Go, Mike, Go! Grrrrr! Grrrr! Take a bite out of those evil conspirators at KPBS! Keep it up! Mike Aguirre is self-destructing right in front of our eyes and it's GREAT!. I was actually a little worried Mike might squeek by in next year's election, but not any more! Go, Mike, go! Give me MORE!!

Posted by akj | reply to this comment
September 13, 2007 11:08 am

He won't talk about it because his office is investigating? When did he start applying that standard? He usually ONLY talks about cases as they are being investigated, and then they go nowhere, so he stops talking about them, hoping we'll all forget. If he had the capacity for embarrassment he would be deeply embarrassed. Of course, he doesn't, so he isn't. He doesn't practice law (although he could certainly use the practice!), and now can't even get his fake-populism to work for him. What a joke he and the top members of his staff are - those poor blokes' reputations will NEVER recover in the legal community.

Posted by What a hoot | reply to this comment
September 13, 2007 11:50 am

Why is it that our city attorney can't even give a clear legal arguement to anything! That's not very comforting. Did he really go to law school?

Posted by Joe | reply to this comment
September 13, 2007 12:52 pm

Completely....I mean completely, UNHINGED!!! Just when you thought Aguirre couldn't get any nuttier. This is better than the squirels!!! What a clown.

Posted by Oliver Holmes | reply to this comment
September 13, 2007 1:05 pm

Someone, please remind Mike that he has no authority to enforce anti-trust laws and that that the Corporation for Public Broadcasting was created by an act of Congress in 1967 to support the local public broadcasting stations. Is he suggesting that Congress be charged with violations of anti-trust laws?

Posted by David Miller | reply to this comment
September 13, 2007 1:40 pm

Wow...Maybe Napoleon has finally met his Waterloo!!

Posted by Jim | reply to this comment
September 13, 2007 1:51 pm

Scott: Just wanted to thank you for the reprise of the talking head graphic thing... I think it really works and brings a certain joie de vivre (i.e. flair) to the site (still waiting for you bring back the pizza charts). Also, since Mike has walked himself into this one, I think this is much better fodder for discussion for the site then the sniveling of SDCERS about how Mike hurt there feelings and was unprofessional (not that you discussed it in SLOP but you know what I am talking about). Now about the issue, wow, Mike has once again shown wonderful prosecutorial discretion. Can I complain that my donation was misappropriated to fund responses to a frivolous subpeona... Oh thats right I would have to complain to the City Attorney's office. FYI, I would love to hear about the status to the case against the pension 8.

Posted by Basic Civics | reply to this comment
September 13, 2007 2:10 pm

It's nice to see KUSI finally questioning him on something.

Posted by LC | reply to this comment
September 13, 2007 10:45 pm

Napoleon / Waterloo is good. My personal favorite is Don Quixote battling windmills. Take your pick. We don't need to worry about the entertainment when the City Attorney provides it.

Posted by arctromba | reply to this comment
September 13, 2007 11:07 pm

Let's talk about the oaf....that's where the meat and potatoes are right now. What is our mayor doing or not doing for our city? Enough about Mike. Let's talk about the strong man.

Posted by Norman | reply to this comment
September 13, 2007 11:48 pm

I suspect the disgruntled here come from the city pension fiasco. I have been in SD for 40 yrs. and seen the kind of self serving politics this city government has hood winked San Diegans with. Unfortunately it hasn't stopped. Aguirre can be the catalyst for that possibility. You know little things like; do the right thing because it's the right thing to do or make decissions for the good of all instead of the few. KPBS is suposed to serve the community. Since 9/11 that has changed drastically. Corporate control is so blatant it is hardly worth watching. I understand if your pocket book is affected you may want to strick out at whom you perceive to be taking from you. Everybody has to deal with living with less all the time. The way to do it is to surrender and quit fighting. Gratitude begets happiness.

