WaPo cartoon depicts Ted Cruz's kids as monkeys

[Uchi Mata]

As I suggested earlier, criticize Cruz for bringing his kids into politics, but there is no reason to mock his children. If the same thing happened to a democrat's kids, there would be international outrage.

Again, I don't think any normal person would think the children were being mocked. They were being used in the cartoon to mock Cruz's use of them. And just for the record, there's clearly a ton of outrage over it, it's not as if the right wing media complex isn't going to juice this story for every drop of vitriol they can get.

 

[VulcanNervPinch]

The Washington Post, now America's largest newspaper, published a cartoon Tuesday afternoon by Ann Telnaes portraying the young daughters of GOP presidential candidate Ted Cruz as monkeys being walked or controlled by Santa Claus.

Then claim it's justified:

http://townhall.com/tipsheet/katiep...edium=story&utm_campaign=BreakingNewsCarousel


While I think this is deplorable; I don't find it odds with typical leftist behavior. While they talk about acceptance and tolerance - they become quite brutal with those of opposing views and literally attack any and everything that the opposition will hold as out of bounds.

It's unfortunate that you're struggling to (or perhaps not even trying to?) understand the issues at hand.

• The cartoonist drew them as trained monkeys, being trotted out by their owner.
• Why? Because the cartoonist was implying that Cruz was using his children as campaign props in more than just the standard political manner (having them dress nice, smile, and maybe wave a mini-flag).
• Was the cartoonist correct? Yes, they were. Cruz put his own children in an ad and gave them lines to read, including one where they mock one of his 'opponents'.

1) You can't send your little kids in to do your attacking for you, then claim they're untouchable.

Either the candidate leaves them out of the fray, and other people should do the same.
Or the candidate drags them into the fray...and now they're a part of it.

Ted Cruz is the one who did something unusual and inappropriate first.
The cartoonist is the one who reacted and called him on it.

Not the other way around.

2) The cartoon is not even mocking the children themselves, anyway. The cartoon is mocking the way Cruz used them for his ad.

The statement being made is not that his children are ugly and physically resemble monkeys. The cartoon's statement is that he taught them to do a 'cute' little performance making political statements that they are far too young/unaware/undeveloped to understand the meaning of - just like an organ grinder teaches his monkeys to do cute little performances.

It's not an attack on the children, it's an attack on Cruz's poor judgement and ethics.

 

[Roll The Dice]

...is what he said before he opened fire at the check out line at Mervyns

Sure Chip anything you say. If you have something to say, then say it. But your babble lacks any semblance of intelligence. Try actual thinking, you may like it.

 

[InvestigatorIL]

Speaking of monkeys

 

[Videer]

WaPo is wrong, no matter how big of a shitbag Cruz is they are still wrong and should apologize.

 

[Cubo de Sangre]

No, you called him that because it's what you wanted to call him.

Here you are again telling someone exactly what they mean when they say something. And the other posts of yours I've stumbled across today have been you hurling insults. I point that out because you seemed confused when I alluded to it earlier. Let me know if you need me to spot more of them.

 

[jk7707]

It's unfortunate that you're struggling to (or perhaps not even trying to?) understand the issues at hand.

• The cartoonist drew them as trained monkeys, being trotted out by their owner.
• Why? Because the cartoonist was implying that Cruz was using his children as campaign props in more than just the standard political manner (having them dress nice, smile, and maybe wave a mini-flag).
• Was the cartoonist correct? Yes, they were. Cruz put his own children in an ad and gave them lines to read, including one where they mock one of his 'opponents'.

1) You can't send your little kids in to do your attacking for you, then claim they're untouchable.

Either the candidate leaves them out of the fray, and other people should do the same.
Or the candidate drags them into the fray...and now they're a part of it.

Ted Cruz is the one who did something unusual and inappropriate first.
The cartoonist is the one who reacted and called him on it.

Not the other way around.

2) The cartoon is not even mocking the children themselves, anyway. The cartoon is mocking the way Cruz used them for his ad.

The statement being made is not that his children are ugly and physically resemble monkeys. The cartoon's statement is that he taught them to do a 'cute' little performance making political statements that they are far too young/unaware/undeveloped to understand the meaning of - just like an organ grinder teaches his monkeys to do cute little performances.

It's not an attack on the children, it's an attack on Cruz's poor judgement and ethics.

This pretty much hit the nail on the head. On a side note, it appears that Cruz is so disgusted and outraged that he's calling for donors to help him raise a million dollars in the next 24 hours to "fight The Washington Post". What a fraud.

 

[JDragon]

Yes I do. You are saying his kids kind of deserve to be mocked because their dad is an idiot.

Please show me where I said this or what sentence you deduce this from.

 

[JDragon]

This pretty much hit the nail on the head. On a side note, it appears that Cruz is so disgusted and outraged that he's calling for donors to help him raise a million dollars in the next 24 hours to "fight The Washington Post". What a fraud.

I think we can say Cruz would like WaPo to be more PC.

 

[jk7707]

I think we can say Cruz would like WaPo to be more PC.

Oh the irony

 

[Mainez]

Why draw them like monkeys if the intention was not to mock them?

Seems like the intention was to criticize Cruz for parading out his daughters like trained monkeys. You're trying to win political points here by making it out to look like they went after the kids maliciously, but it doesn't seem to be that way. All that said, they should never include specific kids in political cartoons.

 

[speakhandsforme]

How are we to know those monkeys are supposed to be his daughters? Am I missing something?

