Saturday, January 31, 2015

Sheeeee's baaaaack

In all of my years blogging, I've only encountered a handful of lunatics that were worthy of their own dedicated blog. Laura Fitterman was the first.

Laura Fitterman, now neglecting and abusing and animals under the name Laura Sherwood, was busted for animal cruelty again. This time she had an accomplice, her new sex offender hubby, Patrick Joseph Sherwood.

Authorities found two dead horses and the remains of between five and ten horse skeletons. Animal control seized 161 lop eared rabbits, 50 mice & hamsters, 3 parrots, 9 dogs, 25 horses, at least 8 mules, a llama, an alpaca and a miniature horse.

Both Sherwoods are facing 16 counts of animal cruelty. Patrick Joseph Sherwood is also charged with failing to register as a sex offender. Patrick Joseph Sherwood crime was committed in Tennessee. He was convicted of assault on a child with the intent to commit rape. Laura Sherwood aka Laura Fitterman has been convicted of animal cruelty and animal theft in Florida, Tennessee and Alabama.

waay tv


waff (video)

Laura Fitterman

Stop Laura Fitterman

Friday, January 30, 2015

Mexican Mutant

one of those ugly hippo type pit bulldog mutants invoking his latent DNA.


Thursday, January 29, 2015

to tell the truth and shame the devil

shaming the devil: the sequel

“There can be no higher law in journalism than to tell the truth and shame the devil.”
~Walter Lippman, a real journalist

The Huffington Post is at it again. They don't even try to pretend to be objective in reporting the "news". In fact, every time someone sends me a link to a pit bull story on HuffPo or the PuffHo as I have come to think of it, they appear to have crossed the line from journalism into public relations even further. I'm convinced that they would not recognize journalistic integrity if it kicked them in the pants.

The most recent attempt to polish the turd image of america's gripping dog comes in the form of a vicious attack on Merritt Clifton and the dog attack data he has been tracking for 30 years. It is much easier to shoot the messenger than transform that ugly message into something that does not scare the hell out of the average american.

DOUGLAS ANTHONY COOPER based his scathing analysis on an impromptu video recorded "interview" of Clifton last summer by the nutters three: JOSH LIDDY, JEFF THEMAN and KIM WOLF. The video opens with a question from WOLF. You only need to suffer through the first minute of these nutters trying to play gotcha! for the purposes of this piece.

KIM WOLF: "Can I ask you a question in the meantime while you are shutting that off?"

Brenda Barnett: "Sure"

KIM WOLF: "I'm curious about yer um statistics cuz I'm a geriatric social worker, so public safety n, n, reducing risk is very very important to me cuz I work with the vulneral set of the population but I'm curious why yer statistics have never been peer reviewed, especially by..."  
i thought phonetic spelling was appropriate here;-)

Merritt Clifton answers: "Actually, they have been. They have been. I'm in over a hundred peer reviewed publications."

KIM WOLF: "In a scientific journal?"

Merritt Clifton: "That is correct."

KIM WOLF: "The AVMA publication that recently came out is contradicting what you've said."

Merritt Clifton" "That article is actually authored by paid professional pit bull advocates."

More on that AVMA publication later, for now, I'll focus on Clifton's answer, "I'm in over a hundred peer reviewed publications."

DOUGLAS ANTHONY COOPER'S critique is based on Clifton AUTHORING over 100 peer reviewed articles. DOUGLAS ANTHONY COOPER twists Clifton's words,"I have more than a hundred peer-reviewed publications." That is an incredibly brazen lie but you don't need to take my word on this. Just click on the link that DOUGLAS ANTHONY COOPER so generously provided and decide for yourself.

DOUGLAS ANTHONY COOPER then goes on to include the opinions of four highly educated experts that he consulted to deconstruct the statement, "I have more than a hundred peer-reviewed publications." Not surprisingly, their comments were harsh and they should be harsh, if that was what Clifton actually said. When I read this HuffPo propaganda piece, I assumed the four experts were unwilling dupes in DOUGLAS ANTHONY COOPER'S smear campaign. I assumed that he deliberately misled the four experts in much the same way that he is deliberately misleading the over emotional politically correct liberal readers of the HuffPo. Then I googled the experts.