Posted by Dannyboy | reply to this comment
September 13, 2007 11:55 pm

Why is it you folks claim you're interested in getting the stories out, in being the alternative to the U-T, but when somebody actually tries to root out corruption, you close in on them? Because you're San Diego good old boys, stupid!

Posted by Truth to power | reply to this comment
September 14, 2007 12:14 am

Now come on folks. This whole controversy disappears when Dr. Weber and KPBS publish their contributor’s info. So we can see who is giving gifts...and who wants to be an indian giver... How hard can that be? Regarding the comment above about nuts and squirrels. I note with interest Mr. Aguirre proudly spoke about his investigations of loose squirrels while it was ongoing. But lets not forget he did save another endangered item in the park. The parking space. His office was responsible for the opinion that the Mayor, who is ultimately responsible, allowed a private company to STEAL, albeit temporarily, public parking spaces to support business interests, to the detrement of citizens visiting Balboa Park. What a surprise. But at least Mike got that one right...those 30 years of practicing law seem to finally be paying off. Go Mike Go.

Posted by RD | reply to this comment
September 14, 2007 1:15 am

Up until now, I've supported a lot of what Aguirre has been digging into (if not necessarily the way he did it), but this is just absurd. According the U-T, this all started because a disgruntled donor to KPBS, who had earmarked his donation for the program, called his office. Geez, you thought your $50 was going to guarantee a program that no one watched was going to stay on the air? And Mike Aguirre doesn't have the common sense to tell you to get a life? I think I'll call him about my neighbor's dalmation that poops in my yard. That ought to require a full-scale probe by the city attorney, too.

Posted by Eric | reply to this comment
September 14, 2007 1:23 am

Dream on, naysayers, Aguirre may indeed have a point, unfortunately. The clue is the statement that some subscriber complained that in effect, he or she was shortchanged. That can be a real pain as newspaper publishers like me can tell. Folks who believe that the agreement they signed on for when they subscribe (or sponsor in KPBS' case) can---and sometimes do---go to their local City Attorney, who just may bring charges since, by subscription, the newspaper does business within that subscriber's jurisdiction. I think that the folks at KPBS may want to refine their terms of agreement in sponsorship. The rest of us wise guys have already. And by the way Duckies, read the ESPRESSO; it's good for you.

Posted by John Rippo | reply to this comment
September 14, 2007 2:05 am

A contributor's complaint is a conmtributor's complaint. So he took up the call? Fine. But I just heard Gloria on 'The Editor's Roundtable' preemptively assert that their editorial selections for the panel were wholly independent. She indicated Mike's office was looking at the possibility of unfair selection or some kind of impropriety in the balance. We shall see what is what when some more players tip their hands... Maybe Bob Kittle should not demand that David Rolland (CityBeat) not be at the table? Maybe...

Posted by Frank In SD | reply to this comment
September 14, 2007 2:23 am

Has Mike Aguirre finally lost his mind? Who got to him to even consider doing an investigation of KPBS? How does he have the guts to challenge a business decision? C'mon Mike. Get with it. Negotiate a deal with the Chargers to keep them at Qualcomm; develop mandatory water recyclying Toilet to Turf rules, and get on with City business.

Posted by Coast Watcher | reply to this comment
September 14, 2007 2:53 am

Pathetic!

Posted by Robert E. Lee | reply to this comment
September 14, 2007 3:02 am

Why can't our city attorney do his job? Why must he spend his time on silly things like this, while the city cannot even get proper legal advice on major decisions? In a normal organization he'd have been fired a long time ago. Mike, wake up and go back to work.

Posted by Aaron | reply to this comment
September 14, 2007 4:13 am

Why is it that when media is investigated, even by a minimal request for information, the rest of the media tries to make the investigation look ridiculous? Well, that's quite simple, my friends. They all realize that they may be subject to the same scrutiny. I have to admit, if you go to a fundraiser event, and you have the stars of "A Way with Words" to talk to you about the future of KPBS, there is an implicit assumption that the show won't be cut just after you sign the paperwork for a significant bequest agreement. No, we're not talking about $50 here, but frequently on the order of throusands or tens of thousands of dollars. I think Aguirre is doing the right thing here, if for no other reason to make KPBS realize that they are not immune to public scrutiny. Go Mike!

