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.
|
|
|
|
|
|
22 Comments:
at 11/1/07, 7:43 AM 
Anonymous said...
-
-
at 11/1/07, 12:35 PM 
Anonymous said...
-
-
at 11/1/07, 1:28 PM 
Anonymous said...
-
-
at 11/1/07, 2:12 PM 
Anonymous said...
-
-
at 11/1/07, 3:41 PM 
Anonymous said...
-
-
at 11/1/07, 4:45 PM 
Wettengel said...
-
-
at 11/1/07, 8:18 PM 
Wettengel said...
-
-
at 11/2/07, 11:20 AM 
Anonymous said...
-
-
at 11/2/07, 1:28 PM 
G-RANT said...
-
-
at 11/2/07, 1:44 PM 
G-RANT said...
-
-
at 11/2/07, 3:25 PM 
Anonymous said...
-
-
at 11/5/07, 5:53 AM 
Anonymous said...
-
-
at 11/5/07, 7:48 AM 
Anonymous said...
-
-
at 11/5/07, 9:49 AM 
G-RANT said...
-
-
at 11/5/07, 4:21 PM 
Anonymous said...
-
-
at 11/6/07, 3:29 PM 
G-RANT said...
-
-
at 11/6/07, 6:06 PM 
Anonymous said...
-
-
at 11/7/07, 2:13 PM 
G-RANT said...
-
-
at 11/9/07, 8:01 AM 
Anonymous said...
-
-
at 11/10/07, 11:28 AM 
Anonymous said...
-
-
at 11/21/07, 10:49 AM 
Anonymous said...
-
-
at 1/13/08, 4:26 PM 
Anonymous said...
-
-
Post a Comment*President Bush is wise and correct to veto this wasteful giveaway.
This program would provide state funded health care for all Americans under the age of 25 in households where income is $83,000 or less.
Just because a giveaway program comes down the pike, there is no justification to approve it.
This type of leglislation is a clear indication of what we can expect under President Hillary Clinton.
I praise and thank the President for his good judgement in this matter.
Heaven forbid that 0-25 year old children should have health insurance given-away to them. Or that smokers and tobacco companies should have to pay tax. Say, anonymous 7:43 AM, do you and your family have health insurance? Wanna share?
peace love joy hope
who
Obviously Anoymous 7:43 has health insurance and probably always has. This is why they have no idea what it is worth to those that don’t. I like the cartoon, especially the expression on the child’s face. Politics aside, if health insurance premiums were in step with their actual value then S-CHIP would not even be an issue. Although it appears Bush prefers bullets over babies it isn’t really important. Both parties should step above this issue and target the real offenders: Large insurance companies such as UHG. I started my career with them….was forced to change jobs so I could sleep at night. I think S-CHIP is a waste of money, however that’s not the kids fault. Give them the coverage now and then go fix the real problem.
ASH
This program would provide state funded health care for all Americans under the age of 25 in households where income is $83,000 or less.
This is a lie, of course. Not a simple misstatement or exaggeration -- an outright lie.
I am Anom 7:43.
Yes, I have health insurance.
Yes, I understand the hardships for those who do not have health insurance.
I stated that we do not have to support each and every giveaway program that comes down the pike.
University Hopspital provides health care to the poor and has for over 100 years. We vote every few years on a renewal for this and it always passess.
I am told that the poor will come to the clinc for extremely minor ailements, problems, etc. Also, many of these poor will make 911 calls for headaches, toothaches, and expect an ambulance to come & get them.
We definitely need catastrophic coverage of some type. EVERYONE should have a co-payment with each medical visit.
Yes, I have medical coverage, but in my near 60 years - I HAVE NEVER BEEN TO A DOCTOR FOR A COLD OR FLU.
This comment has been removed by the author.
To Anon 7:43:
I am not be an expert on this issue but I think the reason they go to the emergency room for headaches is because without insurance they can't call and go see a primary care physician. About the only place they can go for "Free" medical care is the emergency room. So they either go with minor ailments or wait until they are VERY sick to see a doctor.
And we all know "An once of prevention is worth a pound of cure"!
I personally don't believe the government should provide health care for everyone. But we as the most powerful country in the world should be able to provide health care for the poor AND have a reasonable effective system for the rest of us that we can pay into and will never lose if we switch jobs or get sick.
My father has run his own business since he was 16. He paid for health insurance for himself and his employees most of that time (probably since he was 25 or so). About 5 years ago his health insurance company WITHOUT warning said his group (by that point just 2 employees) was not big enough and dropped him. Now he has to pay through the nose for bad insurance!
