New Rule


So do you agree now he should resign?

Or is making out with 17 year old subordinates in a men's room and repeatedly lying about later acceptable behavior for an elected official, in your view?
You are making assumptions.
Any chance of waiting till all the facts get out before issuing any more pronouncements from On High?
Did Sam really uphold your campsite rule? Did he "correct any misconceptions they may have" when he (admittedly) coached the kid to lie for him after? If so, he made the petard 'pon which he's hoist by the kid today. No tea or sympathy owed.
I see. It's the victim's (i.e., minor's) fault. Got it. Thanks.
Hold on there a second, Dan...
I want to say one thing to the people. I want you to listen to me. I'm going to say this again: I did not have sexual relations with that 17 year old boy, Mr Breedlove. I never told anybody to lie, not a single time; never. These allegations are false. And I need to go back to work for the people of Portland. Thank you.
Leave them in better shape then you found them = Coaching kids to lie?

Sam didn't honor the campsite rule at all.

And the rest of us don't need cutesy-sounding rules anyway. We have actual ethics.

Excuse and make cute all you want. It just exposes you as the hypocritical fool you are. Hope you had a nice trip to Portland.
The kid, despite being described everywhere as a "legislative aide," was not Adams' aide. He didn't work in Adams' office, or even Adams' branch of government. The kid worked for the state leg, Adams for the city of Portland. Breedlove wasn't under Adams in any official capacity. Only in, you know, an unofficial capacity.
Maybe Breedlove is squealing because Adams did NOT honor the campsite rule.
Maybe there is some chickenhawk professional courtesy going Adam's way here.
I agree. high school kids should be mature enough to not blab about affairs with us. young kids just suck. I fucked this 15 girl once and I told her about the Tea and Sympathy rule, but she blabbed about it on her MySpace, and now my 50 year old ass is up shit creek. she thought I was talking about going to see the symphony and drinking tea! stupid kids. why aren't they mature enough! I mean, we need to set some age rules that make it easier to follow so that I, the real victim, doesn't find myself in this situation. I HAVE A CARREER TO PROTECT! when do their (kids) minds mature enough to follow simple no blabbing rules? fucking kids. don't they teach them about no-snitching in school? I wish kids had a zero to mature time span of overnight (age 13 please).

there has to be a drug that will make kids cool.
your rules are stupid
@10 welcome to the New Gay Morality.

and they wonder why they don't get more respect. don't the masses understand the "campsite rule" on making out with boys in men's rooms?

Dan-- while your rules are OK in my book, they only really work if they are generally accepted.

Who knew your rules and who wanted to adhere to them? Apparently none of the folks you're writing about.....

Kind of makes it a non-news/blog story from that standpoint.
1-6, 8-11


You know if Adams himself hadn't tried to fool people by moralistically pretending to be Breedlove's selfless "mentor", he wouldn't have so many people thinking he was Breedlove's boss.

One other point on the campsite rule: Camp Breedlove was left with some kick ass how-to-lie-to-the-media skills taught by a high-end PR flack. That's knowledge he can use to worm his way out of accountability the rest of his life.

This is no time to be genteel. The kid is CASHING IN. Look on your libertarian buddy Sullivan's website for that essay "The End of Gay Culture"--this is it. None of those rules from old plays count anymore, we're all fucking libertarians now. Breedlove took the responsibility of 'be kind' and "Atlas Shrugged" off that responsibility for fame and ready cash.

When someone tries to bullshit you in your column you don't put up with it. Why pretend to be 'objective' here? The kid sold the story. After Prop 8, he must have been aware of the sort of damage it would do. He does it in the hopes of money and fame that he can somehow ride into a better position vis-a-vis the gay community.

He'll get the money, no question about that. Your job is to make sure that he knows that there is an actual gay community there that he just sold out. Do you remember that scene in Sin City at the end where that bitch that sold everybody out got into the elevator with Josh Hartnett? You're supposed to be Josh Hartnett! Pussyfooting on your presentation here is only allowing people to paint him as a victim. The kid did it for the fame and money and it has the potential to hurt us all.

Face it, Dan: Adams is going down, and a whole bunch of gays threw their credibility after him, including you. Breedlove isn't hurt, isn't a victim, and he fucking RATTED ADAMS OUT FOR MONEY. Adams is going to pay for being sketchy with his job. But being sketchy isn't the same thing as being a rat. Use your powers to put a stop to this kid's sex life. It's the only thing that will let him know that the gays do look out for their own.
Wait didn't you all hear that the pro-Sam "rally" was, like, bigger?

