A (dis)Honest Conversation About Race

Soledad O'Brien claims she wants to have "an honest conversation about race", then proceeds to lie to her audience.

O'Brien tells so many lies of both omission and comission that it would take too long to break them all down, so I'll focus on only one of them.

In a roughly 10-year period in New York [City], approximately five million people were stopped [and frisked] by police. Eighty three percent of them were black and Hispanic men... What does it do to people to be considered a suspect constantly in their own neighborhoods because of the color of their skin?

O'Brien believes that the only reason police officers in NYC - and the rest of the country - stop and arrest more blacks than whites is because police officers are racists. That's a lie. Heather Mac Donald explains why. 

Blacks commit over 75% of the shootings in NYC, even though they make up only about 23% of the population. Whites commit about 2% of the shootings in NYC, even though they make up 34% of the city's population. As Ms. Mac Donald explains, using 2011 and 2012 data...

Blacks are 53 percent of stop subjects, though they are 23 percent of the city’s population. Whites are 9 percent of stop subjects, though they are 35 percent of the city’s population. Therefore, conclude Stringer and others, the NYPD targets individuals for stops based on their race rather than on crime patterns and suspicious behavior.

...

The claim ignores the reality that the preponderance of crime perpetrators, and victims, in New York are also minorities. Blacks, for example, constituted 78% of shooting suspects and 74% of all shooting victims in 2012, even though they are less than 23% of the city's population. 

Whites, by contrast, committed just over 2% of shootings and were under 3% of shooting victims in 2012, though they are 35% of the populace. Young black men in New York are 36 times more likely to be murdered than young white men—and their assailants are virtually always other black (or Hispanic) males. 

Given such a crime imbalance, if the NYPD focuses its resources where people most need protection, the effort will inevitably produce racially disparate enforcement data.

Police departments that do their job concentrate their efforts in the neighborhoods with the highest crime rates. In NYC, those neighborhoods are largely populated by blacks. Because of that, most of the people the NYPD stops and frisks are black. But Soledad O'Brien blames that on racism.

To illustrate the audacity of Ms. O'Brien's lie, think about this for a second.

According to the Federal Bureau of Prisons, 93.3% of prisoners in the US are male. Clearly that must be the result of anti-male sexism, right? Of course not! Obviously, most prisoners are male because males commit the vast majority of crimes. Likewise, the incarceration rate among black Americans is much higher than the incarceration rate among Hispanic Americans, white Americans and Asian Americans (in that order) because the crime rate among black Americans is far higher than the crime rate among Hispanic Americans, white Americans and Asian Americans (in that order).

In her speech, Soledad O'Brien stated that...

You cannot advance good if you don't confront bad, and you cannot seek renewal if you're not willing to dig into the uncomfortable truths about how we got here today.

She's right. But she also refuses to confront uncomfortable truths about crime rates among black Americans, and the reasons for them. Larry Elder doesn't have that problem.

As I pointed out before, fatherlessness is the number one correlating factor among violent criminals...

According to the National Fatherhood Initiative, 60% of rapists, 72% of adolescent murderers, and 70% of long-term prison inmates are men who grew up in fatherless homes. With regard to girls in particular, those raised by single mothers are more than twice as likely to give birth out-of-wedlock, thereby perpetuating the cycle of poverty for yet another generation.

And as I also pointed out in that article, and Larry Elder points out in his video, our welfare system promotes fatherlessness by encouraging women to "marry the state". Soledad O'Brien can't admit that crime rates actually are higher among blacks than whites because if she did she'd have to begin asking why that is, and as every "good" "liberal", she supports the welfare state that rewards fatherlessness and therefore promotes criminality.

In his video, Larry Elder relates the following advice his hard-working, WWII Marine veteran father, who was born in the Jim Crow South, gave him.

Hard work wins. You get out of life what you put into it. You can't control the outcome, but you are 100% in control of the effort. And before blaming other people, go to the nearest mirror and ask yourself, "what could I have done better to change the outcome?" 

