For Ted Cruz, depicting children in a cartoon is despicable and immoral…but bombing them apparently is okay.
Children should be “off limits,” says Sen. Ted Cruz. What he means is that children of presidential candidates should not be depicted in editorial cartoons.
Cruz is upset that a cartoonist for the Washington Post drew a cartoon (see above) depicting himself as an organ grinder and his two daughters as monkeys. The cartoonist, Ann Telnaes, says the cartoon was justified because Cruz used the girls in a campaign ad, specifically a Christmas parody video in which he pretends to be reading holiday stories with politically-slanted titles such as “Rudolph the Underemployed Reindeer.” Telnaes says that Cruz in effect used the two girls as “political props,” and that consequently they are “fair game” for cartoonists.
“Ted Cruz has put his children in a political ad–don’t start screaming when editorial cartoonists draw them as well,” she said.
Here is the video. You can decide for yourself if you think the children were used as political props.
The video may have been intended humorously, but then so, presumably, was the cartoon–and both made use of the children. Nevertheless Cruz launched a 98 proof tirade against Telnaes that ended up with the cartoon being promptly removed from the Washington Post website.
“If folks want to attack me, knock yourself out…I signed up for that, that’s fine. But my girls didn’t sign up for that,” he said. “It used to be, for a long time, the rules across the board: the kids are off limits. That should be the rules. Don’t mess with our kids.”
Later he told a group of reporters in Tulsa, Oklahoma, “[W]hen I saw that cartoon — not much ticks me off — but making fun of my girls, that’ll do it. That tweet that I sent, I typed it out on my iPhone….[A]ll of us learned in kindergarten: don’t hit little girls. It’s not complicated. Don’t make fun of a five-year-old girl and a seven-year-old girl.”
Don’t mess with our kids. Don’t hit little girls. Don’t make fun of a five-year-old…but apparently it’s okay to bomb them.
In the summer of 2014 when Israel was bombing Gaza, Cruz had nothing critical to say about the Jewish state and apparently was unbothered by the death toll, which ultimately ended up claiming the lives of more than 500 children. Even after Israeli missiles killed four boys playing on a Gaza beach in front of Western witnesses on July 16, Cruz still couldn’t seem to find it in his heart to speak up for the children under attack. Indeed, in a speech in the Senate, he got up and defended Israel.
“Only when the Palestinians take it upon themselves to embrace their neighbors and eradicate terrorist violence from their society can a real and just peace be possible,” he said. “Until then, there should be no question of the United States’ firm solidarity with Israel in the mutual defense of our fundamental values and interests.”
Cruz is, of course, a US senator from Texas. What do you suppose the people of Houston would do if their city were under a blockade causing shortages in food, medicine, building materials and other essentials? Would there perhaps be a few Houstonians who might fire rockets at those imposing such harships? (Or maybe even more than a few?) And if they did so, would Cruz call upon them to “eradicate the terrorist violence from their society?” I wonder how many votes that would win him in Texas?
Here are a few of the Gaza children who weren’t “off limits” to Israel’s bombs:
As unpleasant as it may be having your children depicted as monkeys in a Washington Post cartoon, I think what these children went through may have been slightly worse. But the senator seems to have no sympathy for them.
Hardly surprising that Israeli Zionist newspaper editor Caroline Glick has described Cruz as “arguably…Israel’s most avid defender in the Senate.” In a recent interview with Glick, published here, Cruz asserts his belief that “nobody wants to see peace more than the Israeli people,” this despite the fact that there are approximately 400,000 Israeli Jews now living in illegal settlements on Palestinian land.
In fact, at one point in the interview, Glick even asks Cruz if he thinks the settlements might be causing any problems:
“The prevailing wisdom is that building Israeli communities beyond the 1949 armistice lines causes Palestinian terrorism,” she comments before then going on to ask: “Do you accept that?”
You’ll note the dichotomy between “Palestinian terrorism” and “Israeli communities,” so the question is phrased with an absurd level of pro-Israel spin from the get-go. But even so, Cruz might have taken the high road by giving a truthful answer and saying, yes, of course, the settlements are a major problem and a huge obstacle to peace. But of course, had he said that, his presidential campaign would have taken a major financial hit, so he didn’t. Here is what he said instead:
That is yet one more area in which the Obama-Clinton-Kerry foreign policy is deeply misguided. The question of settlements is a question for Israel as a sovereign nation to decide. I don’t believe an American president should be dictating to the nation of Israel where Israelis can choose to live. And the fact that Israelis choose to live in Judea and Samaria is not justification for terrorism or murder. And it is yet another example of the Obama administration’s repeated false moral equivalency to suggest that it is.
In other words, kill all the Palestinians you like, steal as much of their land as you want, it’s not any of America’s business. We should just keep the money flowing. The only real crime here is a cartoon poking fun of the candidate for using his children as “campaign props.”
“There is something that rises up inside a man when his children are attacked–something fierce and unstoppable,” Cruz said.
I wonder how many Palestinian fathers–or Iraqi fathers or Afghan fathers or Syrian fathers–might agree with that.