten back to approaching business in decent fashion most Portland residents seem to want and expect from their mayor.

Is there any point in another recall? Maybe the effort serves to keep people reminded of Adams quirky blindness to the impropriety while in public office, of inclinations towards young people for sex and romance; as a means of gauging his likelihood to have a relapse. If Adams keeps looking like he's going to do his job...it's probably wiser to not waste too much energy on further recall efforts.

I'd love to see a long discourse on the heterosexual oldies who love them young girls. Propensity to intimacies with younger people and so forth... dunno.. just think this is less discussed in mainstreamish populations!

a 46 year old person that has sexual/romantic relationships with people 17 years and younger? In the restroom of the city hall? Then after someone blows the whistle on them, tries to bad mouth the whistle blower to maintain his advantage in the mayoral election. All of that was just bad.

No city. Since the Attorney General found out that this never happened Portland isn't in this situation. So would you either a: care to enlighten us as to which city you're referring or b: quit making up stuff and passing it off as facts after this speculation has been dismissed by multiple sources.

hit and run car collision...Adams allegedly popping out of his truck with his zipper down after the collision

Again, I realize you don't like the guy but you're making things up. That really doesn't help you prove your point.

Garrett in the garret: I was kinda wondering if I'd totally missed some information... I'd not heard of Adams getting it zippy with a boy in the bathroom; nor of him emerging from his rig with zipper down.

I'd heard nothing of this sort. But did not have the moxy to say it ain't true - just assumed that I'd turned my attention back to getting stuff for the homeless, or packing to move, or hugging my kid or... eating bonbons or something else meaningful.. and missed it.

Seems as though it was widely reported in the Oregonian, the merc or WW and discussed here on blueoregon that Adams was caught kissing what's-his-name in the mensroom. Or was that just a nasty rumor that was later proven untrue? I think it was also in the O where I read that the passenger in the car Adams hit claimed Adams stepped out of his pickup with his zipper down. Remember, I wrote 'alleged'. Adams of course, denied that his zipper was down. Who could blame him? Who would want to appear that flakey, especially if they're trying to hold down the job of mayor of a major U.S. city? The accusation sounded flakey...but so did the collision and Adam's immediate reaction to it.

It's not that Adams is a terribly bad guy. Sure...lots of older people have the hots for younger folks....and vice-versa. Sometimes they even have sexual/romantic relationships....which isn't always a bad thing, but usually isn't the greatest idea. Among the ways those things become viewed as particularly bad is when the person having them is trying to be mayor of a city like Portland. Portland's somewhat of a progressive city...but to a point.

On the topic of government and sexual-romantic funny business... . In the Oregonian tonight, Steve Duin wrote about "...how glibly Sen. John Ensign of Nevada has negotiated his sexcapade." Ensign...what a guy.

Stop whining, Portland. Now, as a matter of fact, he IS licensed to lie and cajole, as long as the verbiage sounds good. People have spoken. And a good thing it is for mainstream politics. Think of all those "hold their feet to the fire" voters that will not be a part of the process, disgusted, and, if you're lucky, won't vote either.

Bottom line: he did what he felt like, every time he felt like it, and Dems have used that to illustrate that, as a matter of fact, you don't have any say in it. "Get with it, or get lost". Message received. If you're not prepared to take matters into your own hands, don't bother with the process. "Just shut the f*ck up". Got it.

Bob T:

if your city winds up with no team, so what.

Garrett in SE:

Hmmm...I suppose I like the city to provide a certain quality of life.

Bob T:

Then move to a city that has the sports events you like instead of supporting using tax dollars (even of that from the pockets of sports-haters) to give to a private person or group so they can have a stadium, or even subsidize keeping a money-losing team.

Using your rule, each sport league will be forced to expand so that more and more cities have some sort of team. I don't know why this is so difficult. I love Triple-A baseball, but I'll accept having no team is the only way we could get one is to give tax dollars to a private person or group. Sorry, that's the way it is. Your rights are not violated if you don't have the kind of team you want. Watch it on TV.

Garrett in SE:

When something like the MLS deal comes along I'm happy when the city approves it. Very little cost in the big scheme of things and it's a city owned facility for one of the only sports in America where most of the spectators actually make more than the majority of the players.

Bob T:

So what. If it's that easy to pay the salaries, then Mr. Paulson should have no problem paying out of pocket.

As for the government-owned stadium, sorry, those are a sink-hole and are still what the millionaire owners want us to do for them while they laugh all the way to the bank. A city could get stuck with a stadium and no team, and that will cause the politicians to subsidize yet another millionaire to re-locate there so the stadium doesn't "go to waste". So it would be cheaper for taxpayers to either not build the stadium in the first place, or tear it down after the first team moves somewhere else.

In some countries, such stadiums will be used for numerous other things, like the Taliban types who used Kabul's soccer stadium for many executions of women who were caught doing such things as listening to music CDs, attending clandestine schools, showing their faces, or working to earn some money (diversity in action), but that's another topic.

Bob Tiernan Portland

Bob T, I'm appalled! I agree with you!

In some countries, such stadiums will be used for numerous other things,

and in the really enlightened ones, the old, grand cathedrals and churches are used for all kinds of secular public functions. Not much use for them as churches. That'll be a blessed day, when we're talking about what to do with unused churches like we are with PGE park.

Mr. Beaver, are you really gonna go there? Anti-Christian?

I was thinking this morning about how, in many respects, there are aspects of fundamentalism in many of my Four Directions Altar families, also my Tibetan Mystery School circle, taught by a fellow who was sent to the monasteries when he was six years old!

Whether it's the seeking of healing, relinquishing of spirits/attachments or, yes, a dogmatism that hurts the ears... I consider that I may just about be ready to be finished with casting aspersions on religions in a generalizing way.

You seemed like such a cheerful sort of fellow...

I am sick to death of the Garretts of the world telling me that I'm a bigot if I happen to agree about ONE PARTICULAR ISSUE with the likes of Lars Larson.

Let's turn it around, shall we, Garrett? It must in fact be that Lars Larson is a sellout to Conservative Truth if he happens to agree about anything with a self-identified leftist. Right?

Hmmm, the most successful team in MLS by fan attendence count would be the upstart Seattle Sounders. they play in an American Football stadium - zounds!

<h2>Methinks the people of Portland have been hosed by Paulson, Adams and Leonard.</h2>