Those are the words of a man who sees himself as an active moral agent, not a passive, perpetual victim. A truly honest conversation about race would ask black Americans to go the nearest mirror and ask themselves what they could do to change the out-of-control criminality in their neighborhoods, but Soledad O'Brien wants them to blame white people for all their problems and pretend that black crime rates are no higher than anyone else's.

Apparently, Soledad O'Brien doesn't see black Americans as moral agents, which means she sees black Americans as either not fully human, or as perpetual children, which is ironic, considering that she accuses others of racism. A person who sees black Americans as fully adult humans holds black Americans to the same standards to which he/she holds white Americans, not the lower, childlike standards to which Soledad O'Brien holds them.



A truly honest conversation about race in America would include discussions about how embracing a victim mentality, a sense of entitlement and fatherlessness, glorifying thug culture, and rejecting individual responsibility can only lead to violence, poverty and dysfunction.



Jason Riley, who wrote Please Stop Helping Us, converses honestly about race in America. He explains how embracing a culture of underachievement holds black Americans back (6:36 - 9:40), and much more. Listen to his whole speech and the Q&A if you have time.



Obviously, Soledad O'Brien told some truths. The most effective lies are seasoned with truth to make them more palatable. For example, it's true that the Tuskegee Institute found that 3,446 black Americans were lynched between 1882 and 1968. It's also true that even one is one too many.

But even then she lied by omission, because it's also true that - according to the FBI's Unified Crime Report - black criminals murdered 4,585 black Americans between 2014 and 2015. That means that black criminals murdered more black Americans in two years than racist Southerners lynched in 86 years.

Which is the bigger, more immediate problem; 3,446 black Americans lynched over 86 years ending 49 years ago, or 4,585 black Americans murdered over two years right now? Why does Soledad O'Brien focus on a smaller problem that ended 49 years ago, and ignore a much bigger problem that is ongoing right now?

Because focusing on the current, bigger problem wouldn't help her sell her lies.

What makes me think that Soledad O'Brien is lying, and not just wrong? She worked for CNN, and CNN devotes itself to spreading the lie that blacks are perpetual victims, whites are perpetual victimizers of blacks, and therefore blacks are not responsible for any crimes they commit. For example, CNN pushed the "hands up don't shoot" lie.

Source: News Busters

Michael Brown died because he was a violent thug who stole from a store, assaulted a store employee who confronted him, then attacked a police officer, not because he was an innocent victim of police racism. But CNN pushed the lie before knowing the facts, then, even when it was clear they'd pushed a lie, they refused to admit to their part in pushing the lie and suppressing the truth.

More recently, four black suspects (two males, two females, ranging from 17 to 24 years old) kidnapped and tortured a white 18-year-old mentally disabled man while yelling "f**k Donald Trump" and "f**k white people" at him, and live streamed his torture on Facebook.



If you have the stomach for it, you can find the whole video online, but I won't link to it here.

Chicago kidnapping & torture suspects: ABC News.

CNN's Don Lemon refused to call this horrific crime evil.

I don't think it's evil. I don't think it's evil. I think these are young people and I think they have bad home training. 

When I say who is raising these young people, I have no idea who is raising these young people because no one I know on earth who is seventeen years old or seventy years old would ever think of treating another person like that.

See? It's not their fault, even though they're well above the age of conscience. Why would CNN's Don Lemon refuse to call this horror evil? One of his guests, Symone Sanders, gives us a clue.

We’ve talked about white nationalists and white supremacists and the KKK, but there also, when this inflammatory rhetoric is out there, when someone is repeatedly telling you that your community is the worst of the worst, it brings out the worst of the worst in people. 

That is not a hate crime. Hate crimes are because of a person’s racial ethnicity, their religion, their gender, a disability, it isn’t your political leanings, because someone doesn’t like you’re political leanings and they do something bad to you, that is not a hate crime.

See? It's white people's fault. No matter what four black criminals did to a mentally disabled white man, it's not their fault, because the black criminals are victims of racist whites. Clearly, neither Don Lemon nor Symone Sanders see these four black criminals as active moral agents, like Larry Elder's father saw himself and taught Larry Elder to see himself. Don Lemon and Symone Sanders both display the same refusal to hold black Americans responsible for their own actions that Larry Elder, Chloe Valdary and Taleeb Starkes referenced in their videos.

