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.
|
|
|
|
|
|
16 Comments:
at 4/23/07, 6:53 PM 
Anonymous said...
-
-
at 4/23/07, 8:46 PM 
Anonymous said...
-
-
at 4/23/07, 10:49 PM 
Terrence said...
-
-
at 4/24/07, 8:06 AM 
Anonymous said...
-
-
at 4/24/07, 6:53 PM 
Anonymous said...
-
-
at 4/24/07, 11:19 PM 
Anonymous said...
-
-
at 4/25/07, 6:29 AM 
Anonymous said...
-
-
at 4/25/07, 10:29 AM 
Anonymous said...
-
-
at 4/25/07, 10:55 AM 
Anonymous said...
-
-
at 4/25/07, 11:12 AM 
Anonymous said...
-
-
at 4/25/07, 1:54 PM 
Anonymous said...
-
-
at 4/25/07, 4:50 PM 
Anonymous said...
-
-
at 4/26/07, 6:35 AM 
Anonymous said...
-
-
at 4/29/07, 10:14 AM 
Unknown said...
-
-
at 12/17/07, 8:06 AM 
Anonymous said...
-
-
at 12/17/07, 8:31 AM 
Anonymous said...
-
-
Post a Comment*Get ready for a lot of irate messages from that doofus on the edge.
no irate message here, its just that....
you're so stupid, borgman.
you know what's funny? what's funny is that no one is going to change their mind because of you. you don't make any difference at all.
Huh, I'm surprised you didn't run such an Earth Day-conscious cartoon closer to Earth Day than the Wednesday after.
Well, it makes me feel better about not getting my own cartoon on the topic online until today, anyway.
"you know what's funny? what's funny is that no one is going to change their mind because of you. you don't make any difference at all."
A good humor diet, high in irony.
I'm curious as to what the 'carbon footprint' of a volcano is? Think of all those greenhouse gasses being spewed forth by mother earth herself..
Blind devotion to accepting inconclusive 'facts' presented by the political left is a sad way to live Jimbo....
Sheesh, right on queue. (I now see you made the guy on the edge look too civil and too bright .)
The people in denial are those like Sheryl Crow who think we should use just one square of toilet paper. And those who ignore mounds of evidence that Global Warming is BS, such as the fact it was as warm or warmer during the Middle Ages.
I'm all for recycling and pushing toward alternative fuels, but the ice caps are going to be fine and the polar bears will live on no matter what we do.
On the subject of global warming I suggest that we monitor weather patterns for another 2000 years. In the year 4007 we can arrive at an informed descision. In the meantime, enjoy life.
JOHNNY CARSON poked fun at many presidents and presidential candidates. His humor was funny and balanced. He was never vicious towards any one president and/or candidate. However, Mr.Carson did remark in 1968 regarding Indep. Presidential candidate George Wallace. Johnny said that it would have been a sad day for this nation if we could elect someone like Mr. Wallace to the office of Presidency.
I do believe that Mr. Carson would have had the same opinion of Al Gore and would have expressed it on is show.
Heard it mentioned yesterday that Al Gore was "caught" on another private jet flight. Is that the definition of limousine liberal?
Jim just a quick heads up global warming is a crock, just like the impending ice age was a crock and the hole in the ozone being caused by Freon and Right Guard was a crock and acid rain was a crock. The only group of people that are buying into the rants of world thinkers like Rosie O’Donnel, Sheryl Crow, Al Gore and UN scientists are goons that draw pretty pictures for a living.
Wow, every scientist in the world is convinced we're on the brink of a world-wide disaster and yet somehow these random bloggers think they know better. Good job kids. No wonder our country is so deeply mired in ignorance and stupidity - you are willing to change the facts so that you can keep driving your 8 mpg Hummer. I hope you're proud.
Sorry, not EVERY sientist is convinced of global warming.
You are so off base here it's not funny.
Has ONLY to do with
1. How we live.
2. Where we go.
3. What we do with OUR property.
4. How to tax us more.
5. Removing some of our freedoms.
You should read a book from the 60's ... "A Nation of Sheep"
You are very talented. You do not
really think things through.
That valcano, if it erupted, could
spew more carbon and sulfuric dioxide into the air than humankind has offered up in the last 100 years. See Mt. St. Helens
I guess you need to make a few more dolts on the brim of that volcano.
Uh...our global temperature is increasing, that's a fact. No one in the know (politicians, scientists) is disupting it. The debate now centers on how much humans are causing the rise and what to do about it. On April 7th, 2,000 scientists (yes, 2000!) put out am Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, IPCC, report about global warming. Look it up...
http://www.ipcc.ch/
These are international scientists and they are associated with the U.N.
What you should look up dawgsfan47 is the number of the 2000 scientist are really climatologist. I think you'll see that most of the boobs are social scientist(which can include political scientist,historians,sociologist,psychologist, lawyers and many other acadamians).
Global warming is a scientific fact. The IPCC Reports are authoritative, and I thinnk the critics should actually read them. Finally, the comment(s) that these IPCC 'scientists' are not real climate scientists is utterly false. Check the facts. The so-called 'debate' about Global Warming is not really a debate at all. It is in fact, an infantile hatefest, based on the same tactics that were used to dispute that cigargette smoking was linked to increases in lung cancer, and to deny the theory of evolution. That is why one sees the ad hominem attachs against Al Gore. Mr. Gore is simply courageous. Most libertarians thinkers can't stand the fact that he happens to be right about global warming, so they attack him personally rather than attack the science (which is conclusive). The persons who say that global warming is a myth are simply cowards and liars.
What mj-rph should look up is the number of critics of the science of global warming who are climate scientists. The answer is almost none, near-zero. When you check out the 'anti-global-warming' websites you will usually find that behind them are: (1) persons with Master's Degrees in something like political science (e.g., "The George Marshall Institute") or lawyers, and (2) money from libertarian groups or old-energy companies.
The fellow behind www.junkscience.com, Stephen Milloy, a fierce critic of global warming is a lawyer (from a second or third tier law school) with a Master's degree in statistics. He formerly made a living representing tobacco companies in their efforts to deny that cigargette smoking led to lung cancer. He also has been a leader in attacking Al Gore for his carbon footprint.
For all the critics who claim that global warming is 'junk science' I offer this simple challenge: point to the reliable peer-reviewed article(s) that are published in major scientific journals that provide the evidence that the theory is wrong. Well?
The problem is - of course - these publications aren't there! But there are in fact THOUSANDS of well-researched publications supporting the basic science of anthropogenic (man-made) global warming.
On the grounds of real science, there is very little (by reasonable standards, no argument)about the causes of global warming. T
his is why the argument rather descends to blogs, websites, attacks on talented cartoonists, and FOX (Faux) News. Fox News at one time, featured Stephen Milloy as a "legitimate" critic of Global Warming.
The critics of global warming can't and don't publish science articles simply because they have nothing truly intelligent and scientifically reliable, to say.
The only thing they can argue in rely to this is that there is some sort of conspiracy between all the top-level journals, the universities that support them, and the scientists that publish there. Of course, that simply isn't credible.
Hence, the attacks on Al Gore's character, the descent into rants, and the cheap shots that anyone can take online.
* 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