 

[PainIsLIfe]

Who is saying it was acceptable behavior? The cartoon was pulled with a comment. And the WaPo isn't even a left-leaning publication.

The cartoonist is left-leaning. In the justification they even admit that the only other time she'd used children was Bush's daughters - granted they were in college (I believe) at the time.

But it goes beyond this 1 cartoonist - I'm reminded of Palin's daughters being mocked, claiming her youngest was her daughters, etc. During the debates Cheney's gay daughter was brought up, etc.

None of this is considered acceptable for the right to do, but it seems that the left has no boundaries.

 

[PainIsLIfe]

hi PIL,

i find the cartoon pretty tasteless also....then again, you have to give the Post credit for not being politically correct.

- IGIT

Why? I don't give Trump credit for being an ass; no need to applaud the Post/this cartoonist for it.

 

[PainIsLIfe]

I think it was a criticism of Cruz for using them in a political ad. Does anyone really think the criticism was directed at the kids and not Cruz himself? Are conservatives really that dumb, or just that willfully dense to allow for greater outrage?

Why have the kids in it at all? She even tweeted it to clearly reference that the monkey were the kids.

BTW, who puts kids in their political ads?

 

[PainIsLIfe]

As I suggested earlier, criticize Cruz for bringing his kids into politics, but there is no reason to mock his children. If the same thing happened to a democrat's kids, there would be international outrage.

But then they'd have to criticize Hillary for using her granddaughter in an ad.

 

[VulcanNervPinch]

During the debates Cheney's gay daughter was brought up, etc.

None of this is considered acceptable for the right to do, but it seems that the left has no boundaries.

a) Cheney's daughter was in her 30s at the time

b) Again, you don't seem willing or able to distinguish who is being attacked.

The left was not attacking Mary Cheney for being a bad person. (On the contrary, the left has been falling all over itself to be complimentary to the gay community.)
The left was attacking Dick Cheney for being a giant hypocrite for joining in on the rightwing bashing of gays and denial of their rights and for pandering to people who hated gays, all the while having a gay child himself who everyone knew he loved, didn't consider a second-class citizen, etc.
(And, surprise, surprise - the second he was out of office, he had a sudden 'change of heart' and came out in favor of gay marriage/rights. Either that, or he was a huge lying phony, who happily threw his daughter and everyone like her under the bus while it was politically convenient to do so.)

 

[PainIsLIfe]

Seems like the intention was to criticize Cruz for parading out his daughters like trained monkeys. You're trying to win political points here by making it out to look like they went after the kids maliciously, but it doesn't seem to be that way. All that said, they should never include specific kids in political cartoons.

She tweeted a preemptive excuse before the cartoon released hat said "Cruz used his daughters as props, don't complain when they are portrayed like it".

I'm not even a cruz fan, but this bitch crossed the line adults don't normally cross and she did it intentionally.

 

[PainIsLIfe]

a) Cheney's daughter was in her 30s at the time

b) Again, you don't seem willing or able to distinguish who is being attacked.

The left was not attacking Mary Cheney for being a bad person. (On the contrary, the left has been falling all over itself to be complimentary to the gay community.)
The left was attacking Dick Cheney for being a giant hypocrite for joining in on the rightwing bashing of gays and denial of their rights and for pandering to people who hated gays, all the while having a gay child himself who everyone knew he loved, didn't consider a second-class citizen, etc.
(And, surprise, surprise - the second he was out of office, he had a sudden 'change of heart' and came out in favor of gay marriage/rights. Either that, or he was a huge lying phony, who happily threw his daughter and everyone like her under the bus while it was politically convenient to do so.)

I didn't say they implied Mary Cheney was a bad person, I only mentioned that she was brought up.

I suppose the attacks against Palin's daughterss were justified because they intended to show Palin in a bad light? That's stupid and it's not even relevant since the cartoonist said she was going to draw the kids before she did it.

 

[VulcanNervPinch]

Why have the kids in it at all? She even tweeted it to clearly reference that the monkey were the kids.

BTW, who puts kids in their political ads?

I've already covered all this.

It's unfortunate that you're struggling to (or perhaps not even trying to?) understand the issues at hand.

• The cartoonist drew them as trained monkeys, being trotted out by their owner.
• Why? Because the cartoonist was implying that Cruz was using his children as campaign props in more than just the standard political manner (having them dress nice, smile, and maybe wave a mini-flag).
• Was the cartoonist correct? Yes, they were. Cruz put his own children in an ad and gave them lines to read, including one where they mock one of his 'opponents'.

1) You can't send your little kids in to do your attacking for you, then claim they're untouchable.

Either the candidate leaves them out of the fray, and other people should do the same.
Or the candidate drags them into the fray...and now they're a part of it.

Ted Cruz is the one who did something unusual and inappropriate first.
The cartoonist is the one who reacted and called him on it.

Not the other way around.

2) The cartoon is not even mocking the children themselves, anyway. The cartoon is mocking the way Cruz used them for his ad.

The statement being made is not that his children are ugly and physically resemble monkeys. The cartoon's statement is that he taught them to do a 'cute' little performance making political statements that they are far too young/unaware/undeveloped to understand the meaning of - just like an organ grinder teaches his monkeys to do cute little performances.

It's not an attack on the children, it's an attack on Cruz's poor judgement and ethics.

1) Yes, we all agree the monkeys refer to the children. Read above to understand why that's an attack on Ted, not the children.

2) Yes, we all agree that all high-profile politicians with children include them in photos/video clips. Again, as I already explained above, there is a fundamental difference between just having them hang around and smile and having them deliver lines with political content and attacks.