So it was already settled. The Jesus freaks lost. It doesn't matter what we find out next.

Kids should understand not to talk about all the ways adults manipulate them!!!
Cause the job of the cults' leaders is to SQUASH anybody who doesn't follow the rules,
especially if the make the cult leaders look like JACKASSES in the process.
Quite true, elenchos, quite true, lol.
Dan, as someone who had a LOT of very hot, no-strings, fuck-buddy relationships with older men when I was a just-legal lad, there are things about your rules that I like quite a bit. Yes, you're right. These relationships are going to happen, and so we might as well have a suggested, honorable code of conduct. Thanks for having the balls to lay 'em out there. However, your "campsite rule" ignores the fact that sometimes bears wander into campgrounds and rip very responsible people limb from limb.

Older and younger men have to accept the occupational hazards that come with such fuck-buddiness. One is that people may be skeeved out by such relationships, however legal, and if you're in the business of pleasing the public...well, you just might end up getting burned.

Furthermore, it is unrealistic (not necessarily wrong) to expect a young person not to make mistakes. Very few just-out young men would ever be able to keep quiet about their hot new fuck buddy, especially if he's the mayor. I'm sorry, but the young gossip even more than the old, and when you expect them to keep it quiet you're asking for something very unlikely. It's kind of like wearing leopard-print short-shorts and being stunned if you get a cat-call or two. Sure, it's inappropriate and they should treat you better. But really.

I think young Mr. Breedlove will regret his innocent boastings that humiliated someone who actually had no intent to hurt him, but young people do that all the time. It's called "growing up," and no one (including the mayor) should be surprised that he's got to go through it like anyone else.

@15 oh BOO HOO. Poor you. Beau "sold out" the "gay community" by talking about an adult in a position of power making out with him in a men's room when he was 17. SO UNFAIR!! The kid sold out!! The kid was supposed to realize lying about kissing adults at age 17 would "HURT US ALL"

How does it HURT US ALL, are you all pedophiles?

Or "not so innocent" boastings. Whatever.
Dan I fear all the spooge you have swallowed has slowed your brain. Now, I know part of your job is to speak as if you are an authority, but really, what you are speaking about is something all gays have known for years, the ability to lie in public to hide what goes on in private. The problem with this particular lie is that it was an adult in a position of power, making out with a 17 year old.
In any other forum, this would be the end of the adults career. Why do you support Adams? Cause you and he share a need for sperm? Really?
Adams told someone to lie to cover up, simple. Adams should go because he is scummy. Fag or not, he is a scummy liar. I could care less if he sucks dick at the gym or makes out with legal teens, but in this case, he is a liar and gay or not, he should resign and go back to sucking cock at the gym, where he just might run into some Stranger writers, eh?

Or better yet, why don't we teach kids that every time they tearfully expose some abuse that they will be showered with media attention and money? Look, I know kids who've been abused for REAL, and this has nothing to do with it. Soon, there will be no reason to believe these sorts of allegations at all, because so many money hungry people who haven't suffered have whored themselves like this to the press.

How do I recognize that the 'victim' knew what he was doing? Because of the shifting tone of his statements: glad of the attention he is getting, but also slightly apologetic to his former lover. People who even felt the least bit uncomfortable in such a relationship have a tinge of vindication, or lingering fear or hatred when the story breaks...not "sorry I had to do it. We can still be fwiends, right?"

Seriously, Dan. Put a boytoycott on his ambitious ass. He did something seriously stupid that has already ruined at least one career.
i dunno, the minute i heard that Breedlove named his little lapdog "Lolita" that clinched it for me. that guy is a knowing, willing slut and a complete fan of sex, older men or not.
dragging a little kinked up dog to an interview where he knows that name is going to be printed is just a freaking HUGE banner ad "fuck me."

or are we to blame the mayor for this guy's kinkiness?
squicky is my new favorite word.
This is all so ridiculous. We all know that the only reason this is a story is because Adams is gay, and gay sexuality is like a fascinating side show -- exciting and offending the pols all at the same time. If they can't kill you for your policies they go after your sex life.

Haven't we all been through this ridiculous thing enough already? We need to flip the standards; what happens when we oust somebody for doing this kind of shit? We get shittier leaders who would have lost to the person we just burned at the stake. Then we get fucked.