Wettengel, I believe people go to the emergency room for headaches because they are used to the government taking care of them and won't spend the extra time needed to find their neighborhood clinic.
Have you heard the stories of some of the people who wanted it to pass? Many just want to be able to afford a vacation. Since when is a vacation a basic human right? I heard another woman who is single, has a child with a chronic ailment, decided to leave her well-paying job that had health coverage to open her own not-for-profit. Is this a mother that puts her child's need first?
When people living off the government acknowledge that their inability to care for themselves means they have to give up certain so-called rights (like the right to bear 8 children, all supported by the government, or their right to smoke or to own a cell phone or have cable), then I'll be willing to support greater health care coverage. Until we have a better way to determine the difference between people who want and those that truly need, I will not support it.
if $83000 is the correct amount, that seems a bit high.
and 25 seems a bit old.
would bush veto a $40000/20 years old plan? i'm curious.
i'd like to see more money go to VA hospitals as well.
politics: all argue, no solution.
and then there's this:
D: "Iowa will also run out cash for the SCHIP by March. Like Maine, Iowa does not cover adults and only covers children up to two times the poverty line, or $41,000 for a family of four."
hmmm. and this:
R: "The bill gives states financial incentives to cover families with incomes up to three times the federal poverty level — $61,950 for a family of four."
from the actual bill:
(A), for the provision of medical assistance to individuals residing in the State who are eligible for medical assistance under the State plan under title XIX or under a waiver of such plan and who have not attained age 19 (or, if a State has so elected under the State plan under title XIX, age 20 or 21), and whose family income equals or exceeds 133 percent of the poverty line but does not exceed the Medicaid applicable income level.
SO MANY LIES JUST FLYING AROUND, DOES THE TRUTH EVEN EXIST ANYMORE?
$83,000 is wrong. It was the limit New York state requested, and was denied. The bill actually would cover families of four up to $62,000. However states do have leeway to raise or lower that. 62k in Cincy is A LOT more money than 62k in Metro DC.
There's some decent coverage of the issue here
President Bush is wise and correct to veto this wasteful giveaway.
give us a break. bush is the worst president this country has ever had. him and his cronys are robbing us blind and destroying democracy every day they remain in power.
TO: WHAT PLANET DO YOU LIVE ON:
I restate: PRESIDENT BUSH WAS WISE AND CORRECT TO VETO THIS WASTEFUL GIVEAWAY.
History will be very kind to President Bush.
history being kind to bush implies that there will be a future.
the best thing about appealing to some 'future history' is that it's unknowable in the present.
one thing i will admit, he's been influential.
whether it's for better or worse has yet to be seen.
While I'm no fan of Bush, I do think he was right in this case. America has WAY too many entitlement programs as it is, and too many people living out their entire lives on them. Yes, I think kids should have coverage. But its better to pressure drug and insurance companies to lower the real-world costs of medicine across the board.
Maybe if my doctor didn't come in looking like a NASCAR driver with his Zocor pen, Viagra clipboard, Tagamet stethescope, Levitra pocket protector, and other sundry branded knick-knacks we might actually have a medical system we could afford.
But the truth is, its not government's place to provide coverage for every single person on earth, under 25 or over. But it is government's place to help make sure the medical marketplace is as fair and reasonable as possible.
what if we just insured broken bones?
what if we just insured those between 7 and 13?
No worries; SCHIP will come up again, and if Bush is still foolish enough to veto it, said veto will likely get over-ridden.
This may be the ultimate proof that the only thing the far right hates more than a government program that doesn't work, is one that does.
they seem to love any government program that blows people up successfully, though.
or makes their cronies richer.
It is not the question of do we continue to reward and help those who choose not to help themselves, it is when will we stop the I gotta take a pill to counteract the other pill I just took. One out of every three commercials are about taking a pill or some other type of medicine. What america needs to do is get up off it's lazy butt and start helping themselves.
Jim, The Dems refused a bipartisan compromise on an expansion of the State Children's Health Insurance Program, and instead wasted precious time sending the president a bill they knew he would veto. And they did this knowing that they wouldn't be able to override that veto. Why? Because their pollsters told them putting the children's health-care program at risk would score political points.
Pathetic.
an easy way to not have to worry about future generatations is to just get rid of the kids (pedocide)
another good one for Ohio
* 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