Brett Bittner

Often, these situations are described by police as "isolated incidents" where the dog in question shows "signs of aggression." This time, there are ZERO signs of aggression on behalf of Sheba, a Labrador Retriever, but that doesn't stop the lead officer of the SWAT team from blowing her away with three rounds from his automatic weapon without a second thought or breaking stride as he ascends the final steps before entering the home.

I can understand a truly aggressive dog that in is the act of defending his home and his people that actually begins an attack of officers, but to have story after story after story** of "isolated incidents" raises the question of whether officers receive training about dog behavior to understand what a dog is communicating. After all, they speak less English than many individuals the police encounter, but with about 36% of American dog owners, it seems that they are more prevalent than non-English speakers, however translators are made available to communicate with them.

What infuriates me about this situation is that the subjects of the SWAT seige/standoff had already surrendered to police, and the SWAT team entered the home to ensure no one else was inside the home.

It's clear that police officers do not receive enough training about the civil liberties of those they swear an oath to protect and serve, but how many "isolated incidents" that emotionally scar families must take place before departments take action on the issue?

As you can see in the coverage by the local ABC affiliate, Sheba remains amazingly still for a dog that didn't lunge or even bark at the officers about to enter her home.

**In the interest of full disclosure, I am working with the family affected by the third story linked above to train their new puppy, Drake.  

If terrorists truly hate us for our freedoms, wouldn't altering our way of life forever in the name of security mean that they won?

Reason.tv shares this video about the virtual disappearance of the antiwar movement since the inauguration of Barack Obama.

With the similarity in actions by both Presidents Obama and Bush, despite rhetoric of the opposite from Obama as a candidate, the swing in support for the imperialism of American foreign policy has grown drastically among those previously against it.

It raises the question about whether previously anti-war Democrats were actually against the war or if their opposition was simply anti-Republican (not that there's anything wrong with being anti-Republican).

Thomas Sowell speaks about the Federal Reserve, calling it a cancer at the end of this clip from Fora.tv

I really enjoyed watching this today, and I thought I'd share it with each of you.

Yes, I realize that I'm a little behind on this, but I took the first few days after Tuesday's election to relax a bit and recharge my political batteries.

Nick Gillespie (and the rest of the Reason crew) is right, as they usually are, about how true The Who's "Won't Get Fooled Again" lyrics are.

Do these guys do this every morning? If so, how long does it take to do that? If not, how often does one make such a spectacle with one's facial hair?

It seems that the Blue Waters Group in Indiana was unable to spot the missing "L" on the digital billboard above... FOUR TIMES.

From the President of the Blue Waters Group:

"Four people looked at it, eyeballed it and didn't see the mistake, and those people all work for me. We take responsibility for it. We simply blew it. We did not see the missing "L."

Not only did the digital billboard typo make it to the South Bend billboard, but it remained broadcast from the initial launch of the ad last Thursday, until sometime Monday afternoon.

Anyone care to venture a guess as to what "pubic schools" teach? Or should we just focus on the fact that a city promotion of public schools shows us how poor of a job they do with "The 3 R's"?