Thursday, January 22, 2009

Speakers Needed

Things are developing fast and furious: I spent most of the afternoon talking to the media and trying to get the word out. What we really need for the rally is a keynote speaker. Ideally, someone meeting the following criteria:

1. Portland resident
2. Public figure
3. Sam supportive

It's been difficult finding people willing to speak; the reaction to this issue has been unpredictable, even (especially!) among the GLBT community. Also, since it's apparently a "sex scandal", public figures don't want to get near it with a ten foot pole. I know they're out there, but being as I don't have a lot of contact with folks everybody knows, I'm sort of hard-pressed to locate anyone willing.

If you or someone you know would be willing to holler into a megaphone in downtown Portland tomorrow night in favor of our current mayor, please let me know ASAP.

One more phone interview and then I'm off to Roots Brewing to make signs and talk to KATU. Hope to see you there!


  1. storm large would be a candidate.
    she is a die hard sam fan.

    I am straight - but well known in the Music/arts community. have acted as MC for sam in his campaign.
    Not sure how else i could be of help.
    But I am planning on being there.

    I wonder if marchfourth (who played his recent party) would also appear?

    Lisa Lepine ProMotion Queen
    contact me off post at

  2. I just got a message on FB from Marc Acito offering to MC, he also listed Storm Large as interested. I have his phone number... I will send him your way.

  3. If Gus Van Sant DOES show up, hopefully he'll be willing to share a few encouraging words.

  4. Support is growing. Here is something I wrote for my blog,

    The Mayor Adams Conundrum, or
    An Indictment of Societal Standards for Politicians

    In a recent Willamette Week cover story, the story unfolded of how Portland Mayor Sam Adams was forced to disclose his relationship with a young intern, Beau Breedlove. With fiery rhetoric, Nigel Jaquiss laid out a good vs. evil story in which Adams besmirched the good name and reputation of Democratic primary competition Bob Ball on a quest for power.

    After an early, brief gut reaction to the story–by God, he lied to us, or something to that effect–I took a step back from this minute-to-minute, shock-and-awe school of news presentation, and looked at the entire story.

    In the realm of real, factual information as it stands, we know two things: Mayor Adams initially lied about his relationship, and that that relationship was a consensual one. Everything else is speculation and moral judgement, what Jaquiss relishes in calling “potentially predatory and illegal behavior.”

    The age of consent, as we all know, is 18. Though Adams and Breedlove both initially lied about their sexual relationship, both still maintain the sexual relationship started after the latter turned 18. Looking at the timeline, Adams met Breedlove when he was indeed a minor, and the two are still in contact. That period of acquaintance, and the fact that the sexual relationship only lasted a few months, leaves it rather comprehensible that this story is true, and the relationship was fully legal.

    Even given that fact, the media has overwhelmingly taken a moral, rather than a legal, stand on the issue. Former Adams campaign contributor–and, not to mention, former Adams boyfriend–John Vezina recounts in WW that he “ran into Breedlove on a Portland street…[and] Breedlove told him he had just spent the weekend at Adams’ house, where they had sex.” Presented almost as a matter of fact rather than speculation, the paper does not substantiate this with a confirmation from Breedlove himself. Rather, it follows this purposely juicy tidbit with an Vezina’s implication that Adams is “the bad guy.”

    This brings us to the issue of societal standards for a politician. Mayor Adams never wanted to inject his personal life into the political process, instead wanting to focus on policy. In a world so fixated on the personal, a media system so focused on the potential soap operas , a man who knew his own life would overshadow his bright ideas for the collective good was forced toward an error in judgement. He knew how his relationship would be spun into something treacherous, something vile, something outrageous. He should have admitted it from the beginning, but that does not negate the fact that he was elected the best person for the job, and he still is.

    On a digressive tangent, the ultimate irony here is that Ball, the man who stirred up the issue in the first place, Adams’ potential political rival, would certainly not fit so well into the “good guy” moral mold if his romantic relationships were called into play. Adams isn’t the only politician who has experience with much younger men. “But Ball isn’t our mayor,” one might say. But he could have been. His initial method of attack was nothing if not hypocritical. Surely, though, it wouldn’t provide such a neat narrative for WW and similar media sources.

    This is not the focus, though; rather, it should not be. Mayor Adams was elected under the promise of change and progress in Portland. He is not a different person than he was when he ran for mayoral office. His love for the city has not diminished. His record is exemplary. Some may debate how exemplary, but that is the discussion we should be having, not one fixated on his personal life. Focus on policy, not the personal.

  5. Also, if you'd like words from an everyman constituent, let me know!