Breedlove is just the gun Adams used to blow his own brains out with.

Underage fuck-and-tell boytoys
don't kill
sleazy lying scumbags-
sleazy lying scumbags
sleazy lying scumbags.
Remember that our old pal Monica Lewinsky had an affair with a teacher in her school and ruined his marriage. Upon learning she'd be a Whitehouse intern, she told her friends she was "going to Washington to get my presidential knee pads."

She was horny, had daddy issues, and was probably looking for some thrilling private scandal that made her feel pretty. Clinton was a dumb-ass dishonorable pig who wanted some trashy poontang on the side. Neither one of them had nefarious designs, but they ended up humiliating themselves, the country, and the democratic party.

When two vain, horny idiots get together, they can accomplish amazing things they never expected. My guess is that like Clinton and Lewinsky, Breedlove and Adams have made similar mistakes before and will probably do so again in the future.
Dan, there is no upside for QueerNation in this one; everyone involved (going back to Ball) is queer and sleazy. Drawing national attention to it is not helpful.
Move on.
Let Portland take care of Portland's mess.
Thank for your thoughts in the update, Dan.
If Adams stays he will be damaged goods.
I can't see Obama wanting to cozy up to Adams after this.

I didn't say Adams shouldn't go down. I have been in similar situations and kept my dick in my pants--I don't feel sorry for him. That said, the kid sought him out; beyond legality, the gays need to be concerned with the damage that this did to us, and it doesn't just concern Adams. This sort of thing happens all the time. The difference here is that the kid appeared to skip the blackmail part of the sequence. The responsibility Breedlove owes has nothing to do with his legal culpability, but rather the damage he did to the reputations of people who are honestly victimized, including those gays who will be called pedophiles because of his and Adam's behavior. Dan's friend is right: they should both 'resign'.
I think he's just a young kid who grew up in the era of Paris Hilton and Monica Lewinsky and thinks this is his fifteen minutes - and it probably is.

By the way, there's a weird little undercurrent running through these comments that is very northwesty: Just so we're all clear on this, you do know that it's entirely possible for two people to have a sexual relationship without one of them being a victim, right?
How dare anyone be angry at an elected official making out with a 17 year old! I'm sure if Adams had been straight and Breedlove a high school senior cheerleader, nobody would have cared at all!

Oh wait, everybody on earth thinks fortysomethings making out with high school students is pathetic and creepy. Except for Dan, apparently.

"it's entirely possible for two people to have a sexual relationship without one of them being a victim, right?"

Yeah, but it's not nearly as hot.
Older and younger is older than civilisation itself. Only in Puritan America is it such a big deal, mostly fueled by media bluenoses who want to sell ad space. People are only human. And, like I've said before, adult consensual sex is nobodies business (unless one of the parties is looking for their fifteen minutes of shame. Oops! I mean fame).
@34: "Just so we're all clear on this, you do know that it's entirely possible for two people to have a sexual relationship without one of them being a victim, right?"

Not between an adult an a minor, no.
For once I am glad to be a remarkably average looking and powerless 40 something. I cant get a 40 year old to make out with me, let alone a 17 year old - and I'm sorry, but I have yet to be in a public bathroom that has ever made me feel like kissing.

The age disparity isn't as compelling/damaging as the gov't official pursing the intern angle.

Adams should have jerked off instead...that's what us not so hot middle agers do.

Since Adams is handsome and connected, perhaps he should have sought out a twink in the private sector.

Don't get your meat where you get your potatoes. Not an original concept.
@34, actually - not just Northwesty (although we do appreciate a good 'camping' reference more than anybody), but overall-American. I bet most Europeans would be saying "...And the scandal here is what?? Come back to us if the age is lower than 16 and then we'll really talk scandal." Having studied Greek antiquity, they probably see this less a violation of public trust and more just a minor character flaw that they'd likely to overlook at the polling booths...
Does anyone know if there was any financial incentive for Breedlove to talk? I bet there's been lawyers all over this for months prior -- if this scandal's been in process, he's had to have people advising him not to talk.
Thanks for bringing up Greek antiquity, that's super relevant.
squeamish + icky = squicky. Another americanism has arrived. I like it.
"Squick" and "squicky" have been around forever:

A term originated around 1994 in the alt.tasteless newsgroup as a response to the question "What is the sound of a good skull fucking?" The term was quickly picked up by the alt.fuck.the.skull.of.jesus group and used primarily within Subgenius circles as a verb meaning "To fuck someone in the skull." The term was co-opted by the BDSM community some time latter, and its original meaning is often overlooked or ignored.
Still want to go rally for him? I notice you're now saying, "...what we know now." As least you're now showing a healthy skepticism....
Can someone explain to me when the legal age of consent became the moral age of consent? Apparently "everybody" thinks that relationships between a really old person and a really young person is creepy and awful. Why? And also, why are you in a rush to throw the book at someone for being creepy or disgusting?