Posted by Raymond Lutz | reply to this comment
September 14, 2007 6:03 am

I try, really have to try hard sometimes, to stay away from cheap shots. Besides the high profile "issues," there are a number of smaller victories, i.e. the parking issue above, the promotion of toilet to treatment, etc. However, they get Over Shadowed... Good intentioned? I don't know- but like I said, I stay away from cheap shots- including Sanders, Aguirre, Peters, and Madaffer. Except Hasselhoff- because he's just funny.

Posted by Omni-Potent | reply to this comment
September 14, 2007 6:24 am

How dare KUSI question Mr. Aguirre! I hope Mike opens an investigation of this ungrateful television station next. What insolence!

Posted by dorod | reply to this comment
September 14, 2007 7:40 am

Actually dorod, I'd like to know why Mike Aguirre has a standing spot on KUSI's morning news each week? I'd like to know how he was selected and why? Do the owners of KUSI have a grudge against the business community in San Diego, the current elected officials in San Diego, the retirement board, firefighters, lifeguards, squirrels, Toilet to Tappers, etc.? Someone needs to investigate KUSI immediately!

Posted by Point Loman | reply to this comment
September 14, 2007 3:21 pm

Hey, Loman, KUSI also had a long-standing morning spot for your neighbor Alan Bersin back when he ran the city schools into the ground and was the establishment's darling. They don't play favorites.

Posted by barista | reply to this comment
September 14, 2007 3:38 pm

There's a nasty issue with non-profits -- some donors think making a contribution entitles them to run the organization, at least insofar as their donation is earmarked. And with a number of such donors, Doug Myrland would not have a job. It is reasonable to accept these 'restricted donations,' but the best money to get is the 'unresricted donations' which are funds contributed without any strings attached. There is a gray area in the method or manner of the restriction, sometimes it's not clear how long the restriction lasts, sometimes it's not clear how long the program will last, and sometimes acts of god intterupt the manner of restriction. // Lastly, there is no clear quid pro quo for donations, and if there were, that may well break the law and get the IRS and the ATF out against the non-profit. Maybe not the ATF.

Posted by Christopher Hall | reply to this comment
September 14, 2007 3:41 pm

I stopped watching KUSI because I could not stomach seeing AGHguirre's face or hearing his voice. But I agree with Point Loman: why is he a regular on KUSI? to spin the truth? He's so deceitful he can't even stay focused on his own lies.

Posted by Sunny | reply to this comment
September 14, 2007 3:46 pm

I can't figure out what gets censored and what doesn't on the Voice. I post caustic, yet accurate comments and they get posted. I post accurate, yet less-caustic comments and they aren't. Until BBH's, FOZ's (do they never end?) and others are equally treated, I will place this forum in the "not-credible" category. I doubt you'll publish this, either, congrats if you do! It's a start?

Posted by Frank1 | reply to this comment
September 14, 2007 3:57 pm

Christopher Hall nailed it right on the head. Donor money comes with strings attached and often those issues are very unclear or weighted in favor of the donor when they go to court. Some take it as breach of contract even if the terms are muddy as is likely in the KPBS affair. While Aguirre has bigger fish to fry, it seems good that he's willing to listen even about something this picayune. We should have more city attorneys willing to go that far for San Diegans. What KPBS really needs to do is spell out very clearly what those donor dollars are used for. BTW, Gloria Penner made some offbeat comment on her show this morning implying that Aguirre was concerned with the standing lineup of her show's regulars. Where did that come from?

Posted by John Rippo | reply to this comment
September 14, 2007 4:30 pm

Hey Frank1, We know who gets censored, so don't get out of line. Hey Scott, censor this: have a good lifetime tenure on editors round-table, you earned it, buddy.