I decided to google them and post their faculty websites with contact information with the hope of creating some discomfort for being manipulated by DOUGLAS ANTHONY COOPER and just maybe the four experts would pressure the HuffPo for a retraction and an apology to Clifton. You know, cuz of all that academic integrity they have and need to maintain. But as I googled the experts, my position began to shift.

Let's meet DOUGLAS ANTHONY COOPER'S cadre of expert dupes.

Dr. Mark Hogarth, Philosophy of Science, Cambridge University
(note there is a misspelled word on this prestigious university website)
Nothing I found on-line was cause for concern but I had to ask myself, of all of the professors on the North American continent, why was this particular professor consulted?

Rafael Newman, translator for hire with a PhD from Princeton
Rafael Newman was the first of the four to set my spidey sense a-tingling. Newman attended high school and college in Canada, so I assume he is Canadian. His linkedin page states that he is a freelance writer and while he lives in Switzerland, his phone number is Canadian and his email is German. Newman seems to be a rather obscure character and an unlikely candidate for this job. I found myself thinking, Why him?

Professor Amy Kaler, Sociology, University of Alberta
Amy was my fave. There she was in all nutter glory, facebook friends with DOUGLAS ANTHONY COOPER. Yeah, I suppose she could have been duped... nah, never mind.

Professor Michael E. Harkin, Anthropology, University of Wyoming
Again, nothing I found on-line was cause for concern except for his connection to Canada, I must ask myself, WHY this particular professor?

DOUGLAS ANTHONY COOPER has an expert statistician at the ready to inspect Clifton's raw data. I would like to encourage Clifton to do just that on one condition, that the evil genius KAREN DELISE fork over her raw data for scrutiny as well. The expert statistician, Mike McCaffrey of the University of Toronto does not appear to have personal ties to DOUGLAS ANTHONY COOPER but I did notice that McCaffrey is a softie when it comes to dogs but geese, not so much.

Mike McCaffrey,  Lecturer at the Faculty of information who specializes in reference work and government information, University of Toronto

I saved the best for last, the article authored by paid professional pit bull advocates.

I will cherry pick a few gems and comment.
"The study found that "Most DBRFs (dog-bite-related fatalities) were characterized by coincident, preventable factors; breed was not one of these."
The study FOUND exactly what it was looking for and breed was not on the list. This is really not hard to understand. Look, if the cattle industry funds heart attack or cancer studies and they don't design their study to LOOK at meat as a possible culprit, they won't find it. This is not rocket science man.

If you watch another couple of minutes of the Clifton video on Josh Liddy's blog, you'll see him refer to this very paper: "That article is actually authored by paid professional pit bull activists."

That's a pretty serious accusation. Liddy sounds unconvinced. So let's examine it.
BRAVO DOOFUS! Although not verbatim, I'll give you points for accurately conveying the meaning of Clifton's statement! But yes, LET'S FUCKING EXAMINE THAT. And thank you for linking to it, you saved me a step.


The evil genius needs no introduction.

He has been on Berkey's payroll for as long as Clifton has been collecting dog attack data.


The lead authors on this article are Gary Patronek VMD, PhD, and Jeffrey J. Sacks, MD, MPH. Dr. Patronek's PhD is in Epidemiology. Dr. Sacks is an epidemiologist with the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention: the official body in the United States devoted to the study and containment of epidemics. Sacks writes about dog-bite issues not simply for JAVMA, but for the CDC itself.
Sacks WROTE about dog-bite issues for the CDC. PAST TENSE. It has been over a decade doofus.
Clifton's charge is that an epidemiologist with the CDC -- a doctor tasked with the study of dog-bite prevention, nationwide -- is for sale. And has been bought by crazed dog lovers bent on making America less safe.
Well, Sacks is working with Jane Berkey puppets, DELISE, CLEARY and MARDER, so I'd say that is that is a very real possibility.

ANTHONY DOUGLAS COOPER is just one of the huffington post's many shameless whores for pit bulls.

Arianna Huffington, wtf are you doing over there? Your schlog has begun to resemble the tobacco industry's public relations firm, Hill & Knowlton.

some interesting reading:
Principles of Journalism Pew Research

A rather negative book review on Animals 24/7 of Galunker, pit bull propaganda whose target audience is preschoolers written by none other than DOUGLAS ANTHONY COOPER.
hmm... is it possible that someone has an ax to grind?

postscript If NCRC's PUBLISHED mission statement is "preserving the human-canine bond" what do you suppose their UNpublished mission statement is? Three guesses.