Clearly, CNN is devoted to pushing lies about race in America, and it stands to reason that they hired Soledad O'Brien because she too is devoted to pushing similar lies.

There's another reason that Soledad O'Brien is clearly lying, and not just repeating a lie she believes. Soledad O'Brien is a professional investigative journalist with the resources of one of the world's biggest news organizations at her disposal. What's more likely; that her investigation never uncovered the facts I presented here, or that she omitted them deliberately? Is it more likely that I'm better at her job than she is, or that she omitted facts that contradict the narrative she wants to push?

The answers are obvious.

Why take the time to expose these lies?

First and foremost, because the truth matters... always. Second, because the lies that CNN and Soledad O'Brien are spreading have gotten hundreds of people killed, the majority of them black.

As Heather Mac Donald states in her video, crime rates - especially murder rates - skyrocketed in many US cities when the "Ferguson Effect" - spurred by media lies about endemic racism among police officers - caused police departments to pull back from high crime, inner city, majority black neighborhoods.

University of Missouri at St. Louis criminologist Richard Rosenfeld has had "second thoughts." Like many academic criminologists, he had pooh-poohed charges that skyrocketing murder rates in many cities in 2015 and 2016 result from a "Ferguson effect" — a skittering back from proactive policing for fear of accusations of racism like those that followed the death of Michael Brown in Ferguson, Missouri, in August 2014. 

Now, after looking over 2015 data from 56 large cities, he tells The Guardian that he has changed his mind. Homicides in those cities were up 17 percent from 2014. And ten cities, all with large black populations, saw homicides up 33 percent on average. 

"These aren't flukes or blips, this is a real increase," Rosenfeld told reporter Lois Beckett. "The only explanation that gets the timing right is a version of the Ferguson effect."

It gets worse when you look at specific cities. The murder rate in DC increased by 54%. In Baltimore it was 56%. In Cleveland, 90%.

In Chicago, 768 people were murdered in 2016 (as of 27 Dec 2016), compared to 468 in 2015, and 416 in 2014.

How many hundreds (thousands?) of people - most of them black - are dead today because of the lies that Soledad O'Brien, CNN and the mainstream media in general spread?  We'll never know. And Soledad O'Brien, Don Lemon, Symone Sanders and the rest will never care.

So Much Worse Than They Realize

Hillary Clinton - the most corrupt presidential candidate in American history - lost the election to Donald Trump, and her supporters are freaking out.

Many are protesting, some are rioting.

Anyone who's been paying attention expected riots, because it's what Leftists do when they don't get their way. Leftists are overgrown toddlers, so when someone tells them "no", they pitch a fit. Besides, it's what they've been doing all along this election year.



Things look pretty bleak for Leftists on the presidential front.

Source: NYT

The mainstream media expected Clinton to carry Florida and Arizona. They certainly didn't expect to lose Ohio, Pennsylvania, Wisconsin and Michigan (a traditional bastion of union and Democrat support).

Ironically, things are far worse (or better, depending on your perspective) than the vast majority of Clinton supporters suspect. Because they're Leftists, and for Leftists politics are a religion, they see their presidential candidate as a sort of messiah figure.



Because they see their presidential candidates as saviors, they focus almost all their attention on the presidential race, to the detriment of the hundreds of other races throughout the country. Yes, Republicans maintained majorities in the Senate and House of Representatives (though not with a filibuster-proof super majority), and yes, that's bad news for Democrats, but it's the states where things get really ugly for them. Check out these maps from the Washington Post.

When you look at state legislatures alone, the picture looks even worse. From Reason Magazine.

Republicans control 32 state legislatures, but - as the WaPo points out - Nebraska's legislature "is technically nonpartisan but Republican in practice". That means Republicans "in practice" control 33 state legislatures. As the WaPo points out, most of this Democrat decline took place during the Obama administration.