Posted by truth to power | reply to this comment
September 14, 2007 5:09 pm

Point Loman.....didn't KUSI have the mayor interviewed on Fridays? What happened to that? Didn't ander want to get up that early, were KUSI viewers interested in watching hime, does Sanders even want to talk about our City's issues on the TV in an interview setting? Anyhow, Mike is much more charming and well read so I image that is why he has the attention of KUSI personnel and viewers. You must admit Aguirre's got some substance behind him verus other city officals that behave and speak as duds. I hope all next week we can talk and read about our Mayor and not our City Attorney. Remember, the Mayor is the big strong dude here. That is who the Voice should be focusing on.

Posted by Norman | reply to this comment
September 14, 2007 6:11 pm

Don Quixote reference...but Don Quixote was honorable so that doesn't work.

Posted by Andy | reply to this comment
September 14, 2007 6:22 pm

Hey, NO ONE gets censored on VoSD more than I do, but the welfare queens are able to call me every name in the book, now stop the whining babies.

Posted by Billy! Bob!! Henry!!! | reply to this comment
September 14, 2007 6:31 pm

Oh who is whining Billy? Sounds like it's you. I am lucky to even get half of my comments posted. A lot of my very best material is censored as it most likely should be. If you and Edgar only knew.

Posted by Caitlin | reply to this comment
September 14, 2007 9:44 pm

The real whiner is the person who called the city attorney's office to complain about KPBS. Although I adored "A Way With Words," I would never have thought to contact a local elected official to express my discontent with its termination. Of course, I understand the structure and funding of public broadcasting. If Mike had solved even some of the city's problems that he had promised to, if his office were getting their charter-mandated work done in a timely manner, and if I had been a big Mike contributor, I might have considered mentioning the KPBS decision to him. However, it is an unconscionable waste of taxpayer money that this whiner called our incompetent, unfocused, publicity-seeking city attorney and was able to get him involved with an issue that is outside his jurisdiction. The caller should have copied KLSD supporters and organized the grassroots, but perhaps s/he is too lazy.

Posted by Califia | reply to this comment
September 14, 2007 9:54 pm

You're essentially right, Andy. My 'quixotic' reference was regarding Aguirre's endless pursuit of things that often don't make sense or that seem entirely irrational. And, in my mind, my use of the term certainly did not refer to or imply any 'honor' that Aguirre might possess...

Posted by Robert E. Lee | reply to this comment
September 15, 2007 5:45 am

C'mon people, focus. The point of the interview is simply that the City Attorney will not and (apparently) cannot justify the expenditure of city time and money to "investigate" an entity that is outside the scope of his authority. Save the media conspiracy theories for another thread.

Posted by JAD | reply to this comment
September 15, 2007 7:23 am

I am not whning, just stating the facts! Now, Caitlying, if you think your best material gets censored, well, your best material is pre-school compared to mine!

Posted by Billy Bob Henry | reply to this comment
September 16, 2007 7:36 am

Billy, would you like to make a bet? I say nothing will ever come out of this waste of time and taxpayer money.

Posted by Caitlin | reply to this comment
September 18, 2007 1:50 pm

This would all be laughable if not for the fact that Mike Aguirre's constant litigation, or the threat of it, has become so counterproductive, costly and embarrassing. Anyone who has followed his career should not be shocked at what we are seeing. Aguirre has always been like the fellow who was picked on, bullied and humiliated by others as a youngster and has spent the rest of his life "getting even." In that quest, he has become the bully himself - the very thing he hated so much when he was the victim.

Posted by TJ in San Diego | reply to this comment
September 28, 2007 7:16 am

• Users may post more than one comment, but should not pose as multiple users. Multiple posts from the same IP address but with a different user name on each will be reviewed to determine whether abuse has occurred.
• Posts with overly personal attacks or unsubstantiated allegations may be edited or deleted.
• Please be patient with the posts -- there may be a delay before they appear on the site -- and make sure to enter the code in the "image verification" box.