Wednesday, January 28, 2015

BADRAP surrenders to facts

"A lie can run around the world six times while the truth is still trying to put on its pants." ~Mark Twain

on May 20 @ 9:00am PST, BADRAP made the following proclamation:
It's Dog Bite Prevention Week. Did you know that there was never such thing as a 'Nanny's Dog'? This term was a recent invention created to describe the myriad of vintage photos of children enjoying their family pit bulls. While the intention behind the term was innocent, using it may mislead parents into being careless with their children around their family dog - A recipe for dog bites!

INNOCENT? the phrase 'Nanny Dog' was never used innocently. it was a very deliberate, very deceptive campaign to manipulate people into accepting a FIGHTING bred dog into the community.

manipulation is never innocent.

BADRAP (or JANE) has employed a talented public relations specialist. they have managed to put a fantastic spin on the reversal of the 'Nanny Dog' myth and back peddled right out of that sticky mess. or so they think. but trying to flush this lie from internet will be a herculean task, similar to trying to remove pee from the pool. the damage is done. this LIE will never be erased and the truth will still be trying to put its pants on long after DONNA'S big announcement has fallen from the top of the page.

flip flopping is nothing new for DONNA REYNOLDS. years ago, she said things like "pit bulls are naturally dog aggressive" and advised people against taking their pit bulldogs to dog parks. now she talks in terms of "individuals" and "dog selective". i think the change happened right around the time BADRAP became JANE BERKEY'S pet project.

let me be perfectly blunt. i'm calling shenanigans on BADRAP. i have a theory. rather than try to explain "the myriad of vintage photos" as DONNA claims, i think the likes of BADRAP, AFF and the utah cult BEST FRIENDS, aggressively sought out vintage photos of pit bulls with kids in an attempt to reinvent the pit bull into something that didn't scare people.

pit zealots like to point the finger of blame to the famous 1987 sports illustrated article for ruining the reputation of their pit bulldogs. but media coverage works both ways. after the famous vick bust of 2007 and the "rehabilitation" of his grippers, pit bulldogs, especially vick pit bulldogs were constantly being paraded in the media. there was a massive surge in all of the myths: nanny dog, it's all how they're raised, ATTS, man biters were culled etc.

trend in DBRF:
2009 - 14 people were killed by pit bulls
2010 - 22 people were killed by pit bulls
2011 - 22 people were killed by pit bulls (DARLA NAPORA)
2012 - 23 people were killed by pit bulls (REBECCA CAREY)
2013 and now in the first 122 days of this year, a whopping 13 people have been killed by pit bulls, 14 if you count the man who was struck by a car while fleeing a rampaging gripper. at the current pace, grippers are on target to claim the lives of 42 americans this year.

a very small sample of pro-pit bulldog media coverage:
12/2008 with the help of JIM GORANT, sports illustrated redeems itself in the eyes of nutters by publishing a sickening pro-pit article (page 2 paragraph 3 references the nanny dog)
09/2010 NPR story about the vick dogs
01/2011 (uploaded to youtube) PBS cashes in on the feel good vick dog action.
many of the vick dogs have their own facebook pages, websites and blogs

2009 badd newz
2010 one good dog (a jane berkey production)
2010 lost dogs 
2011 saving audie (propaganda age 6-9)
2011 pit bulls: villains or victims? (a regurgitation of karen delise + police gazette)
2012 wallace: the underdog

tv shows
2009 pit bulls and paroles 
2010 pit boss

2009 vicktory to the underdog
2010 the pit bull hoax
2010 beyond the myth
2012 guilty til proven innocent

miscellaneous crap
2008 vicktory dog wine
2013 jonny justice plush toy
creepy calendars of tattooed floozies & bulldogs

i'm sure that i missed a few.

media blowback
you don't have to be a rocket scientist to see the impact that of all of this positive media attention has had on the number of dog bite related fatalities. whether positive or negative, too much media attention on a breed of dog is never a good thing. media hype always appeals to people on the most superficial of levels. too much negative press attracts the thugs & criminals and too much sugar coated press attracts the naive and politically correct fur mommy crowd who think their love supersedes genetics. both of these groups compromise the safety of the rest of us.

slick public relations tricks fueled by a guilty conscience and BADRAP thinks they can back out of this mess with their reputation intact and pretend as if nothing happened. not if i can help it.

