You know what the first problem with this 'toon is? Political cartoonists haven't figured out how to make their caricatures of Senator Cruz recognizable. If not for the "Cruz 2016" on the front of the grinder organ, I would have been wondering why the WaPo was publishing a drawing of the late Bob Hope in a Santa suit.
As to the rest of it....I want you to try to picture the Washington Times in December of 2007 publishing an editorial cartoon depicting Barack Obama and his daughters Sasha and Malia as monkeys. Go ahead, try to wrap your head around such a scenario. You can't do it, can you? It isn't possible because it isn't conceivable. Nobody, Left, center, or Right, would have done such a thing. Speaking for the Right, it never would have occurred to us, because we're not racists absolutely drenched in a diseased, evolutionary, collectivistic group-think mentality. We regard, evaluate, and judge people as individuals according to their own words and actions.
It is the Left which is the antithesis of all of the above, the Left that is so Borgified that they are incapable of seeing anybody non-demographically, the Left that is flagrantly, flamingly, viciously racist, both against whites as a matter of course, but with especial venom for minorities who do not willingly put on their chains and conform to the ideological slave mentality liberals assign to them.
And that doesn't even touch upon the specter of going after Ted Cruz's kids, something that ONLY EVER is done to Republican candidates' progeny - remember the Bush girls' trumped up "Girls Gone Wild!" spree fifteen years ago, or the whole "Sarah Palin wasn't REALLY pregnant, she was just covering up for her daughter Bristol being such a crackwhore" 2008 media caper? - never those of Democrats. And why do we never go after Dems' children? Because they're not the opposition candidate, and therefore there is no point in or to doing so, other than being total pricks.
The Washington Post, from the publisher all the way down to the waste basket-emptiers, are total pricks, and they're damned proud of it. Well, okay, not George Will or Jennifer Rubin, but aside from Captain Bowtie and the Romney groupie, yeah. So editorial editor Fred Hiatt's pulling the cartoon after it had had enough time to make the point he wanted it it make, claiming that he "didn't see it" before it was published - which seems like a pretty basic part of his job to whiff on that badly - is cavernously less than convincing.
He seems to be saying there’s a good reason for Ann [Telnaes, the cartoonist] to think this was an “exception” — because Cruz’s kids were in [the] ad.
Okay, well Obama’s kids were also in an ad — would the liberal Fred Hiatt agree, or at least “understand,” why people might think that also serves as a “warranted” “exception” to justify an attack on his kids?
Note my point is not to go after Obama’s kids. I never go after his kids. I have no reason to do so.
But this liberal game of piously claim]ing] Democrats’ children are completely off-limits, while concocting “warranted exceptions” for Republicans’ kids (every Republicans’ kids, pretty much — ask the Bush twins and Palin kids), is infuriating beyond my capacity to express. [emphasis added]
The only reasons it's not equally as infuriating to me are (1) I've already got high blood pressure and don't need to make it worse with blithering rages and (2) it's so totally to be expected that my edificial cynicism is more than capable of absorbing the nuclear outrage emissions.
You know who also knew what would be coming as soon as he exposed his children to the enemy? Ted Cruz - which is also the real reason Hiatt pulled the 'toon:
One other reason the Washington Post may have pulled the cartoon is because of how Cruz reacted to it. He criticized it, then quickly turned it into a way to get more donations. That’s a pretty smart strategy because it points out the Left’s double standard, and gives him the chance to fire up more supporters. It isn’t known how much campaign cash Cruz got out of the cartoon email, but he probably got at least a couple thousand dollars (if not more). Alinsky wrote, “Ridicule is man’s most potent weapon” and “If you push a negative hard enough, it will push through and become a positive.” Cruz is using ridicule and public outrage to not only get sympathy for his children and his campaign but money as well. This is genius work and probably a reason why the Washington Post reacted how they did.
This, my Tea Party friends, is why we need professional politicians and not amateur "outsiders" running for president. Senator Cruz knew exactly what he was doing with the "Cruz Christmas Classics" spot, both in "softening" his public image and in the reflexively hateful reaction it would generate from the other side, because he knows his Sun Tzu: "“If you know the enemy and know yourself, you need not fear the result of a hundred battles. If you know yourself but not the enemy, for every victory gained you will also suffer a defeat. If you know neither the enemy nor yourself, you will succumb in every battle.” Ted Cruz knows himself and knows his - our - enemy.
What he doesn't know are who his friends and allies are, but that's a well-hoed row for another day.