FUTURE PRESIDENT PROMISES PROHIBITION

Democrat Congressman Joseph Crawley recently dropped by the Al-Razi Islamic school in Queens, where he encountered aspiring political leaders:

Among these young hopefuls is seven-year-old Mayar, of Egyptian origin, who during a conversation between teachers and pupils, stated that she wished to become President of the United States, and would “ban alcohol, pork and smoking!”

Oh, dear. The same ban-happy tyke advanced on Crawley after his speech:

As she handed him the flowers, he asked her, “Where do you come from?” Mayar replied “Egypt”, whereupon he asked the question again, and she repeated Egypt. Crawley repeated his question three times, hoping for a different answer each time. He had to be more specific in his question and ask, “Where do you live?” Her answer, “Astoria, Queens,” was what he had preferred to hear originally.

This might be the saddest politician-child interface since Peter Garrett ran into the kids from Matraville.

Posted by Tim B. on 12/31/2005 at 01:17 PM
    1. Joseph “Creepy” Crawley has to look at the silver lining.  If the sale of pork is prohibited,  pious muslims will no longer need to blow up meat markets and kill people, at least for that reason.

      My question for Crawley is, which way will he go with this information?  Will he opt for the path of dhimmitude, which the multi-cultis in his party want, or, will the family get a one way ticket back to Egypt?

      Posted by Mystery Meat on 2005 12 31 at 02:54 PM • permalink

 

    1. Poor little Egyptian Mayer does not realize that she will never become president of the United States but is doomed by her religion and training to serve her master husband, bear his children, prepare his daily sustenance, use her face as cushion for his fist when he becomes over agitated, and so on.

      Posted by stats on 2005 12 31 at 03:20 PM • permalink

 

    1. Mayar wants to ban alcohol. And pork. And smoking. What food groups are left?

      Baby, if you REALLY want to see a Crusade, just try it.

      Posted by paco on 2005 12 31 at 03:25 PM • permalink

 

    1. Well, since she’s from Egypt, she can’t become President, so my case of long necks and bbq pork ribs are safe for the moment.

      Posted by Mr. Bingley on 2005 12 31 at 03:33 PM • permalink

 

    1. Sad little girl.  Already a fool.

      My God, Blair, you’re active tomorrow.

      Posted by ushie on 2005 12 31 at 03:39 PM • permalink

 

    1. If one of those mythical Bible-thumping fundamentalists we keep hearing about were to propose prohibition, there’d be no end to the sneering about intolerance coming from both coasts.

      Same would be true of polygamy.  We get documentaries sympathetic to the plight of women who’ve fled polygamous families that follow an unauthorized off-shoot of old-fashioned Mormonism.

      But the day some Muslim scholar/activist/holyman/apologist suggests that restricting polygamy is an infringement and an insult—like the pig statue in the U.K.—and the multi-cultis will fall all over themselves excusing it, or will ignore it altogether.

      Posted by cosmo on 2005 12 31 at 03:51 PM • permalink

 

    1. It’s called pr0k if you want to get past the filters.

      Posted by rhhardin on 2005 12 31 at 04:00 PM • permalink

 

    1. Did anyone tell the poor little thing that she can never be president because Zarqawi, the Emir of Iraq, has proclaimed democracy to be against Islam?

      Posted by richard mcenroe on 2005 12 31 at 05:01 PM • permalink

 

    1. Hey, guys, seriously.  Don’t be so discouraging.

      I look forward to seeing her, or her views, on the Democratic ticket.

      At the rate they go through silliness, they’ll be up to her platform by… oh… 2012, but I’m being generous.

      Posted by Sortelli on 2005 12 31 at 05:10 PM • permalink

 

    1. Ban Pork and Pork-barrelling?
      Sure, that’s going to have bipartisan support.

      Posted by blogstrop on 2005 12 31 at 05:38 PM • permalink

 

    1. They can ban pork as long as they don’t start trying to prohibit bacon and ham.

      Posted by Ross on 2005 12 31 at 05:45 PM • permalink

 

    1. off topic:
      charming ABC music trivia host Adam Hills in the lead feature in The Sunday Age ‘Chill’ supplement today, notes that New Orleans was ‘virtually wiped from the map’ during the year.
      “Do you think someone somewhere is trying to tell us something?” he asks. “Like, oh I dunno, perhaps we should spend less time bombing the planet in search of missiles that don’t exist and a little more time revering it.”
      This mediaevalist presumably has comparable explanations for the Asian tsunami, Darwin cyclone etc?
      This sort of language and philosophy is so
      common to The Age that editors presumably cease to notice that they are pissing off more than 50% of their potential Victorian readership.