"Nanny Dog" was the pit bull breed booth theme at multiple booths at Americas Family Pet Expo in Orange County, CA.
Paid attendance 30,000.

thank you pmic4od!

in search of "innocence"
i briefly surveyed the presence of the nanny dog on the internet. here is a small sampling of nanny dog references. what do you think, are they innocent?

first stop 'in the company of dogs' where you can show the world your pit bull pride with a t-shirt or pillow.

which words jumps out at you first?

here's what jumps out at me.
1) babysitter
2) pit bull
3) misunderstood
that's no accident.

GEORGE TAKEI (star trek's sulu) thinks pit bulls get a "bad rap". nutters really hate facts. i posted the link to badrap's big announcement, you know, cuz i'm all about educatin' but this little weasel deleted my comment.

BEST FRIENDS ANIMAL SOCIETY  gets in on the 'nanny dog' action with one of the vick cash cows - HANDSOME DAN.
"When our daughter, Josephine, was born in 2010, we knew Dan would be great with her. We just had no idea how great. When she was a baby, he would sleep next to her crib. Now that she is a little older, he is so calm and patient with her. Sudden movements have always startled Dan, but the craziness of a toddler doesn't seem to bother him at all. Dan can truly be considered a nanny dog!"

JIM GORANT my understanding of his book is that he was personally spoon fed by DONNA and TIM. this pdf sports illustrated article written by GORANT is hosted on NCRC :-)

JAMES SULLIVAN  this fresh faced punk journalist is described as a culture critic.
"In 19th-century England, one dog breed was known as the “nanny dog’’ for its exceptional relationship with children. One probable member of the same breed, writes author Jim Gorant, was a beloved World War I mascot; another was the Little Rascals’ constant companion."

ELIZABETH A BROWN  journalist writing for the christian science monitor.
"If readers are surprised to find an entire book devoted to these dogs, here’s another upset: Our image of pit bulls couldn’t be further from the truth. The Staffordshire bull terriers, from which the American pit bull terrier descends, were known to be so gentle that in the 1800s they were called “nanny dogs,” ideal to be left alone with babies."

JOE WOESTENDIEK  (a pulitzer prize winning journalist - LOL!) the omidog blogger wrote a puff piece about one of JANE SAUL ROTROSEN BERKEY'S literary clients.

BRENT TOELLNER  pit zealot, blogger and marketing/advertising slime ball.

ANDREW ROZSA  psychologist, irresponsible pit bull owner and a very bad neighbor. his comment about the 'nanny dog' is actually comical.
"A Google search of the phrase “nanny dog historical fact” yields 1.5 million hits, much of it “”noise.” However, the vast majority of hits on the top few pages will be supportive of the idea, while the minority who calls us “nutters,”  holds the opinion that this is a myth."
witness proof of assertion in action.

YONAH WARD GROSSMAN  this idiot is just way too confident in his position. he reminds me of another Mark Twain quote, "It ain’t what you don’t know that gets you into trouble. It’s what you know for sure that just ain’t so." GROSSMAN wrote about the nanny dog, not just once but twice. his blog posts went viral.

JOSHUA HOLLAND  this idiot calls himself the truth vigilante.
"For most of the 114 years since the American pitbull terrier was first recognized by the United Kennel Club, the breed was rightly seen as the perfect “nanny dog” for children because of its friendly nature, loyalty and stability. As the ASPCA notes, the pitbulls were “once considered especially non-aggressive to people."
(shame on you alternet, i expect more from you!)

PAMELA KRAMER  "Although pit bulls are still suffering from discrimination, this book will go a long way toward the day when they will no longer carry the stigma of "fighting" dog, but rather the appellation "nanny" dog, once again (as they were known years ago)."

i expect this crap from the examiner. afterall, they provide CINDY MARABITO and PENNY EIMS with a platform to spread their lies and propaganda. but the christian science monitor? alternet? c'mon!

They are often referred to as "nanny dogs" because they are excellent with children.

4. Pit Bulls are great with kids. They weren't referred to as the "nanny's dog" for nothing that's for sure.

CELIA SUE HECHT a best friends groupie


IAN DUNBAR you'd be hard pressed to find a more spectacular display of stupidity from a so-called expert. DUNBAR doesn't actually mouth the words NANNY and DOG but his meaning is undeniable as he tells viewers that pit bulls are his first choice for child psych wards because pit bulls don't care if kids pull their tails. ISYN.

