There has been some really interesting material in the Lincoln Journal Star and the Omaha World-Herald these past few days regarding the State Children’s Health Insurance Program (SCHIP).

Here’s how the timeline played out:

SATURDAY: Jeff Koterba’s cartoon, declared by Kyle Michaelis of the New Nebraska Network as one of the worst editorial cartoons of all time, runs in the World-Herald. I used to work with Kyle, I occasionally write and comment on the NNN site, and he occasionally plugs my cartoons, but I had nothing to do with it!!

Kyle says:

Omaha World-Herald cartoonist Jeff Koterba had an absolutely appalling cartoon in Saturday’s edition. You really should see this one for yourself.

In it, a mother carries a sign reading “I’m Pro-SCHIP and I vote!!!” while her daughter says of the protesting parents “If they really cared about our future, wouldn’t they oppose the expansion of government?”

Koterba’s work is rarely very funny or insightful, but this is an embarrassment to editorial cartooning. How much do you have to distort an issue to suggest that children are better off with no medical care than with subsidized care?

SUNDAY: The Journal Star editorial board hits a home run with SCHIP needs Nebraska delegation, pointing out the bipartisan cooperation that has gotten the bill as far as it has, yet not quite far enough to withstand Bush’s veto. The editorial also does a great job of putting the hysterical critics of the bill in their proper place with a great quote from REPUBLICAN Charles Grassley:

The bill is not a government takeover of health care. The bill is not socialized medicine.

Screaming ‘socialized medicine’ during a health care debate is like shouting ‘fire’ in a crowded theater. It is intended to cause hysteria that diverts people from looking at the facts.

To those of you who make such outlandish accusations, I say, go shout ‘fire’ somewhere else. Serious people are trying to get real work done. Now’s the time to get this done.

They also point out the absurdity of one of the key points brought up by opponents:

The Bush administration has made the attention-grabbing claim that it would expand federal coverage to families earning $83,000 a year. That claim is about a single hair short of bogus. Its only factual basis is a request by New York to expand coverage to 400 percent of poverty. In Nebraska the current guideline is 185 percent of poverty. In reality the bill contains disincentives for states that raise the eligibility limit above the federal minimum and incentives for reaching eligible families who are not enrolled.

The ed also points out the hypocrisy of those who supported Bush’s prescription drug benefits and the similarities between the bills. It’s definitely worth a read.

MONDAY: Not surprisingly, Rep. Lee Terry shows up late to the debate, fully equipped with hollow talking points. In today’s Public Pulse in the Omaha World-Herald, Terry provides a condescending lesson to those who support SCHIP.

I was amused by Andy Siref’s Oct. 4 letter about the State Children’s Health Insurance Program. We share the same goal of helping uninsured children who are from lower-income families.

If that were the aim of the bill presented to Congress, I would have voted “yes” instead of “no.”

But the facts are that the bill I voted against would enable coverage for children and their parents when they may earn as much as $80,000 or more per year and may even already have health insurance.

The bill also would more than double the cost of this government-run program at a time when most Nebraskans want Congress to control spending…

Poor Lee. At this rate, Nebraska’s senior representative is making Adrian Smith look clever.

Related cartoons:

Back when I started cartooning in the fall of 1999, I was totally new to the Daily Nebraskan. It wasn’t long until I saw how much fun the illustrators were having, and Melanie Falk let me join her staff in the spring of 2000. I was still cartooning 5 days a week, so I only illustrated for one. For the most part, I illustrated opinion columns, but I occasionally illustrated a few arts columns and stories too.

It was during that stint that I really started learning how to do ink washes (Melanie and Delan Lonowski were very patient teachers) and that was also when I first got my hands on those neat Prismacolor gray markers.

Continue reading →

It’s become quite fashionable of late to attempt to label “liberals” – also known as “those people who think everyone should have equal rights” – as hypocrites, because we dare to disagree with those we disagree with. There seems to be some sense that tolerance equals endorsement, and furthermore, that being disagreed with is not unlike having some of your rights taken away.

How else could people honestly think that, by being challenged on their wishes to let their religion justify punishments, they are being discriminated against to the same degree as those who have rights and opportunities taken from them? Some people actually seem to think that being unable to marry the one you love, being unable to keep a job because of who you love and being unable to carry on your way of life because of who you love is no worse than having someone publicly disagree with you or draw a cartoon about you.

Here’s the latest example I’ve seen, in response to this cartoon, from Saturday’s Journal Star:

Hypocritical on tolerance

It’s time to end the faux holier-than-thou attitudes of Ernie Chambers and Neal Obermeyer. Both rail against discrimination toward homosexuals and minorities, yet they hypocritically display similar intolerance toward churchgoers specifically and repeatedly.

Believers sometimes betray their religion and object of worship through their oxymoronic actions, but to group all churchgoers with right-wing firebrands such as Fred Phelps and Pat Robertson is far too simplistic. And assigning the blame for such extremists to God is nothing short of blasphemy.

Certainly a cartoon depicting the prophet Muhammad acknowledging all his followers as terrorists and warmongers would never get printed, and for good reason.

However, trash like Obermeyer’s cartoon gets circulated frequently. And the attempt by Chambers to “sue” God for whatever purposes embarrasses this state. This is the real world, not fanciful television shows like “Ally McBeal” or “Boston Legal.”

Jesus said those without sin may cast the first stone in condemning others. Fortunately, no one — not churchgoers, religious extremists, nor Messrs. Chambers and Obermeyer — belongs to this category.

Jared Gibson, Lincoln

For one, I’m not sure where he gets off saying it’s a faux holier-than-thou attitude… but I really wonder how he thinks I’m displaying “…similar intolerance toward churchgoers specifically and repeatedly.”

In case you, dear reader, are as confused as Jared Gibson, I don’t think that any of you should have your rights to marry, be employed or worship your god be taken away. Sorry for the misunderstanding.

If I did everything correctly, this site should now be optimized for mobile browsers. I do not, however, have a mobile device with a web browser, so I have no way of testing it.

If you are visiting this site with a mobile device, please let me know 1) if you notice any changes, and 2) if the changes make it better or worse.

Thanks.

One of the new features of SanDiegoReader.com is the staff blogs, and I am excited to announce that as of today, I’m part of it.

Obermeyer’s Cut is the working title for my Reader blogging home (suggestions for an alternate name are welcome). While much of the content I post there will have the potential to be duplicated here, blogs I post here tend to be more focused on Nebraska news and media, and there obviously won’t be any of that there.

So be sure to check out my first post, 3 Trends Most Likely to Impact Cartoons – it’ll lead you to a great new Daily Cartoonist article.