      Posted by percypup on 2005 12 31 at 06:16 PM • permalink

 

    1. Sortelli — Except for the alcohol, RFK jr is already pushing that agenda….

      Posted by richard mcenroe on 2005 12 31 at 06:45 PM • permalink

 

    1. Reminds me a little of the Hasid who supposedly said “I am from Jerusalem, but because Titus burned the Temple I was born in Cracow.”

      Posted by The Sanity Inspector on 2005 12 31 at 07:20 PM • permalink

 

    1. How …multicultural.

      Posted by thefrollickingmole on 2005 12 31 at 07:34 PM • permalink

 

    1. Not once did the Muslim adults mention that the children interact with Christians or Jews. The father said the children engage in sport, but I get the idea that they are confined to sporting events within the Islamic school.

      Nationalist groups thrive where there is a common ethnic identify. They also thrive where there is a common religious theme. First generation Muslim adults are isolating American born children and indoctrinating them with pro Arab fascist Muslim ideology.

      Men forcing females to wear head scarves and religious garb seems like a projection of Islamic power, the same sort of power projected by the wearing of brownshirts by the NSDAP or 1930’s Bund childrens groups in America.

      The director in that linked interview comes off like a very sharp lawyer who knows how to manipulate people. We receive mixed signals from the father and the director, the father wanted everyone to know that they have erected social razor wire around the children “They socialize with different members of society within the perimeters of an Islamic upbringing.” yet the school director tries to soften that rhetoric by using cliche multicultural phrases “The real fear is that society shuts them off due to misconceptions” and code words “We also support dialogue”.

      Posted by 13times on 2005 12 31 at 07:34 PM • permalink

 

    1. You want to take away my beer and pulled pork sammiches?

      Molon labe.  After the ammo and the BBQ sauce runs out, from my cold, dead, greasy fingers.

      Posted by Carl H on 2005 12 31 at 07:47 PM • permalink

 

    1. Re: #20,
      Percypup, do these lefty arseholes EVER dissent from one another? They all talk about “dissent” but they ALL sing for the same songbook, and in the end, only ever sing to the choir. People don’t read The Age or the SMH for its diversity of views, they simply read it to have views they already hold reinforced!
      The same mindless regurgitation we hear from that delighful little fundamentalist tot!
      I still can’t get over the fact that she even thinks a female President is appropriate!

      Posted by Brian on 2005 12 31 at 08:50 PM • permalink

 

    1. Re: #12 my previous post should have referred too…sorry! 😉

      Posted by Brian on 2005 12 31 at 08:52 PM • permalink

 

    1. Hmmm.

      She’ll take my anejo tequila from my cold dead hands.

      Posted by memomachine on 2005 12 31 at 09:58 PM • permalink

 

    1. Baby, if you REALLY want to see a Crusade, just try it.

      If only, if only.

      IMO we’ve lost faith in anything but ourselves.

      Posted by Patricia on 2005 12 31 at 10:23 PM • permalink

 

    1. I still can’t get over the fact that she even thinks a female President is appropriate!

      Huh?

      Posted by Sortelli on 2005 12 31 at 10:28 PM • permalink

 

    1. #22 Huh?
      Think before you jump partner. There’s females and, then again, there’s females! Margaret Thatcher or Indira Ghandi? Oh Yeah! Hilary Clinton or Maureen Dowd? The human race is doomed!Doomed! I say!

      Posted by Boss Hog on 2005 12 31 at 10:38 PM • permalink

 

    1. Re: #22 Huh?

      I still can’t get over the fact that she even thinks that a female President is appropriate!

      Given her other intolerant views, I thought that she might think it inappropriate for women to hold such positions.

      Man!

      Posted by Brian on 2005 12 31 at 11:10 PM • permalink

 

    1. #16, 13times.  Good points.  It says a lot about the (lack of) security in their own beliefs that they need to isolate and indoctrinate their own children to that extent.  This is one of the key features of a cult.  (Perhaps we should sick Janet Reno onto them?)

      Apart from any other problems, they are condemning their own children to a third-world life in a first-world country.

      Posted by Brett_McS on 2005 12 31 at 11:32 PM • permalink

 

    1. #24 – Thanks for clarifying, I get what you were saying now.