Go ahead and throw him in jail for having an affair with someone that would have been totally legal (but still totally creepy and disgusting, right guys??) if it happened a few months later. It's probably illegal, and therefore abominable. Just like that one 17 year old who had to register as a sex offender for having consensual sex with a 15 year old, illegally. Those two were totally asking for it.

While we're at it, can we just make a law saying that it's illegal to have sex with anybody 15 years away from you in age, so that Everybody can breathe a sigh of relief that this creepy behavior will never go unpunished again, and we can finally throw Hef in jail for all his years of totally grossing us all out?
Somebody start an argument with me about how none of the Playboy bunnies dating Hugh Hefner are at all victims in their relationships because they're all over the legal age of consent.
I'm so annoyed by this stupid story. Did Adams do anything illegal? No. End of fucking story! Fuck all of you and your fucking bullshit "ethics". You know what ethics are? They're a way of making yourself think you're better than other people. Most of you fucking morality jockeys wouldn't do the same as Adams only because you wouldn't have the OPPORTUNITY to do the same. But if the opportunity came along you'd be singing a different fucking song.
Bay Area apartment rents fall 1st time in years…

Bay Area rents succumbed to growing economic pressures during the fourth quarter, dipping for the first time in years and upending the balance of power between tenants and landlords, according to a report by Novato research firm RealFacts Inc.
If Hef runs for Mayor, it will be a problem.

Keeping legal does not mean keeping your office.

Make out with a high school kid in a public men's room, lying about it, telling him to lie, and "not remembering" when contradictions come out = GOODBYE! And GOOD RIDDANCE!

Ethics are required for democracy to work. Thankfully some of us understand that. The rest of you can go seduce teenagers and learn the hard way.
What is your evidence for your assertion that ethics are required for democracy to work?
Also, what is a sufficient condition for Democracy no longer working? If Adams keeps his job, will people in Portland stop voting in elections? Will there be a coup? Or will the town just blow up?
Oh, also, please define ethics. And by define, I mean enumerate completely. And by completely, I mean in such a way that everybody is in agreement.
Put a fork in Adams.

Yeah, when you're chickenhawking a minor you pretty much lose the high ground despite how much cognitively distorted rationales you employ. And some of you (including your idiot leader Savage) would put a first time disclosure therapy group of sexually violent predators to shame.

We're not the French mooning over perverse romantic notions of Mary Letourneau and Villi Whatever. We're Americans and we have laws to protect children. Demonizing the victim only red lines the squickOmeter.

Every Mayor Deserves a Dan Savage and his Sloggers.

Patsy: "In my day there was a sense of style about the whole thing, you know... Christine Keeler and Mandy Rice-Davies, little gorgeous little women who just kept their mouths shut and just looked gorgeous and gave the whole thing an air of dignity. You know, that's the way I shall play it Eddy. Not like these two-a-penny tarts of recent times, you know; kiss and tell, blurt it all out for the promise of a quick buck and instant fame. Not me sweetie, my lips are sealed!"

Eddy: "You'll do Hello Magazine then?"

Patsy: "Oh, yeah."
Thank you to 43.
Sunday - media reports Adams has told members of the City Council he will NOT resign ...

well well
@56 So Adams likes it rough, eh?
I'll bring the axle grease.
@56, it's no longer his choice.

if he wants a slow and painful exit so be it.

but he's done. we all know it. the only question is how selfish he is and how much he wants to further divide and harm the city.
@ 53

I agree that Adams is done. He will never be able to lead after this. Most of that is because we insist

On the flip side, who cares if a politician has the moral high ground? What if he does a good job? I just think it's such a bad idea to think (or expect) that any politician will be *morally* virtuous. Executive virtue (avoiding corruption, waste, kickbacks and looking out for the people) we can insist on. We can ask that they obey the law, and ask that they perform their specific duties well, and then I think we should shut up.

