Jim Borgman has been the Enquirer's editorial cartoonist since 1976. Borgman has won every major award in his field, including the 1991 Pulitzer Prize, the National Cartoonists Society's Reuben Award for Outstanding Cartoonist of the Year in 1993, and most recently, the Adamson Award in 2005 as International Cartoonist of the Year. His award-winning daily comic strip Zits, co-created with Jerry Scott, chronicles the life of 15-year-old Jeremy Duncan, his family and friends through the glories and challenges of the teenage years. Since debuting in July 1997, Zits has regularly finished #1 in reader comics polls across America and is syndicated in more than 1300 newspapers around the world.
|
|
Wednesday Sketchbook 3.1.06
|
3 Comments:
at 3/1/06, 1:35 PM 
Anonymous said...
-
-
at 3/2/06, 8:24 PM 
Anonymous said...
-
-
at 3/5/06, 11:27 PM 
Anonymous said...
-
-
Post a Comment*Having the Smith case as a foldout court record was WAY too funny! I'd just tweak it to have all the male justices peeking at the foldout, maybe with the ladies turning up their noses or scowling. Justice Thomas did not deserve what happened to him, and it's still a sore spot with me.
The "Clarence!" one is priceless!!! Simple, direct, and funny on a multitude of levels. Even if it never goes to press I'm glad I got to see it.
The Clarence Thomas sketch is spot-on. L.O.L.
Remember Anita Hill? Thomas sexually harrassed her and then lied about it.
Did you know that the American Bar Association was split on his nomination and voted that he was "not qualified?"
I was discussing the Supremes with my Constitutional Law professor the other day. We discussed Justice Thomas's dissent in a recent case. My professor said that Clarence Thomas's seat is wasted space on the Court because all he does is rely on an originalist interpretation of the Constitution. I was somewhat surprised at this harsh criticism since my professor is also African-American.
The problem with Thomas's view is that he ignores the fact that the Constitution is a living, breathing document.
The Supremes are supposed to interpret the Constition, not simply rely on an originalist interpretation. Read MARBURY v. MADISON, 5 U.S. 137 (1803). This case gave the Court the authority to be the "final arbiter of the Constitution."
* Our online blogs currently are hosted and operated by a third party, namely, Blogger.com. You are now leaving the Cincinnati.Com website and will be linked to Blogger.com's registration page. The Blogger.com site and its associated services are not controlled by Cincinnati.Com and different terms of use and privacy policy will apply to your use of the Blogger.com site and services.
By proceeding and/or registering with Blogger.com you agree and understand that Cincinnati.Com is not responsible for the Blogger.com site you are about to access or for any service you may use while on the Blogger.com site.
<< Home