However, this latest decline is part of a 38-year trend, according to Pew Research.

Joe Scarborough put it this way.

Democrats Under Barack Obama

-11 seats in Senate
-60 seats in House
-14 governorships
-900 state legislative seats

Worst since 1922.

— Joe Scarborough (@JoeNBC) November 13, 2016

There are at least two major reasons why this is a disaster for the Democrats. First, state legislatures and governors make up a political party's "bench" for national politics. The Republicans now have a much deeper bench from which to draw national-level candidates than the Democrats do. It's not even close.

The second reason is far more important. Article V of the US Constitution reads...

The Congress, whenever two thirds of both houses shall deem it necessary, shall propose amendments to this Constitution, or, on the application of the legislatures of two thirds of the several states, shall call a convention for proposing amendments, which, in either case, shall be valid to all intents and purposes, as part of this Constitution, when ratified by the legislatures of three fourths of the several states, or by conventions in three fourths thereof, as the one or the other mode of ratification may be proposed by the Congress; provided that no amendment which may be made prior to the year one thousand eight hundred and eight shall in any manner affect the first and fourth clauses in the ninth section of the first article; and that no state, without its consent, shall be deprived of its equal suffrage in the Senate.

With 33 state legislatures effectively under Republican control, the Republicans can now call a convention to propose amendments to the Constitution, and they don't even need to convince Democrats to go along. In fact, a convention of the states has been in the works for years. The states already held a simulated convention from 21-23 September 2016. According to National Review...

The simulated convention passed significant amendment proposals on the following six ideas:
1. Requiring the states to approve any increase in the national debt
2. Imposing term limits on Congress (effective retroactively)
3. Limiting federal overreach by returning the Commerce Clause to its original meaning
4. Limiting the power of federal regulations by allowing an easy congressional override
5. Requiring a supermajority to impose federal taxes and repealing the 16th Amendment, which legalized the federal income tax
6. Giving the states (by a three-fifths vote) the power to abrogate any federal law, regulation, or executive order  

If the states ratify just half of these proposals, they would greatly limit and decentralize the federal government's power, which would return the country to a point closer to the founders' intent - a federalist system in which the states govern themselves with little input from the federal government, and the federal government is mostly limited to regulating trade between the states and implementing foreign policy.

Now, don't get too excited (or horrified, depending on your perspective). Article V of the Constitution states that new amendments must be...

... ratified by the legislatures of three fourths of the several states, or by conventions in three fourths thereof... 

... in order to make those amendments...

.... valid to all intents and purposes, as part of this Constitution... 

Three fourths of 50 state legislatures equals 38 state legislatures. The Republicans effectively control 33 legislatures, which means they need to convince five legislatures they don't control to ratify any amendments. Right now, there are three bicameral legislatures that are split between Democrats and Republicans.

Can the Republicans convince five state legislatures that are either split, or controlled by the Democrats, to ratify Constitutional amendments that would be a Leftist's nightmare?

We shall see.

There's a lesson here for my Democrat friends. Slandering your fellow Americans as racists so you can wallow in your unearned sense of moral superiority is no way to persuade people to your way of thinking. But, hey, keep it up. Surely you can deliver five more state legislatures to the Republicans.

Woman Worship

Joining in on the fake outrage over Donald Trump's lewd comments, many Republican politicians released statements condemning Trump's immorality - of which they were well aware from the start. That's only a springboard to this post's subject. Here are two of the stupidest statements I read. 

“Mr. Trump’s comments were offensive and disgusting. There is no excuse for such degrading behavior. All women deserve to be treated with respect.” ~ Sen. Orrin Hatch (Utah) 

“I am sickened by what I heard today. Women are to be championed and revered, not objectified. I hope Mr. Trump treats this situation with the seriousness it deserves and works to demonstrate to the country that he has greater respect for women than this clip suggests.” ~ House Speaker Paul Ryan (Wisconsin)

Coincidentally, around the same time I ran into this horror story.

