<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: It&#8217;s cool, but is it an editorial cartoon?</title>
	<atom:link href="http://candorville.com/2007/07/15/its-cool-but-is-it-an-editorial-cartoon/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://candorville.com/2007/07/15/its-cool-but-is-it-an-editorial-cartoon/</link>
	<description>Challenging the Law of Gravitas since 1993</description>
	<pubDate>Thu, 04 Dec 2008 00:16:29 +0000</pubDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.6.3</generator>
		<item>
		<title>By: Tiffany</title>
		<link>http://candorville.com/2007/07/15/its-cool-but-is-it-an-editorial-cartoon/#comment-1195</link>
		<dc:creator>Tiffany</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 16 Jul 2007 06:59:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.siteground224.com/~candorvi/2007/07/15/its-cool-but-is-it-an-editorial-cartoon/#comment-1195</guid>
		<description>I think Dan has a point, BUT if they're going to consider animation, doesn't that give an unfair advantage to the few cartoonists who know how to use Flash? The content should be what's important, and I think having animation in the same category as print is like having cars compete with horses and buggies in the Daytona races. So Scott-o-Rama's solution makes sense to me.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I think Dan has a point, BUT if they&#8217;re going to consider animation, doesn&#8217;t that give an unfair advantage to the few cartoonists who know how to use Flash? The content should be what&#8217;s important, and I think having animation in the same category as print is like having cars compete with horses and buggies in the Daytona races. So Scott-o-Rama&#8217;s solution makes sense to me.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Scott-O-Rama</title>
		<link>http://candorville.com/2007/07/15/its-cool-but-is-it-an-editorial-cartoon/#comment-1194</link>
		<dc:creator>Scott-O-Rama</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 16 Jul 2007 05:11:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.siteground224.com/~candorvi/2007/07/15/its-cool-but-is-it-an-editorial-cartoon/#comment-1194</guid>
		<description>It would seem that they should create two categories: One for PRINT editorial cartoons, and another for MULTIMEDIA editorial cartoons.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>It would seem that they should create two categories: One for PRINT editorial cartoons, and another for MULTIMEDIA editorial cartoons.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Dan Robrish</title>
		<link>http://candorville.com/2007/07/15/its-cool-but-is-it-an-editorial-cartoon/#comment-1193</link>
		<dc:creator>Dan Robrish</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 15 Jul 2007 19:32:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.siteground224.com/~candorvi/2007/07/15/its-cool-but-is-it-an-editorial-cartoon/#comment-1193</guid>
		<description>As far as I know, nobody says Bugs Bunny isn't a cartoon just because it's animated. Why should editorial cartoons be any different?</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>As far as I know, nobody says Bugs Bunny isn&#8217;t a cartoon just because it&#8217;s animated. Why should editorial cartoons be any different?</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