Of course, it'll never be that way, but I think it would be easier on all of us and give us a much better government to boot.
I can understand why Adams did what he did. I won't tell you how I came to understand that, because that's my own business. If you want my opinion of this whole debacle, read it here:…
oops. "Insist that certain forms of propriety are far less important than others."
@59 yes government would be so much better if mayors in their 40s who make out with 17 year old boys in public restrooms, lie about, tell the boys to lie about it, and "forget" about it when confronted later only to stop talking and refer questions to lawyers..

OH, YES it would "be easier on all of us" and "give us a MUCH better government."

OH YES. YOU ARE SO RIGHT!! Bring on that better government! It would be so much easier and better!!

@52. Please stay in Florida. Florida deserves to have you. Thanks.
chris - you have to draw a line somewhere. it happens to be at 18 in portland. if you want to argue there shouldn't be a line, or that the line should be different, well, have at it. but that's a different argument then what we are talking about.

and when a minor is involved, there is a victim. aside from that, dan's rationale sounds like blaming the victim. it's the same logic almost all who are caught having sex with minors use. they wanted it. they instigated it. they were mature enough. they were in the wrong for squealing about it afterwords.

if there is a campside rule, then there are potentially victims. the pretend adams is the victim here is quite the turnaround, despite what fantastical motives breedlove may now have.
New poll!!!! How many think he should resign now?
@34: "Just so we're all clear on this, you do know that it's entirely possible for two people to have a sexual relationship without one of them being a victim, right?"

Not between an adult an a minor, no."

@66... because -- like it or not -- that is the law at present. unless you want to go through all the "youth pastor watch" posts and exonerate a bunch of creeps, you have a victim when a law is broken.
What's Dan's term for a journalist who accepts the word of public officials without question?

Oh yeah, "stupid fucking credulous hack."
More sound advice from Dan Savage regarding sex with young people.

Has anyone else noticed this trend?
Infrequent, why is that a different argument? What exactly are we arguing here, whether he broke the law, or whether he's morally bankrupt? According to the facts as they stand, no law was actually broken, although the legal ground is getting delightfully grayer every day. Until Beau comes forward and says that he had sex with Adams when he was 17 years 364 days old, we should assume there are no legal grounds of deposing the mayor.

So if we're arguing ethics, why is the nature of the law itself not up for discussion? I mean, "it happens to be 18 in Portland?" Not only have we drawn an arbitrary line in the sand over what's illegal, and what's merely gross and abnormal, it's not even the same from state to state! And people are pretending that the law is a firm basis for deciding what is ethical and what isn't.

"When a minor is involved, there is a victim", but if we are to assume that under 18(or whatever the age of consent might be) means a 100% chance of someone being a victim (and by someone, that is to say, always the minor) then what are the rates on a 19 year old, or a 21 year old? If they're 90%, shouldn't it be illegal, just to be on the safe side?

I was pretty stupid when I was 18 years old. I'm much smarter now, at a mere 24. In 10 years, I'll marvel over how stupid I was in 2009. And when I'm 34, I can't guarantee that I won't be deceived by some 60 year old broad, who will ruin my life forever. None of this has any impact on the fact that I did not suddenly begin holding myself accountable for all of my actions on the day I turned 18.

This kid is not innocent. He may be fucked up later in life because of this, but it will be partly his fault. Why is that people think one person has to be entirely to blame, and why is this belief preventing them from comprehending people saying that both share some of the blame, and both might be victims?

Confidential to 63: Tampa, Kansas.
More self righteous and bullshit trolling from people refusing to even use the same handle, let alone their real names.

I have noticed this trend.
Troll: a person who disagrees with me, and who points out what an ass I am while ripping my flawed logic to shreds.
Oh, Tampa KANSAS. A mighty fine state. Making a solid contribution to culture, science, technology. Kansas.

Hey, did you vote for Sam Brownback?
Is there another Chris in Tampa who reads SLOG? What a freakin small world it is!!
Wouldn't "brownback" make a great name for unprotected enema-less anal? Use that in a column, Dan.
was @71 directed towards me?
Oh, I don't live in Kansas, silly, I live in Florida. You make a lot of assumptions though!
or, is this about there being two chris in tampas? i'm confused. where is the real CiT?
No, infrequent, I only engaged you in the first place because I know you're not a troll. This topic is attracting an unusual amount of anonymous posts, though, and I was responding to the one guy making all of them.
i don't know which chris in tampa is talking with me, but in response to 70 via 45:

there are WAY more than one or two issues at play here. those pretending otherwise are not arguing fairly. in concern to your post about the age of consent, i return with there is currently a law. when you wrote about a few weeks or months not making a difference, i then replied about that issue. i said, well, then change the law. until then, there is a well-known line (obviously SA and BB knew it!), and even if you change it, there has to be a line somewhere. because there is a line, and there has to be a line, the "it was only a few weeks" argument does not really stand legally. it doesn't stand ethically for those who are squicked out by it. so, that's a potential lose lose.

