And now, from the "Poodles just don't cut it" department and Yahoo! News

Sudiegirl sez: Look at that sweet little face. is that the face of a killer? I don't think so.

I am one of those people who gets tired of the hype surrounding pit bulls. I had a pit-bull mix dog as a teenager, and he was one of the best dogs we ever had. He was very loving, lively and fun. He was protective, I'll give him that. He died because he was hit by a car while chasing a strange dog off the property. He died a heroic death, unlike another dog I know who died after he ate a roll of Scotch tape.

But you know what? As far as people breeding dogs exclusively for fighting goes, they'd try to do it to another breed if pit bulls weren't available. There's always some sick yahoo who selects this activity as a hobby/career option. They're the same ones who pull the wings off flies in kindergarten and kept doing it until HS graduation. Furthermore, I can't think of any breed of dog (besides a comatose one) that would tolerate the conditions that exist for fighting dogs - beatings, constant aggression, starvation, dehydration - and not come out crazed. Yes, even a POODLE.

But this article is an example of "Methinks the lawyers doth protest too much". Read along with me (and enjoy the comments) and see if you don't agree.


Pit bull ad insults lawyers: court
By Michael Peltier Thu Nov 17, 3:34 PM ET

TALLAHASSEE, Florida (Reuters) - A Florida law firm's television advertisement featuring a pit bull, a dog breed known for its aggression, is misleading and an affront to the legal profession, the Florida Supreme Court ruled on Thursday. (Yeah, but somehow goldfish or gerbils don't have quite the same impact. I mean, say you're going into court against your ex-spouse who wants to take you to the cleaners. Would you rather have an aggressive lawyer or one who runs around in a hamster wheel all day? I think you know where I'm going with this...)

Responding to a complaint by the Florida Bar, the state's highest court sanctioned a pair of Fort Lauderdale attorneys whose advertisement showed a spike-collared pit bull in the company logo. The bar also objected to the company's telephone number: 1-800-748-2855 or 1-800-PIT BULL. (I smell a Sudiegirl contest...OK, here it is...what do you fair readers think the new 800 number should be for these defenders of the law? How about 1-800-BLD-SUKR? Or 1-800-SCRWYU? Put your ideas in the comments, please.)

The advertisements "demean all lawyers and thereby harm both the legal profession and the public's trust and confidence in our system of justice," Chief Justice Barbara Pariente scolded a unanimous decision. (I dig the choice of verb here describing the Chief Justice's actions...I imagine June Cleaver on the bench in pearls, shaking her finger at Wally and the Beav.)

The court said the ads violated a prohibition on legal advertising that suggests behavior, conduct or tactics that are contrary to rules of professional conduct. (Uh-huh. Obviously, whoever wrote this law has never been in a courtroom or worked with lawyers on a regular basis...let's just say that's like asking anyone else to stop BREATHING!)

Attorneys John Robert Pape and Marc Andrew Chandler were ordered to attend an advertising ethics workshop and receive a public reprimand from the Florida Bar. Pape disagreed with the ruling but stopped short of saying the court was barking up the wrong tree. (Well, thank god for that! And the phrase "advertising ethics"...that's an oxymoron, right? How contradictory is that...having lawyers go to a course on advertising ethics? That's like sending a klepto to a department store to browse.)

"I really can't get into it much," Pape said. "It's a hot-button issue for me." (And as you know, nobody likes a hot dog...except with pickle relish. WHAHAHAHAHAH! I kill me.)

Sudiegirl's final verdict?

Woof. Woof. Grrr.

Pitbulls forever, y'all!
Sudiegirl