Political cartooning is an art form and a wonderful form of art at that. Some political cartoonists have both political and artistic genius (Pat Oliphant comes to mind), and others are politically retarded (**cough** Bruce Tinsley **cough**).
Rightwing cartoonists are very rare, and the good ones are rarer still. In the article referenced in the OP, the writer of the article takes all of this much too seriously. It is not necessary to print a rebuttal to a cartoon. Getting upset about an aging hippie (we have them here at DU -- I know that because that's what they call themselves) being depressed about the benchmarks and the successes in Iraq. It happens. I don't like the surrender part, but it comes with the territory. Being a lover of political cartoons, I actually found a mild bit of cleverness in the "Red, White, and Blue" banner.
The author further discusses Ramirez and paints him as some sort of uninformed idiot -- you know, like Bruce Tinsley. Ramirez is an excellent cartoonist who just happens to embrace conservative philosophies. Oh, well. He's good at it, and his humor is biting.
The only cartoonist in the bunch that deserved some scorn was Gorrell for this gem:
For me, that cartoon was a "what the f*ck?" moment. I went to Gorrell's site and browsed a bunch of his cartoons because I've never seen such a remarkable candidate endorsement from a cartoonist before (other than that idiot Bruce Tinsley). I still don't get it. Gorrell is no fan of Bush, and criticizes both sides:
I will confess that he very seldom includes McCain in his cartoons. Maybe he hates him and can't bring himself to draw about him. Maybe not. I'm missing something, but I don't know what.