now, i say potential, because at this point, there is no proof that a law was broken. but come on! we certainly have cause to doubt the testimony of these two! sure, until a law is proven broken it's just icky to those that find 40 year olds hooking up with 18 year olds icky. but to submit SA is clear because of the current story being peddled is not the strongest argument.

apart from all that, there is, of course, still the lying. the lying that helped get him elected. the lying that helped prevent an earlier investigation. the lying that made many voters feel betrayed. and, the laying that makes some now doubt that the truth is really being told.

but suddenly, everyone hates the age of consent! and suddenly, the 17 year old knew exactly what he was doing! suddenly the older party is the victim! and it's all the younger parties fault! legality aside, i don't buy that. it just arguing what is convenient.
@79 okay, thanks for the clarification. yeah -- lots of new, strange postings.

i think it all looks bad, but i'm not willing to say i think he should resign until more information surfaces. i'm not sure support him either, just because the lying doesn't look good, and it's really not a display of the best decision making.

that aside, if cases like this case the current age of consent to be reconsidered, i'm totally okay with that. it might be good in a way. it's certainly strange to have people feel one way, but the laws acting in another. i'm not a fan of bending around the law; if the law is antiquated, change it.
I understand the law, and I'm sure all parties involved understand it just as well. As long as everyone involved understands that the relationship is either illegal, or ethically gray, then they are all accountable.

Now, maybe you are only using victim in the legal sense, and not in an ordinary sense. It seems to me, though, that you are conflating the two. Because the law supposedly deems this boy a victim, that means that he is a victim in an ordinary sense. He will need therapy, will face countless hardships because of the affair, and faces an increased probability of ending his own life in despair. But, if this had happened in Iowa, he would be perfectly well adjusted.

I know you don't believe this, but this is the conversation that we're having. That's the conversation everybody is having when they talk about how this boy is a victim.

If you want to quibble over the fact that he lied about it, that's fine. I don't agree on that front, either, but I can see how someone would feel they lost their trust in their mayor.
But he's either broken the law or he hasn't. He shouldn't be impeached for grossing out people's sensibilities. And the kid shouldn't be treated as though he was helpless and forced and mistreated just because of a legal technicality.
Seriously, y'all sound a bit hysterical.
CiT - the victim conversation is only interesting to me because of the way dan commented on this. to me -- as it did to others -- it really sounded like "blaming the victim". this is an expression that is fitting even if there is no actual victim, for we understand what that means in this context. (additionally, the blaming makes them a victim of sorts). certainly BB is the innocent party in the original interactions, legally, ethically, and morally. he may be selfish now, but that's not the nature of this discussion (though it is a variable when determining the credibility of his testimony).

Lay off the (former) teenager, he was a kid whether he was 17 or 18 years old. If you want to be pissed off at someone, be pissed off at the horny old fool, they adult who diddled him. Sam Adams was the adult. If he cared about his damn career so much he could've kept in his pants...or dated somebody his own age. He didn't. Instead of saying "mind your own business" when his personal life came up, he lied and had the kid lie for him. That was his own dumb mistake.
What a lot of people aren't realizing is that this isn't just about "saving Sam Adams". This is about saving the voters of Portland who voted for Adams' ideas, experience, and vision for the city. Those remain unchanged by this scandal, but all the hysteria surrounding this scandal has almost robbed us of our mayor, which would have deprived us of the policies we voted on back in November.

I would be very interested to know how many of the people calling for Sam to resign voted for him in the first place or even voted at all. I would be interested to know how many of them even live in Portland and would be affected by a change in government here.

Of course there are Portlanders and Sam supporters who want him to step down, too. But there are many of us who want the damn mayor we voted for to serve his term, or as much of it as he can, because we like his policies.

There are so many logical fallacies going on in these discussions too.

- the idea that because you lie or are dishonest in one area of your life you're going to lie in others. Doesn't follow.