"Below is a great, short article that gives a brief history of Pit Bulls and brings to attention that the breed has become very misunderstood and misrepresented. Please, please read in order to educate yourself on this wonderful dog, a breed that used to be known as the Nanny Dog." 
scroll to the bottom for the photo of her toddler hanging on her pit bull while the pit bull is eating two feet from her other dog who also has his face in the food bowl.

KEITH L. KENDRICK a pit bull fanatic in oregon
"So despite being known as the "nanny dog" in the early 1900's, as well as in the United States as a well regarded all purpose family dog good with children, because of such highly distorted journalism Pit Bulls immediately became the top demon dog."

i have pdf copies of all of these (and more) just in case the FTC comes a knockin'.

“The great enemy of the truth is very often not the lie — deliberate, contrived and dishonest — but the myth — persistent, persuasive and unrealistic. Too often we hold fast to the cliches of our forebears. We subject all facts to a prefabricated set of interpretations. We enjoy the comfort of opinion without the discomfort of thought.” 
~John F. Kennedy

so, to recap - BADRAP, i don't believe you and i don't forgive you.

Saturday, January 17, 2015

Friday, January 2, 2015

Pit Bull Experts: scientifically unimpressive and technologically worthless

In 1960, Louis Leaky sent a secretary with no college education into the Africa bush to study chimpanzees. Despite the objections of "experts" Leaky persevered. Leaky felt that someone with little formal training would be more likely to describe what they were seeing rather than what they thought they should be seeing. 

I think everyone will agree that hiring Jane Goodall for the job was a brilliant move. 

Keep Jane Goodall in mind while you watch this video, The Trouble With Experts, then continue reading.

Pit bull advocates make a lot of noise about their "experts" and tout the perceived consensus among "experts" as proof that "pit bulls" are not the problem, owners are. Here are four of the more impressively credentialed "experts".


The ASPCA cited BORCHELT in their anti-BSL position statement and BORCHELT was called upon to provide his "expert" opinion in favor of pit bulls when a NYC council member sought to ban them:

A Brooklyn-based animal behaviorist who opposes a citywide pit bull ban, Peter Borchelt, said strong dogs such as pit bulls, Rottweilers and German shepherds are generally safe, if they are "raised like pets." You get into trouble when the dog is not trained to be nonaggressive," Mr. Borchelt, who has a doctorate in animal behavior, said. "They can become dangerous when they're thrown behind a fence and allowed to become overly protective. You just have to take a few extra steps to make sure the dog is friendly, affectionate, and well socialized."
PETER L. BORCHELT, PhD and "expert" for hire.

BORCHELT provided the above "expert" opinion about the safety of pit bulls AFTER he was sued for a million dollars for providing his "expert" opinion to a retired fire fighter about the safety of a pit bull that he was in possession of. The pit bull attacked the retired fire fighter. Despite the fact that the pit bull had a known documented history of previous aggression, BORCHELT assured the retired fire fighter the pit bull was safe. During the civil trial, BORCHELT testified under oath that the pit bull was not vicious. Yeah. Just in case you missed the colored text above indicating an external link, click here.

PETER BORCHELT is a member of an elite club known as Certified Applied Animal Behaviorists. According to the civil lawsuit article, he charges $300 an hour to fix your dog's problems. You can find his fee schedule here. BORCHELT'S gun for hire, er uh I mean "expert" witness page is conveniently malfunctioning.


If I were asked to recommend a dog, say for a children's psychiatric ward, my first choice would be a pit bull. When children pull their tail, if they have one, or poke them, the dog's like... he doesn't care. With a good owner, you have the most fantastic breed of all.  

Poor Ian. Yet another dupe of proof of assertion. Apparently he has yet to receive the memo regarding the official revocation of nanny dog status

Hot shot Dunbar does not appear to offer services for problematic or dangerous behaviors. Smart move.


No other breed has been maligned or vilified as much as the pit bull terrier. One commonly finds negative publicity about this breed, despite the fact that many honorable Americans have kept pit bulls as pets, including Franklin Roosevelt and Thomas Edison. 
RICHARD POLSKY, PhD and "expert" for hire.

