Tragic Comedy: Spurned Mistress Loses Contest, Drives Tycoon & Four Other Mistresses Off A Cliff

Daily Mail:

A married Chinese tycoon who could no longer afford to support his five mistresses during the credit crunch held a contest to decide which one to keep.

But when one of the women was eliminated because of her looks, she decided to take revenge - and drove her former lover and her four competitors off a cliff.

Ugh. Some people just don't know how to lose gracefully.

H/t Conservative Grapevine

Chilling Question Of The Day: Is China More Capitalist Than The US?

AP:

While China improves its business climate by lowering the burden of state confiscation, the US plans to increase it, and in some cases by a significant amount. Meanwhile, the House last night voted 237-170 to sink $15 billion into the American auto industry, with government officially owning part of three private auto makers in order to dictate to management how to run their businesses. Management welcomed the move, and in fact wanted Congress to buy an even bigger stake in these companies.

[...]

When one looks to Beijing for rational tax policies … well, that’s just a sad day for Americans, even if it does portend a brighter future for China.

I recall a day when 'grace under fire' was considered a supreme virtue in business and inviting government into the management of your company an unthinkable ignominy. The American response to the current financial crisis, and particularly the clambering of the corporate community for government handouts, suggests just how far America has strayed from this vision of honourable conduct in business. Is China actually more capitalist than America? Of course not. But when the question can be asked without the intention of provoking laughter, something is rotten in the state of Denmark.

Hey, Remember When Paul Martin Was Quiet For Two Years?

Boy, that was nice.

So says Martin:

"China is a superpower, as is India, and they have got to be able to play on a level playing field with the other superpowers but it's very important to us that they do it because that's what's going to make the world work.

"And it's very important for us 33 million people to be involved with these massive markets and their huge economies and we should be doing a great deal more."

Always fun to get your opinion, Paul. Could you crawl back under your rock now, please?

PM Harper Pussies Out Over Beijing Boycott

Freedom and democracy. These are the values that animate us as Canadians. They give us meaning and identity. And yet we are happy to participate in amoral and relativistic institutions like the United Nations and, more relevantly, we are pleased to send delegates to countries that flaunt their repudiation of our values as a matter of public policy. And why? Because a boycott is deemed to be impractical.

There are a thousand reasons to condemn China and, consequently, Canada's participation in the Beijing Olympics. Their frequent human rights abuses. Their communism. Their government's stranglehold over their domestic economy. Pick one and ask yourself why that isn't enough to preclude our presence at the 2008 Olympics. Our participation is a tacit moral sanction of their practices.

That isn't to say I expected another outcome. Doesn't politics require compromise? Isn't it impractical to hold such standards? I've always maintained there was nothing impractical about living according to one's values. Apparently, the government disagrees.

UPDATE: Mike Brock adds his two cents.

UPDATE II: My favourite camel chimes in as well. Give it a read. Alice digs it.

UPDATE III: The Steyn weighs in:

Well, I think there is something sort of disgusting about the world’s leaders gathering in China to, in effect, sign off on this. I think the International Olympic Committee was wrong. And while I think there’s something slightly pathetic about downgrading, you know, that we do that a lot, at this horrible Durban conference on racism, the State Department signaled its displeasure by not sending the Secretary of State, but downgrading to a low level diplomat. The low level diplomat is effectively the gun boat of 21st Century diplomacy. As I said, it’s pathetic. But I do not think, there’s no obligation for the President to be in Beijing. Other heads of state are not going to be there. The Queen is not going to be in Beijing. So I think it’s entirely reasonable to say well, you know, the International Olympic Committee made the wrong call, but if the athletes want to go, that’s one thing. But we’re not going to politically endorse what’s going on there.