- the idea that what is legally right is necessarily what's morally or ethically right. If that were true than just a few years ago when sodomy was illegal in many states it was also morally wrong and all people having anal sex were bad, bad, bad. Age of consent is a legal construct, not a matter of absolute right and wrong.

- the idea that all relationships between people of vastly different ages are unhealthy. Sure, many of them are, but that doesn't mean all of them are. And I think we should take the word of the people involved. If we don't take Breedlove's word that the relationship was positive, it doesn't really show him much respect as a human.

I don't know why I keep reading about this issue. Maybe it's because it upsets me on so many levels. The homophobia surrounding this (and yes, there is homophobia surrounding this - whether you yourself are a homophobe is for you to decide, but there are crazy homophobes coming out of the woodwork on this one), the sexphobia, the hysterical parents who can't deal with teenage sexuality in general whose kids are probably having anal sex already cause they learned about it in abstinence-only education class, and just the general sense of mean-spiritedness in so many comments. I don't feel like anyone calling for Sam to resign has any actual concern for Breedlove, maybe because Breedlove wasn't harmed. I don't feel like these attacks are made out of actual concern for youth in general. I don't think, finally, that most of these people are considering the future of the City of Portland, or the voters' interests.

If people really want Adams out, they'll get their chance to try for a recall. In the meantime, we've got our mayor back (thank God); no one was actually hurt by this non-crime crime (keep in mind that politicans regularly stay on after DUI's and other more serious potentially deadly crimes; and it's time for Portland to get back to the business of being awesome.
Portland awesome , what a cover up.

Just to set the record correctly, sure ain't Seattle.

And, you can have him.

In all things national, he should have a lot of credibility and access.
When it comes time to hand out Federal pork I'm sure Barak "I'm not 100% comfortable with queers and btw I'm running to the middle as fast as I can" Obama will want to be seen moving heaven and earth to accomodate the chickenhawk Mayor. not.
Putting other issues to the side for a moment, is anyone tracking the fact that Breedlove is currently employed by the man - the gay man - who was going to run against Sam Adams in the last Mayoral election? If Portland does go down the road of electing a new Mayor. what's the odds that this Bob Ball will be a candidate?
@ 62 -

I'm not saying we'd better if all mayors were sleazy, I'm saying we'd get more out of the system if we didn't care about LEGAL sleaziness. We'd hear a lot fewer lies if we just said "look, that's gross, but as long as you're running the city well, that's your business."

Part of the whole reason he lied (and told Breedlove to lie) was because so much emphasis is placed on appearances of seemliness that really have nothing to do with the job. If the media and the public didn't place such immense value on such inconsequential things, he wouldn't have been asked and he wouldn't have lied and we wouldn't be wasting all this time.

Sometimes I just think we put so much value on the "he's so clean-cut and nice" thing because it's something we can assess personally (we think). Whether or not someone is really a good Mayor is way more complicated, and we don't really understand the job or how to make the decision, so we focus on stupid stuff that really belongs in US Magazine.

I'm not sure about kissing 17 year olds. Is that illegal, or just having sex with them?
The question here isn't legal or illegal.

Like it or not, the vast majority of Americans consider fortysomethings fooling around with high school students to be disgusting. Whatever gender, whatever situation. Dis-gust-ing.

Does that mean fortysomethings can't or shouldn't find high school students attractive? No. What it means is that they should keep their pants zipped and their egos in check.

THESE. ARE. CHILDREN. If you are fortysomething, you are certifiably adult. You have no business messing with kids in high school.

Whether or not the majority of SLOG participants feel this way, the voters do, and they will kick Adams to the curb.
Sven, at what age do you think we should cut off adults from having sex with 18 year olds? Is it creepy when a 35 year old does it? What about 30?

And what about Hef? Should we send him to jail?

I seriously don't understand what's inherently disgusting about it. So if you speaking for yourself, and not just the vast majority of Americans, can you please tell me what specifically grosses you out about an 18 year old dating a 40 year old, and whether it still grosses you out when the former is 20, 22 or so on.
Chris in Tampa-

High school students are children. Grownups- real grownups, like 40 year olds- shouldn't get romantically/sexually involved with children.

What do you do about the gray zone? Because as you say, nothing magical happens on your 18th birthday.

Where I come from, MN, the law is that you have to be within 3 years of age of a minor to not have it be a crime. So a 20 year old can date a 17 year old. This seems totally reasonable. If you are 21 years old, you should be able to find a grownup to have sex with.