Poor Richard. All of that money and all those years spent studying to acquire impressive degrees was no guarantee that he would be able to demonstrate critical thinking skills. He still he fell prey to the common fallacy known as Proof of Assertion. It is a documented fact that President Roosevelt's "pit bull" was a dangerous menace. It is a documented fact that Edison did not own Nipper and there is no documented proof that Thomas Edison ever owned any pit bull. 

The pit bulldog's long legacy of vilification is well earned and well documented.

POLSKY'S fee schedule is available on demand. I suspect it is one of those cases where if you have to ask, you probably can't afford it.


DR JAMES HA, animal behaviorist at the University of Washington in Seattle and "expert" for hire.
The reason we're focusing just on pit bulls is that we hear so much about them, and that is not because of the breed difference, the genetic difference - that's because of the way they've been raised.

That quote is from a 2010 KOMO news interview. Compare that to HA'S blog post in 2008, where HA cited research that stated red and golden cocker spaniels were more likely to display aggressive behavior than black cocker spaniels and that yellow labs were "significantly more likely to be reported with aggression problems" than the black or chocolate variants, yet JAMES HA promotes the crazy notion that dogs artificially selected for violence only require a loving gentle family.

Also in the 2010 KOMO interview, DR HA stated that mastiffs, chows, shepherds, rottweillers and dobermans are "all more genetically aggressive than" dogs that had been artificially selected for combat for 200 years. HA goes on to add that genetics is roughly 20-30% responsible for temperament. YET, at the roughly 4:00 minute mark of his presentation on "Behavioral Genetics" DR HA stated that in studies of selected dog breeds, none were gripping breeds btw, for defence behaviors ie, guarding, attacking, biting there is a 14 - 20% heritability rate "which in genetics world is important". He immediately followed up with "there are different genetic predispositions in different breeds." Towards the end of this 2011 youtube video, HA states that 30-50% of behavior is genetics. My head was spinning just trying to keep up with all his facts.

DR JAMES HA is a member of an elite club known as Certified Applied Animal Behaviorists.
HA offers a variety of services ranging from $75 - 250 plus travel fees.

One unspoken assumption among early behavior geneticists, an assumption that was shared by most for many years, was that some psychological traits were likely to be significantly influenced by genetic factors, whereas others were likely to be primarily influenced by shared environmental influences. Most behavior geneticists assumed that social attitudes, for example, were influenced entirely by shared environmental influences, and so social attitudes remained largely unstudied until relatively recently. The evidence now shows how wrong these assumptions were. Nearly every reliably measured psychological phenotype (normal and abnormal) is significantly influenced by genetic factors. Heritabilities also differ far less from trait to trait than anyone initially imagined. Shared environmental influences are often, but not always, of less importance than genetic factors, and often decrease to near zero after adolescence. Genetic influence on psychological traits is ubiquitous, and psychological researchers must incorporate this fact into their research programs else their theories will be ‘‘scientifically unimpressive and technologically worthless,’’ to quote Meehl again.
Genetic Influence on Human Psychological Traits

Genetics, Not Parenting, Key to Temperament, Studies Say, Los Angeles Times, February 20, 1994

Major Personality Study Finds That Traits Are Mostly Inherited, New York Times, December 2, 1986

PETER BORCHELT, IAN DUNBAR, RICHARD POLSKY and JAMES HA believe that purpose bred dogs, artificially selected for violent combat for 200 years are not genetically predisposed to violence. BORCHELT, DUNBAR, POLSKY and HA believe it is equally wrong to think that nurture plays second fiddle to nature in dogs. Unfortunately, they have been able to convince others of their distorted beliefs too.

So much for "experts".

Dr James Ha

Jane Goodall

The Nanny Dog Myth Revealed

Thomas Edison's pit bull

Famous Pit Bull Owners: The Thomas Alva Edison Edition

Famous Pit Bull Owners: The Presidential Edition

Pete Roosevelt: The Disgraced White House Bandog

Myth 99: Scientists know what they are talking about because they study animals in an objective way, Alexandra Semyonova

The science of how behavior is inherited in aggressive dogs by Alexandra Semyonova

Alexandra Semyonova's book, The 100 Silliest Things People Say About Dogs is available in the right side bar of this blog.

The Trouble With Experts

Only An Expert


Wednesday, December 17, 2014