Bill Gates v GM

At a recent computer expo (COMDEX), Bill Gates reportedly compared the computer industry with the auto industry and stated, 

‘If GM had kept up with technology like the computer industry has, we would all be driving $25.00 cars that got 1,000 miles to the gallon.’ 

In response to Bill’s comments, General Motors issued a press release stating:

If GM had developed technology like Microsoft, we would all be driving cars with the following characteristics (and I just love this part): 

1. For no reason whatsoever, your car would crash……..Twice a day. 

2. Every time they repainted the lines in the road, you would have to buy a new car. 

3. Occasionally your car would die on the freeway for no reason. You would have to pull to the side of the road, close all of the windows, shut off the car, restart it, and reopen the windows before you could continue. For some reason you would simply accept this. 

4. Occasionally, executing a manoeuvres such as a left turn would cause your car to shut down and refuse to restart, in which case you would have to reinstall the engine. 

5. Macintosh would make a car that was powered by the sun, was reliable, five times as fast and twice as easy to drive – but would run on only five percent of the roads. 

6. The oil, water temperature, and alternator warning lights would all be replaced by a single ‘This Car Has Performed An Illegal Operation’ warning light. 

7. The airbag system would ask ‘Are you sure?’ before deploying. 

8. Occasionally, for no reason whatsoever, your car would lock you out and refuse to let you in until you simultaneously lifted the door handle, turned the key and grabbed hold of the radio antenna. 

9. Every time a new car was introduced car buyers would have to learn how to drive all over again because none of the controls would operate in the same manner as the old car. 

10. You’d have to press the ‘Start’ button to turn the engine off.

Please share this with your friends who love – but sometimes hate – their computer!


Boris Johnson: We need more tax cuts – Telegraph

Mr Johnson uses an interview in The Sunday Telegraph to make a direct appeal to his party’s core values, presenting himself as a “tax-cutting Conservative” and promising to cut council tax if re-elected as London mayor.

His intervention will be seen as a gesture to his party’s leadership, which is facing growing claims that it is losing touch with grassroots supporters.

As well as his insistence on a low-tax agenda, Mr Johnson cites freedom, democracy and low government spending as his key beliefs, and vows to crack down further on crime.

Mr Johnson, who takes on Labour’s Ken Livingstone in this week’s mayoral election in London, does not mention issues such as gay marriage and the environment – policies that Mr Cameron has promoted recently, earning him criticism from his party.

The mayor also describes George Osborne, his possible future rival for the Tory leadership, as “the jaws of death” — a jibe that comes as the Chancellor faces continuing attacks over the Budget and last week’s confirmation that Britain was back in recession.

via Boris Johnson: We need more tax cuts – Telegraph.


In her radio show, Dr Laura Schlesinger said that, as an observant Orthodox Jew, homosexuality is an abomination according to Leviticus 18:22, and cannot be condoned under any circumstance. The following response is an open letter to Dr. Laura, penned by a US resident, which was posted on the Internet. It’s funny as well as informative: 

Dear Dr. Laura:

Thank you for doing so much to educate people regarding God’s Law. I have learned a great deal from your show, and try to share that knowledge with as many people as I can. When someone tries to defend the homosexual lifestyle, for example, I simply remind them that Leviticus 18:22 clearly states it to be an abomination … End of debate.

I do need some advice from you, however, regarding some other elements of God’s Laws and how to follow them. 1. Leviticus 25:44 states that I may possess slaves, both male and female, provided they are purchased from neighboring nations. A friend of mine claims that this applies to Mexicans, but not Canadians. Can you clarify? Why can’t I own Canadians?

2. I would like to sell my daughter into slavery, as sanctioned in Exodus 21:7. In this day and age, what do you think would be a fair price for her?

3. I know that I am allowed no contact with a woman while she is in her period of Menstrual uncleanliness – Lev.15: 19-24. The problem is how do I tell? I have tried asking, but most women take offense.

4. When I burn a bull on the altar as a sacrifice, I know it creates a pleasing odor for the Lord – Lev.1:9. The problem is my neighbors. They claim the odor is not pleasing to them. Should I smite them?

5. I have a neighbor who insists on working on the Sabbath. Exodus 35:2 clearly states he should be put to death. Am I morally obligated to kill him myself, or should I ask the police to do it?

