Skip to main content









Donation Heart Ribbon

Comments made by DonInHillcrest

Gary Kreep Says His 'Birther' Positions Do Not Relate To Being A Judge

It's clear that KPBS and other news media failed to do their job on this prior to the election. Even minimal research on their part would have brought to light Mr. Kreep's far-right views. How do I know this? Please read on:

Over the years, Bryan Wildenthal, a professor at Thomas Jefferson School of Law, has circulated to his friends an email with his judicial recommendations. Please read this excerpt from Bryan Wildenthal's email sent on 5/8/2012:

"Superior Court Judge - Office 34

There are only two candidates for this seat, both with rather strange
names: Gary Kreep and Garland Peed.

Mr. Peed is a Deputy DA (yet another one!!) with the same type of
narrow criminal prosecution experience that generally makes we yawn
(yet again) with irritated familiarity. On paper, Peed appears fully
qualified, though probably more conservative than would be my taste.
He is endorsed by current Sheriff Gore and former Sheriff Kolender,
and numerous law enforcement associations, though curiously not by his
own boss, DA Bonnie Dumanis (but neither has she endorsed his
opponent, who is a rightwing wacko, see below; QUESTION: is Peed so
lackluster that Dumanis won't even endorse him, one of her own
deputies, over a demonstrably wacko lunatic-fringe candidate???).

Peed is also endorsed by a range of leading Republican officeholders,
from moderate Mayor Jerry Sanders to rightwing Congressman Brian
Bilbray, and County Supervisors Ron Roberts and Greg Cox. On the other
hand, he is also endorsed by Democratic City Councilmember Tony Young,
and numerous local judges.

Mr. Kreep claims to be a "constitutional law attorney" but his ballot
statement is short on specifics about his professional background and
filled with red-flag rightwing "Tea Party" style rhetoric. The website
of the "United States Justice Foundation" which he heads ---
see ---
indicates, sure enough, that Mr. Kreep has numerous extreme-right
political affiliations. He appears to be a rightwing political gadfly
candidate, not a serious choice for Superior Court Judge.
Mmong other things, is supporting "birther" groups suing to remove
President Obama's name from the 2012 ballot on grounds he is not
legally qualified to be President. 'Nuff said!! See:

So the choice for Office 34 is clear: an apparently qualified (if
disappointingly prosecution-oriented) candidate, or a completely
unqualified and frighteningly rightwing extremist.

I am voting for Garland Peed for Office 34, though mainly just to stop
his dangerous and unqualified opponent. I don't think we have the
luxury of sitting this one out!"

-Don Skolnik

June 20, 2012 at 1:12 p.m. ( | suggest removal )

KPBS Strengthens News Service

I am disappointed and echo most of the comments made by lagunagrl, mickeen, wga, jmckane, philski, LynneSC and others.

I will especially lament the loss of Performance Today, a truly unique program of very high quality.

I am a news hound, but am not a fan of the mind-numbing and dumbing 24-hour news "cycle".

Nor do I think devoting fully one-third of your Mon-Fri schedule to the BBC is balanced. As well said by others, most of this "news" will be highly repetitious; and it is obviously single-sourced.

Finally, I am struck by the scope of these changes and the way they have been promulgated: from the top down, without soliciting the opinions of listeners and supporters in any genuine fashion (notwithstanding Tammy's response about the so-called "research" behind this.) This is completely consistent with the way KPBS has operated for many years, and is very disappointing.

Obviously, the changes reflect the "news-only" vision of the station's management. But they don't take account of KPBS's diverse audience.

May 22, 2011 at 4:08 a.m. ( | suggest removal )

Political Analysis: Building Downtown San Diego

It is was really quite surprising --- and disturbing --- to hear Gloria Penner confuse the city's "Living Wage" ordinance with the "Prevailing Wage" requirement on government-related construction projects. This in no way serves the public debate on these important topics.

June 30, 2010 at 10:20 a.m. ( | suggest removal )