Listen

Read

Watch

Schedules

Programs

Events

Give

Account

Donation Heart Ribbon

Avatar for sbcabello

( sbcabello )

Comments made by sbcabello

San Diego Leaders Announce New Campaign To Combat Sex Trafficking

Wow. I'm going to desist now. I'll state only this caveat to lawmakers and media:

1) People only read headlines
2) "Sex-trafficking" is a misleading headline, whether you are printing a government sign or a newspaper banner.

Call it what it truly is to get the support it truly deserves.

Sex-trafficking is one thing. Forced prostitution is another.

January 31, 2014 at 9:45 a.m. ( | suggest removal )

Sex Trafficking Overtakes Drugs As San Diego County Gang’s Top Cash Source

This article makes a great point about the rise of "sex-trafficking" - which makes it uncomfortable for me to refute the basic assertion of the article. "Sex-trafficking," as it appears here - and as it is explained by Ms. Sharma - is used to state that girls are being forced or coerced by pimps to sell their bodies for the financial gain of the pimps. I fear that the headline alone paints a different story than the nuanced story presented below it. (The word "sex-trafficking," I fear, conjures an image for most people that is different than the reality... we don't typically state that a drug dealer is "drug-trafficking" unless they are transporting drugs across borders [international, federal, or county]). The reality is that there has been a marked rise in coerced prostitution, while the commerce in drugs has remained relatively flat. That said, drugs remain king of the realm. If you take every Backpage ad and every other prostitution ad in San Diego county and multiply that by $500 (which is almost twice the the actual average daily earnings of most of these girls), that number wouldn't be significantly less than half of the gangs' earnings from drugs in the same period. My point here is irrelevant, of course. Coerced prostitution is bad - and it is a growing trend. Also, it should be acknowledged that the term "sex-trafficking" means something very different to the average listener.

January 28, 2014 at 10:21 a.m. ( | suggest removal )

Food Truck Market Draws Complaints In Downtown San Diego

The food trucks are a welcome addition to the downtown offerings. If I owned a restaurant down there, I'd be unhappy, too - but that, it appears is irrelevant to the city and to the 10 million of us who visit the Gaslamp each year. I hope that the food trucks stay, and that the free market gets to decide. If people don't like the food trucks, they'll go away. Also, how did Dick's Last resort not recognize that their protest would do nothing but put them in a bad light?

May 9, 2013 at 10:48 a.m. ( | suggest removal )

Legal Battleships Are Still Docked At De Anza Cove

I'm not sure that I understand the most basic of premises in this controversy. Are their current residents who have pre-1980's leases that were written prior to the leases that include the language "your lease will expire in 2003"? If so, how many can there be? Does the language of the post 1980's leases state that after 2003, the city will pay to relocate residents to a comparable home at the same rate? If so, that would seem a ludicrous thing for the city to have promised - but not too dissimilar from the pension plan, I suppose. My problem with all of these long-term commitments is that they don't reflect the changing economic needs or obligations of the city. The land at DeAnza clearly does not belong to the mobile home residents. It belongs to all of the residents of the city. If a hotel comes in its place in exchange for millions of dollars, relieving us tax payers of further debt... that's one thing. If mobile residents sit on the sandy shore, sucking up our resources and opportunities, that's something else all together. I don't care if you're old, on a fixed income, or just feel that you're entitled to a bayfront view because you're special. As much as you've come to believe that you deserve to stay forever at DeAnza. You're wrong. As I understand it, your entitlement expired in 2003.

September 13, 2012 at 11:22 a.m. ( | suggest removal )

Lance Armstrong's Seven Tour De France Titles Are Effectively Gone

Joe Paterno was a much-loved hero to many. Lots of people jumped to defend him, too. He was a good coach. He made some lousy decisions. He will forever be known for his failings. To all of you yellow rubber wristband-wearing zealots: there is nothing you can do to change the legacy that Lance Armstrong has now created for himself. Why in the world do you suppose he would roll over and let the whole world crash down upon him? His positive role in the public eye is now decimated forever. With so much good to be done through his foundation - with so much earning potential still ahead - why would he have rolled over and let it all slip away if he was truly innocent? The greatest comeback story fighter in the sport just gives up? Do you really believe it that an innocent Lance Armstrong would do that? To what end? Today he lost everything anyway. Stop professing his sainthood. Maybe he would have won without the juice. We'll never know. Too bad for everybody. (Also, to the supporters whose defense is, "Everybody was doing it..." the titles should be removed completely - not relayed to the 2nd place finishers. I believe that's why Fahey used the word "obliterated.")

August 24, 2012 at 9:41 a.m. ( | suggest removal )

San Diegans Search For Drugs, Track Smugglers At Citizens Academy

I loved these guys back when they called themselves the Minutemen. Good job infiltrating, Enrique.

This is not work to be done by Boy Scout-style cadets.

Ludicrous. I'm hoping that the reporter missed the facts here and chose instead to highlight only the sensational aspects, but I fear that she hit it right on the head.

December 13, 2011 at 10:41 a.m. ( | suggest removal )

Child Abductions By Parents Into Mexico Rising

Insult me all you want. I am the one person who has worked on all sides of this issue. While I feel strongly for the left-behind parents and family of children who have been abducted, it has nothing to do with my point. My point is that children in America are NOT being abducted at random and taken to Mexico. The point made by a commenter above that children are kidnapped from the US all the time and taken to Mexico to work in the sex trade is ludicrous. You made up that allegation based upon your own fears and jingoism. My sole point in making the comment is that this article is about parental custody abductions - or as another commenter added, family custody abductions. These have nothing to do with random children being stolen from the streets of the US and taken to Mexico - because the cases of that happening are almost zero. Your responses to my comment are based wholly in fear - not in any semblance of reality. Regardless of your emotions, the point stands as a fact (based on real data), exactly as I wrote it.

Regarding the parents and families of these custody abductions - other commenters are right. You cannot rely upon either government to return your child. It is something you will need to effect on your own. And there are plenty of ways to go about it.

Challenge me with facts. Not with insults.

October 7, 2011 at 9:59 a.m. ( | suggest removal )

Child Abductions By Parents Into Mexico Rising

I fear that this headline is sensational in a way that Ms. Guidi did not intend. Children are very rarely kidnapped at random and taken to Mexico. This article refers to custody dispute-related abductions. A better headline would be: Parental custody abductions into Mexico on the rise.

October 5, 2011 at 9:43 a.m. ( | suggest removal )

Rattlesnakes Common Year-Round In San Diego County

DeanAllan is another guy trolling the internet to post links to his website. All of his posts on the KPBS site are about the company Working With Wildlife. This is contrary to the aim of this board, and of public radio.

September 14, 2011 at 9:02 a.m. ( | suggest removal )

Casino Money Goes To Protecting Indian Sacred Sites

Thanks, Skeptical1. You weren't kidding. That's insane to think that somebody ever thought that was an acceptable situation. I've not followed any of these landfill sagas, but now I feel I should. I'm certain that the argument here is that the earth itself will filter out the bad stuff before it gets to the watershed and, truthfully, it probably will filter most of it. Most isn't really acceptable, though. Especially when there are so many other areas that won't allow lead - and worse - to flow to the sea. A company that has invested so much time and energy won't likely back down, I suppose... which means they'll need to be beaten down.

September 2, 2011 at 10:16 a.m. ( | suggest removal )

Previous