Shockingly, police accused the child’s mother, Michelle Martens, 35, of arranging for her boyfriend, Fabian Gonzales, 31, to rape her child. Police also accused Martens of helping to stab the child to death and dismembering her. Gonzales’s cousin, Jessica Kelley, 31, was also arrested for participating in the horrific crime. 

Michelle Martens (left), murderous mother of the late Victoria Martens (right, 10 years old).

Now new details from the investigation obtained by KRQE News 13 reveal that police think Martens sat back and watched her own daughter’s death and then had sex with the child’s killer.

..... 

But ultimately the records show Martens gave up her claims of being a victim and admitted she had allowed several men to have sex with the child and named at least two men who did so. 

Have you ever heard anyone say that all men "deserve to be treated with respect", or that men "are to be championed and revered"? Me neither. Why? Because no one believes such nonsense. Everyone understands some men earn respect and reverence through their respectable, reverential behavior, while others don't, and that we should treat them accordingly.

But, for some bizarre reason, few apply that same standard to women.

Does Michelle Martens "deserve to be treated with respect... championed and revered"? Is pimping out her daughter to various men in exchange for drugs, watching them have sex with her daughter, watching one murder the 10-year-old girl and then having sex with the murderer respectable, reverential behavior that we should champion?

If you answered "yes" to either question, please leave my blog.

If you answered "no", please ask yourself; why is it acceptable to say that "all women deserve to be treated with respect", and that "women are to be championed and revered"? If those statements are true, that means that Michelle Martens "deserve[s] to be treated with respect... championed and revered".

The truth is that women who've earned respect and reverence through respectable, reverential behavior deserve to be respected, championed and revered. Those who haven't, don't. If you think otherwise, you're sexist.

Think about it. Judging a person on the basis of his/her sex instead of his/her individual behavior is sexism.

Furthermore, people who treat women who've never earned respect as though they have are basically treating women who have earned respect like chumps. After all, if you can receive respect without earning it; why go through the trouble of earning it?

Women aren't angelic, sinless beings born through immaculate conception. They're retched, depraved sinners, just like men.

Romans 3:10 As it is written:
“There is no one righteous, not even one;
11     there is no one who understands;
    there is no one who seeks God.
12 All have turned away,
    they have together become worthless;
there is no one who does good,
    not even one.”
13 “Their throats are open graves;
    their tongues practice deceit.”
“The poison of vipers is on their lips.”
14     “Their mouths are full of cursing and bitterness.”
15 “Their feet are swift to shed blood;
16     ruin and misery mark their ways,
17 and the way of peace they do not know.”
18     “There is no fear of God before their eyes.”
...
23 for all have sinned and fall short of the glory of God...

Note the repetitive use of absolute terms like "no one", "not even one" and "all". There is only one exception, and it's not your wife, your daughter or your mom. It's Christ. That's it.

Now, I realize that Paul Ryan and Orrin Hatch are politicians, and as such they are craven opportunists who'll say anything to give their political party an advantage. But, precisely for that reason, they would only make such statements if they knew that such statements play well with their constituents. Paul Ryan and Orrin Hatch probably aren't stupid enough to believe those statements, but they probably know their constituents are.

It's far worse when pastors - who really should know better since, presumably, they know the Bible - engage in woman worship.

I don't have time to get into that now, but I will.

Human Planet Honors Fathers

I meant to have this ready for Fathers' Day and failed miserably, but any day is a good day to honor fathers, so here we go.



Human Planet is a BBC documentary narrated by the legendary David Attenborough. Every documentary of his I've watched is about animals or plants, but this one is different. Here, the BBC shows us how people from vastly different cultures all over the world live. In so doing, the BBC ends up telling compelling stories about the extraordinary things fathers do to support their families. I assume this is inadvertent, but that makes the documentary even better. Here's what I mean.

As I noted earlier, movies that are based on true stories are more likely than fictional movies to honor fathers. That's because in real life, fathers aren't the incompetent, impotent imbeciles commonly portrayed in modern popular culture. Human Planet, because it's a documentary, and because it didn't set out to portray fathers heroically, sets the difference between real life and Hollywood indoctrination in even starker contrast.

Without further ado, I'll start with my favorite story.