6. A friend of mine feels that even though eating shellfish is an abomination, Lev. 11:10, it is a lesser abomination than homosexuality. I don’t agree. Can you settle this? Are there ‘degrees’ of abomination?

7. Lev. 21:20 states that I may not approach the altar of God if I have a defect in my sight. I have to admit that I wear reading glasses. Does my vision have to be 20/20, or is there some wiggle-room here?

8. Most of my male friends get their hair trimmed, including the hair around their temples, even though this is expressly forbidden by Lev. 19:27. How should they die?

9. I know from Lev. 11:6-8 that touching the skin of a dead pig makes me unclean, but may I still play football if I wear gloves?

10. My uncle has a farm. He violates Lev.19:19 by planting two different crops in the same field, as does his wife by wearing garments made of two different kinds of thread (cotton/polyester blend). He also tends to curse and blaspheme a lot. Is it really necessary that we go to all the trouble of getting the whole town together to stone them? Lev.24:10-16.

Couldn’t we just burn them to death at a private family affair, like we do with people who sleep with their in-laws? (Lev. 20:14)

I know you have studied these things extensively and thus enjoy considerable expertise in such matters, so I’m confident you can help. Thank you again for reminding us that God’s word is eternal and unchanging.

Your adoring fan.
James M. Kauffman, Ed.D. Professor Emeritus, Dept. Of Curriculum, Instruction, and Special Education University of Virginia (It would be a damn shame if we couldn’t own a Canadian 🙂

The last, desperate days of Victor bin Laden

From the later communications of Osama bin Laden comes this valuable lesson. If you wish to become a top-ranked genocidal maniac with a name to echo down the centuries as a chilling byword for purest evil, do make sure that you get out at the top. Do not linger for a moment. Leave the stage as soon as possible, and never return.

The documents released by an American counter-terrorism agency on the first anniversary of bin Laden’s death paint a portrait that must be acknowledged, however incongruous it seems in the context of such a creature, as darkly comic. Marooned in dismal isolation in that suburban house in Abbottabad, Pakistan, the leading global bogeyman of the 21st century so far found himself sunken into laughable obsolescence.

He wrote untold thousands of words in that ornate Arabic hand of his to underlings across the region, yet the thrust of his literary oeuvre may be condensed into the mantra of the bossy trout of post-war, upper-middle-class English legend: you just can’t get the staff.

Read more…

This is the moment to revive the Conservative and Liberal Democrats Coalition, not to break it apart

You often hear people described as being “flushed with success”, but I would say that the Tory critics of the Government this morning are flushed with failure. They speak with all the angry confidence of people who feel they have been proved right by disaster. David Cameron, they say, has not pursued what they think are the right policies for economic recovery. He has bothered himself with non-urgent, metropolitan issues like gay marriage and Lords reform. He has held himself poshly aloof from the nation’s strivers. And so they have punished him at the polls.

There is truth in this. But Cameron supporters retort with the sharp reminder that this is a coalition, not a Conservative government. Are the critics proposing the Prime Minister govern as if the Liberal Democrats did not exist? If so, are they ready for the Coalition to break down? Do they want an election?

There is truth in this answer, too. Since the two positions appear irreconcilable, have we reached a stalemate? I have a nasty feeling that both the Coalition party leaderships think we have: each finds it so difficult to hold its supporters together that the creative energy has dissipated. The relationship between the two parties has beco

Read more….

Religious butchering now commonplace in Britain, leading vet claims

Prof Bill Reilly, ex-president of the British Veterinary Association, said cutting the throats of lambs, chickens and other animals without stunning them breaches legal requirements because it causes significant pain, fear and distress.

British and EU law permits the method of religious slaughter to account for Muslim and Jewish dietary practices, but stipulates that the animals must not be caused “unnecessary suffering.”

Prof Reilly called for the practice to be dramatically curbed, suggesting that some slaughterhouses are refusing to stun animals simply to cut costs, rather than for religious reasons.

Writing in the Veterinary Record, he said the number of animals having their throats slit while still fully conscious – a practice known as non-stun slaughter – was “unacceptable”.

Referring to a report by the former Animal Welfare Council he claimed that “such a massive injury could result in very significant pain and distress”, particularly because the throat has a large number of nerve endings.

Read more….