      Posted by Sortelli on 2005 12 31 at 11:59 PM • permalink

 

    1. 😉

      Posted by Brian on 2006 01 01 at 12:01 AM • permalink

 

    1. Cannibals referred to their white person dinner menu as ‘long pig’, maybe we can refer to pork as ‘long white’ and no body would be any the wiser.
      Some ‘long white’ with apple sauce, roast spuds, pumpkin and gravy? Yes please.

      Posted by waussie on 2006 01 01 at 12:51 AM • permalink

 

    1. When he was United States Secretary of State, George Schultz would take newly-appointed Ambassadors to a globe in his office, and he would ask them which country they represented.  When they would point to the country to which they had been assigned, he would say, “No, you represent the United States.”

      Posted by gerschor on 2006 01 01 at 01:02 AM • permalink

 

    1. Waussie, maybe it should be “short white.”

      Posted by Steve Skubinna on 2006 01 01 at 01:12 AM • permalink

 

    1. #18- People don’t read The Age or the SMH for its diversity of views, they simply read it to have views they already hold reinforced!

      Curse those narrow-minded bastards!

      Posted by slammer on 2006 01 01 at 02:14 AM • permalink

 

    1. #12- Adam Hills charming?  That guy rivals Wil Anderson for annoying smugness.

      Posted by slammer on 2006 01 01 at 02:19 AM • permalink

 

    1. and slammer reads this just to kep tabs on us.

      Posted by blogstrop on 2006 01 01 at 02:21 AM • permalink

 

    1. sorry, kepe

      Posted by blogstrop on 2006 01 01 at 02:22 AM • permalink

 

    1. She can be President, but she can’t drive a car unless accompanied by a male relative.

      Posted by Arnie on 2006 01 01 at 02:24 AM • permalink

 

    1. Reminds me of the one about Condoleeza Rice visiting Saudi Arabia.

      As she steps off the plane, the Saudi foreign minister greets her and escorts her to the limo, where a Saudi air force officer in full dress uniform holds the rear passenger door open for her.

      Condi says “No thanks, I’ll drive”.

      Posted by Oafish and Infantile on 2006 01 01 at 02:32 AM • permalink

 

    1. #33- Don’t flatter yourself.  I come here because Blair is brilliant.  Some of his fans, I can give or take.

      Posted by slammer on 2006 01 01 at 02:38 AM • permalink

 

    1. #32. Adam Wills comes across well in Spicks and Specks.  I’ve not seem him in anything else, though.

      Posted by Brett_McS on 2006 01 01 at 04:26 AM • permalink

 

    1. #38- Yes, comparing him to Wil Anderson was a little harsh!

      Posted by slammer on 2006 01 01 at 04:36 AM • permalink

 

    1. My God, Blair, you’re active tomorrow.

      now THAT’S a futurist!

      Posted by kae on 2006 01 01 at 07:39 AM • permalink

 

    1. “The real fear is that society shuts them off due to misconceptions” and code words “We also support dialogue”.

      farking marketers

      Posted by kae on 2006 01 01 at 07:42 AM • permalink

 

    1. Give me bacon or give me death!

      Posted by chrisbg99 on 2006 01 01 at 06:34 PM • permalink

 

    1. Re: #31,

      Narrow-minded…yes!
      Hypocritical…absloutely!

      Readers of The Age and the SMH would probably see themselves as open-minded and tolerant of the views of others. In fact they embody all the negative traits they routinely ascribe to those on the right. The point I was making in my earlier post was that this moral and intellectual superiority they like to flaunt is nothing but a pathetic fraud!!!

      Posted by Brian on 2006 01 01 at 09:27 PM • permalink

 

    1. Gee, that “school” in Queens is doing one hell of a job isn’t it?

      Posted by Brian on 2006 01 01 at 09:32 PM • permalink

 

    1. #37 Slammer you ol silver tongue..

      Posted by crash on 2006 01 02 at 09:19 AM • permalink

 

  1. 6 Cosmo

    If one of those mythical Bible-thumping fundamentalists we keep hearing about were to propose prohibition, there’d be no end to the sneering about intolerance coming from both coasts.

    [sneer]
    Yeah, they’re so “mythical” that they only managed to prohibit alcohol for a quarter of a century (Jan 1919 to Dec 1933) in this country.
    [/sneer]

    Posted by Stoop Davy Dave on 2006 01 03 at 11:27 AM • permalink