Sailau and Berek



Sailau belongs to a Kazakh tribe who traditionally use golden eagles to hunt foxes. His family needs fox furs to stay warm through the brutal winter. Sailau trains his son, Berek, in the art of falconry, beginning with capturing a fledgling female (they're bigger than the males), then training her, then taking her on her first hunt. The best part is when Berek and his eagle make their first kill. Sailau tells his son, "now you are a man of your people".

Stanzin



Stanzin and his family live in a remote Himalayan village. He wants his children to receive an education, but there are no schools in his village, so Stanzin takes his children to a boarding school 90 Km away. It's a treacherous six-day trek over the frozen (but thawing) Zanskar River.

Sam Niang



Sam Niang risks his life every day to feed his family of seven. The roiling rapids of the Mekong River trap migrating fish, but to net them, Sam Niang has to climb wet, mossy cliffs and traverse the Mekong on a makeshift bridge he jury rigged together in the dry season.

Tete



Tete also risks his life for his family, but in his case it's by climbing 130 ft up a tree with no safety gear and suffering dozens of bee stings to score some honey for his wife and children. Tete's wife has some great lines.

Tete is the best. The kids are not afraid for him, just proud. They say, "wow, look at dad!"... My husband has a kind heart. He always brings me honey. 

The narrator, though, gets the best line.

Tete takes time to savor his success. He's done enough to keep his wife sweet, treat his children and earn respect from his tribe. 

Isn't that what all married fathers want?

Hatogo and Sulaiman 



I've observed good men work themselves into an early grave to support their families, but nothing quite like this. In the Indonesian island of Java, men mine sulfur in the Ljen Volcano's crater. The gasses that constantly fill the crater, including Hydrogen Sulfide (H2S), are highly toxic, and even if they don't kill the men right away, they destroy their lungs over time. On top of that, carrying 90 kg (about 200 lb) of sulfur at a time in baskets leaves their shoulders scarred, calloused and deformed. One of them states:

They say this job can shorten your life. I do it to feed my family. No other job pays this well. 

All for $5.00/load.

But that's what dads do. They sacrifice themselves for their families.

Human Planet contains many more stories. Not all of them are about dads, but most are. The documentary is beautifully shot, entertaining and educational, but what I love most about it is the stories of dads from wildly different cultures who are remarkably alike. They all want to provide for their families and earn their peers' respect. That theme is so nearly universal that it's almost as though someone designed it that way.

I shouldn't be surprised anymore when I see God's plan naturally bubble to the top through layer upon layer of human sin, but for some reason I still am. I doubt that any of the men whose stories I highlighted have ever heard the Gospel, but they all bring to my mind passages from the New Testament.

Romans 2:14 Indeed, when Gentiles, who do not have the law, do by nature things required by the law, they are a law for themselves, even though they do not have the law. 15 They show that the requirements of the law are written on their hearts, their consciences also bearing witness, and their thoughts sometimes accusing them and at other times even defending them.

Having never read the book of Ephesians, these married fathers nevertheless love their wives and children sacrificially. My experience and observation tell me that is the rule, not the exception, among married fathers, and for that we should honor them.

Watch Human Planet on Netflix while you still can.

Choose Your Own Judgement

King David had sinned. Tempted to rely on his own strength instead of God's (which had saved him numerous times and made him the great man he was), and against his Commander in Chief's advise, David conducted a census of all the men in Israel. As soon as the census was complete, David felt remorse and asked God to forgive him.

The angel of the Lord by the threshing floor of Araunah the Jebusite

God sent the prophet Gad to King David with the following message.

2 Sam 24:12 “Go and speak to David, ‘Thus the Lord says, “I am offering you three things; choose for yourself one of them, which I will do to you.”’” 13 So Gad came to David and told him, and said to him, “Shall seven years of famine come to you in your land? Or will you flee three months before your foes while they pursue you? Or shall there be three days’ pestilence in your land? Now consider and see what answer I shall return to Him who sent me.”

