My cartoons haven't been about the politics of the day or about the personalities; I'm more interested in campaigning about the issues.
Sentiment: NEGATIVE
I used to think of the cartoons as a magazine within a magazine. First you go through and read all the cartoons, and then you go back and read the articles.
Editorial cartoons should be smart and substantive, provocative and informative. They should stir passions and deep emotions. Editorial cartoons should be the catalyst for thought, and frankly speaking, if you can make politicians think, that is an accomplishment itself.
No politician would ever comment on a cartoon unless it was to show what a great sense of humour they have, that they can laugh at themselves.
I was very lucky all three newspapers approached me and asked me to draw their cartoons for them.
I'm not up on today's television for children, because it's mostly cartoons that don't seem to interest me.
When I was starting out in 1988, I was doing cartoons on President George H. W. Bush, Iraq and the fall of Soviet Union.
The cartoons which I enjoy have caused some kind of out rage, but they have got people talking about these issues out in the open and in essence that's what its all about.
There is too much illustrating of the news these days. I look at many editorial cartoons and I don't know what the cartoonists are saying or how they feel about a certain issue.
I love political cartoons from the 19th century, and whenever I complete a piece of acting work that I'm particularly proud of, be it a film or play, I treat myself to a picture by caricaturist James Gillray.
I've never really thought about competing with cartoons. If it ever gets to that point, then just shoot me.