And please, don't respond with "well that's just your opinion." My point in my original post was that it's a very, very widely held opinion, and politicians who ignore widely held opinions rapidly become ex-politicians. I'm not saying he should go to jail; I'm saying he's political toast.
Sven is right - if you do things that a lot of people think are gross (right or wrong), you won't get a lot of votes. You might be a great politician who happens to love picking his nose and eating it, but if you get's over.

I think it gets a bit ridiculous, frankly, and I wonder if leaders with horrendously unethical sex lives (Clinton, Kennedy, MLK) tend to be much more effective than those who are more virtuous (Bush, Carter, Dinkins). But that's the way it is in this country. Adams may pull a Marion Barry out of a hat, but he's going to have to really be exceptional to pull it off when the next election cycle rolls around.
I started dating my then 17 year old girlfriend(who had literally just graduated high school, making her a real adult, I guess) when I was 21. Though neither of us were particularly well adjusted to begin with, we're both living happily together nearly three years later. She very persistently sought me out, and I even went through a lot of trouble to avoid her advances entirely. But that's only one year longer than MN deems illegal, so it's no so bad. It probably wouldn't have been so bad if I was 22 or 23 either, because it's only a few years more than what's allowed. Though really, I could still be in college at 25 or 26, and she would just be entering college, so we're still practically of age. And so on...

I'm not trying to marginalize what you're saying as being just your opinion. I'm more than aware of the majority opinion, and the reality of our country's politics. None of that should have any effect on the fact that you yourself seem to think it's disgusting, haven't given a definite reason why. I don't see a distinct enough difference in this particular relationship from any random gay relationship, that the majority of the people in this country still believe to be creepy and disgusting.

Gay relationships can end in devastation regardless of age. So can straight relationships. People can die or be ruined because of dishonesty, brutal behavior, or passive abuse. This is not the exclusive domain of 40 year olds dating 18 year olds. You might argue that there is a much higher risk for them, but then good luck with the public perception that AIDS is still very much a gay disease, and still very dangerous.

It might seem like I'm trying to frame the argument as though older people who have relationships with newly minted adults are suffering through all the same bullshit and hardships that gay people are, but I'm not. The public perception of what is right, or normal, or whatever, is the similarity here, and it shouldn't be affecting legislation or policy whatsoever in either case. And every time someone prominent steps up and says that they're going to continue living their life the way they want to, while still doing their job, that's a good thing. The next time this happens, it will be a little less taboo, and maybe in 50 years or so, people won't be voted out of office for having a normal, consensual relationship with someone half their age and just out of school.
chris -- thanks for sharing your personal story. there are, however, so many differences between your story and sam's story that it's almost not worth discussing. the few commonalities may help you relate to him, but it does nothing to advance the discussion. finally, since your story is a personal anecdote, i cannot really debate it one way or another. i would just insist that you and sam were in very different situations, and even you know your behavior questionable.
Oh, I know. I don't sympathize with him on a personal level or anything. I don't hold any stake in this at all. I just think all of these laws need serious reworking, because obviously I could have gotten in some serious trouble if I lived in MN, for something that had a high likelihood of turning out to be something completely innocent.

I don't think that the probability of a relationship turning abusive should mean completely cutting out that type of relationship.

For the record, I'm also for lowering or getting rid of the drinking age. Whatever happened to that movement?
I think it's worth pointing out that the Oregonian's account of Beau Breedlove's story of the kissing incidents paraphrases rather than quotes him. The actual quotes in the story show him to be pretty emphatic about the point that he does not feel like any kind of sexual victim. So while Dan's tea-and-sympathy rule is reasonable, it's not clear to me that Breedlove violated it -- and it's certainly not clear that he violated it intentionally. He may well have come into the interview intending to help Sam Adams by stressing the non-victimy, consensual nature of the relationship. The reporter may have pressed him for exact dates and details or coaxed him into sharing them, then emphasized them in the lead. And/or Breedlove may have let it slip that they kissed, not thinking it was a big deal. As Dan has pointed out, there are lots of young people out there who don't even seem to think that anal sex is really sex, so it's not a stretch to think that it may not have occurred to Breedlove to suppress mentions of the kissing to protect Adams. At any rate, we'd probably have to read an unedited transcript, or better yet see video of the interview to have a better sense of whether Breedlove meant any harm in talking to the Oregonian.
OMG. Read some of the comments. I hope 50 year old "Chet" was being sarcastic and ironic. If that was for real, someone should report him.