This is the only case of which I'm aware in which God commanded a Biblical character to choose his own judgement. That brings me to this meme I saw at Pastor Doug Wilson's blog.

That's not an exact quote from Calvin, but it gets to the heart of what he did say on the matter. If Calvin was right, and I think he was, the United States of America is already under judgement, and is headed for more (probably worse) judgement. Barring a miracle, only two people are likely to be elected president, and they're both wicked, and everyone knew it long before the primaries. Anyone who pretends to be surprised at either candidate's latest outrage is faking it. That means we Americans find ourselves in a position to choose our own judgement.

I completely understand my Christian friends who've decided that Donald Trump is the lesser judgement upon our nation. I don't see how one can make the same case for Hillary Clinton. My Christian friends who are enthusiastic about either candidate are - I think - following the wrong shepherd.

 
How did King David respond?

14 Then David said to Gad, “I am in great distress. Let us now fall into the hand of the Lord for His mercies are great, but do not let me fall into the hand of man.” 

Which is, of course, exactly the right way to respond.

15 So the Lord [g]sent a pestilence upon Israel from the morning until the appointed time, and seventy thousand men of the people from Dan to Beersheba died. 16 When the angel stretched out his hand toward Jerusalem to destroy it, the Lord relented from the calamity and said to the angel who destroyed the people, “It is enough! Now relax your hand!” And the angel of the Lord was by the threshing floor of Araunah the Jebusite.

Unlike David, God didn't instruct me to choose between the judgments facing us, so I won't, but like David, I'll also pray "Let us now fall into the hand of the Lord for His mercies are great, but do not let me fall into the hand of man". How should we pray for our abundant wicked rulers? I have an idea.

Psalm 58
1 Do you rulers indeed speak justly?
    Do you judge people with equity?
2 No, in your heart you devise injustice,
    and your hands mete out violence on the earth.
3 Even from birth the wicked go astray;
    from the womb they are wayward, spreading lies.
4 Their venom is like the venom of a snake,
    like that of a cobra that has stopped its ears,
5 that will not heed the tune of the charmer,
    however skillful the enchanter may be.
6 Break the teeth in their mouths, O God;
    Lord, tear out the fangs of those lions!
7 Let them vanish like water that flows away;
    when they draw the bow, let their arrows fall short.
8 May they be like a slug that melts away as it moves along,
    like a stillborn child that never sees the sun.
9 Before your pots can feel the heat of the thorns—
    whether they be green or dry—the wicked will be swept away.[c]
10 The righteous will be glad when they are avenged,
    when they dip their feet in the blood of the wicked.
11 Then people will say,
    “Surely the righteous still are rewarded;
    surely there is a God who judges the earth.”

What is it About Iceland?

For the first time in its (admittedly short) 10-year history, the women's podium at the 2016 CrossFit Games looked exactly like it did the previous year.

2015 CrossFit Games women's podium
1st: Katrin Tanja Davidsdottir (Iceland)
2nd: Tia-Clair Toomey (Australia)
3rd: Ragnheiður Sara Sigmundsdottir (Iceland)

2016 CrossFit Games women's podium
1st: Katrin Tanja Davidsdottir (Iceland)
2nd: Tia-Clair Toomey (Australia)
3rd: Ragnheiður Sara Sigmundsdottir (Iceland)

A repeat like this has never happened before, so that was surprising, but it wasn't the least bit surprising to see Icelandic women on the podium. In fact, at least one Icelandic woman has stood on the podium every year since 2010, when Annie Thorisdottir (yes, that means Thor's Daughter) took second place, except for 2013, when Annie Thorisdottir took a year off due to injury.

Annie Torisdottir

Only American women have more podium finishes at the CrossFit Games that Icelandic women.

American women have two big advantages. First, CrossFit started in the US - Santa Cruz, CA, to be exact. When the Games began in 2007 all the podium finishers were Americans. The Games only started growing into an international event in 2009. Second, the US has an enormous population from which to draw competitors, and more CrossFit gyms than any other country.

