Read 'em and weep
I saw Sam the Tram out putting up lawn signs on NE 33rd near Grant High School on Saturday. He was waving to cars as he dashed through the rain. I contemplated an obscene gesture, but decided the better tack would be to act like I didn't recognize him.
The signs are pretty nightmarish. Bright red, as in the city's balance sheet. No "Shake Up City Hall" this time (at least, not that I saw), but "Because Portland Belongs to All of Us." I guess Sho's into excluding people?
And "Moving Portland Forward." I picture the Portlandia statue on a cliff, peering over the edge.
Jon Coney, the Metro clone who's running for state representative, has quite a few up in the same area as well. Haven't seen one from Cyreena Boston yet, but I am sure they'll be exquisite.
| Posted at 2:33 PM | Permalink |
|
Comments (13)
Well, at least red will be a bit of a break from the enviro blue and green everyone else is using.
Posted by Dave Lister | March 31, 2008 2:57 PM
Was that supposed to say "peering?"
Posted by Garage Wine | March 31, 2008 3:09 PM
And "Moving Portland Forward." I picture the Portlandia statue on a cliff, peering over the edge.
That's classic! We need pics! Photoshop Jack!
Posted by Jon | March 31, 2008 3:10 PM
I hereby declare all Adams' (and all VoE candidates') lawn signs litter.
Wow. Civil disobedience is liberating.
Do your part.
Posted by cc | March 31, 2008 3:29 PM
Only those where they don't legally belong, of course.
Just tryin' to do my part.
Posted by cc | March 31, 2008 3:30 PM
So is it "Portland belongs to all of us", or perhaps "Portland belongs to all of us"?
Posted by Allan L. | March 31, 2008 4:31 PM
What about Chris Smith's sign claiming "experience"? Nothing like a little resume-padding for a computer tech who likes to sit in on govt meetings.
Posted by Steve | March 31, 2008 4:34 PM
I saw some of those Sam signs this weekend and they look awful! Bad graphics, I thought maybe I was seeing a "houses for cash" type sign. (Does one of them say something like, "I'm with Sam"? gag me...) Sho, on the other hand, has absolutely gorgeous turquoise blue signs, very simple and elegant. Not that that's a reason to vote for a person...
Posted by Doris | March 31, 2008 5:57 PM
'Not that that's a reason to vote for a person...' - heck the fact that he is not Sam is reason enough to vote for him. At this point I rank Sam right up there with some of the most short-sighted, pocket-padding, crony -cozying, back-room-dealing, crooks that ever ran for a government seat. Oh yeah, I won't be voting for him either.
Posted by native oregonian | March 31, 2008 7:03 PM
Sam, a crook? I hadn't even considered that, but I suppose it's possible. Not too bright, highly neurotic, and pushy and manipulative beyond words were what I was sensing.
Posted by Jack Bog | March 31, 2008 7:05 PM
I’ll admit that I am slightly surprised that the conversation on this blog is pro-Sho. I can understand that it would be against Sam – Jack Bog has made his position known for a while. But everytime I read something in the paper about Sho Dozono, it seems that he is either flip-flopping on his word or he is just plain not making sense. Sho’s simply not credible.
Posted by sho nuff? | April 1, 2008 5:24 PM
But everytime I read something in the paper about Sho Dozono...
Now that you're in the admitting mode, you should admit that "everytime" is actually two words.
The trail of a SamBot is hard to miss, I'll admit.
Posted by cc | April 2, 2008 11:13 AM
I would have gone with the obscene gesture.
Posted by none | April 2, 2008 3:48 PM