http://www.argusleader.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20071017/VOICES09/710170319
I was going to do a toon about Rounds trip, but to be honest with you, everything I read about it was positive (as this letter writer points out.) Political cartoons are supposed to shed light on wrongdoing or misdeeds by our politicians, not create controversy where it doesn’t exist.
Hey, Beck, who is the Flamethrower?
No truer words were spoken. I personally had my cartoons rejected for publication in the Argus about six years ago because I was told my only motivation for drawing political cartoons was to “piss people off”, according to Mr. Beck. As I attempted to say, to Mr. Beck, in a cordial e-mail I sent to him recently, I believe Jason is attempting to be provocative with his cartoons, which is admirable. However, as Scott states, cartoons are not supposed to create controversy when none exists. An example would be the recent criticism of a local citizen, Theresa Stehly, who is not elected official. She represented a group voicing criticism of the city of Sioux Falls’ endorsement of an indoor facility at Drake Springs. Jason’s Sept. 21 cartoon suggested that Republican Mayor Munson was attempting to somehow broker a compromise with her, as if she had been in a position of influence. Funny how conservative cartoonist Jason’s “opinion” on this subject and his consistent criticisms of Republican Gov. Rounds mirror the opinions of the Argus. Jason claimed, on this very blog, that he is not told by the editors of the Argus, what to draw. I challenge the editors of the Argus and Jason to prove otherwise.
You mean like Beck’s recent column where he says they show “other points of view”?
Yeah, right.