As impressive as the Icelandic women's accomplishments are by themselves, they become mind-blowing when one considers that Iceland has a tiny population of 332,529. By comparison, Wichita, KS has a population of 389,965. That means that a tiny island country in the North Atlantic with a population smaller than that of a mid-sized city in the American Midwest has dominated the women's half of a grueling international multi-sport competition for the last six years. When I compared women's podium finishes to population size (podium finishes per 1 million of population), the other countries practically disappeared.

The Icelandic women's dominance has been a major topic of discussion among those who follow the CrossFit Games.



Icelandic men haven't been nearly as successful in CrossFit. The only Icelandic man to stand on the podium is Björgvin Karl Guðmundsson, who took 26th at the 2014 Games, 3rd in 2015 and 8th in 2016.

Björgvin Karl Guðmundsson

American men are far more dominant in CrossFit with only one non-American champion (Mikko Salo, of Finland, in 2009). Even so, when one considers population size, Iceland eclipses all other countries in podium finishes.

Why don't Icelandic men perform as well at the CrossFit Games as their female compatriots? Maybe because they're too busy with the World's Strongest Man competition.

A photo posted by Björgvin K. Guðmundsson (@bk_gudmundsson) on Jun 15, 2016 at 5:44am PDT

The giant on the right is Hafþór Júlíus Björnsson. Most people know him as The Mountain on Game of Thrones, but he first gained fame by placing 3rd in the 2012 World Strongest Man competition, 3rd in 2013, 2nd in 2014 and 3rd again in 2015. The 2016 competition will take place later this month in Botswana. As you can see from the video I posted above, and Björgvin Karl Guðmundsson's Instagram feed, Icelandic CrossFit athletes train with Hafþór Júlíus Björnsson, in large part because the CrossFit Games typically include some Strongman events (though at much lower weights). And also because he's preternaturally strong, and training with someone who's stronger than you are is a great way to get stronger.

Like the CrossFit Games, the US has more podium finishers at the World Strongest Man competition than any other country.

Fortunately, the WSM has been around since 1977, so there is a lot more data to sift. Again, the US has the same advantages in WSM as it does in the CFG (yes, I'm tired of typing both those out), yet tiny Iceland isn't far behind. And when I compared podium finishes to population size...

... no other country even comes close. And, as with the CFG, others have noticed this phenomenon.


The WSM and CFG share a few similarities. They're both strength-based sports. They both feature different events each year, so they both require athletes to adapt to unknown and unknowable challenges. And, as I mentioned above, the CFG often feature events like yoke carries and weighted sled pushes, pulls and drags that are staples of the WSM. But the differences are much greater than the similarities.

So, why does Iceland produce great athletes for these two sports in numbers so wildly out of proportion with its population? Obviously, genetics have a lot to do with it. Every world class athlete is a genetic freak. No amount of hard work or great coaching will turn an ordinary person into a world class athlete.

But, why Iceland, specifically? No other Nordic country is nearly as disproportionately represented in these sports as Iceland. What is it about the Norse who colonized Iceland that makes them such outstanding athletes in these two sports? Is there a cultural component on top of the genetic component?

Unfortunately, I don't have answers to my questions, but maybe someone reading does. If so, please comment. Hopefully, I'll get to watch the WSM later this month and marvel at the near-super-human feats the athletes will perform.

PS: The current WSM champion is American Brian Shaw, who's been on a winning streak since 2009.

PPS: Australian Tia-Clair Toomey will compete in Olympic weightlifting at the XXXI Olympiad in Rio de Janeiro next week. This is the first time any athlete has qualified for both the CFG and the Olympics in the same year.  

Leverage

I broke the end off my clutch lever by dropping the Tiger in my driveway, because I'm a klutz.



Aimee and I went to Engle Motors as part of our Fathers' Day date mostly so I could drool over the new Thruxton R. While we were there, I ordered some new adjustable levers.



They look a lot nicer than the stock levers and and have a lot more adjustability.





They were very easy to install. I only used a 10 mm socket and a screwdriver. I think I'd like some had guards. I don't plan to do any offroading with this bike, but they'd make cold weather riding a little more comfortable. I'll probably wait until the weather cools down.