So it's not acceptable to mention that whenever a city becomes majority black, it always sees a rise in poverty, crime, and blight?

Please provide an example of a city which transitioned from majority white to majority black, and saw a corresponding increase in GDP and a decrease in crime.

Russia and Serbia are far more prosperous than Detroit.

You're close. Yes, Detroit's problems are largely caused by being run by Democrats——-but the ultimate reason for Detroit's failure is the demographic shift it underwent.

Excuse? Sure, Detroit has a great one. After the 1967 riots, the white, property tax-paying population began leaving. Detroit is now something like 85 percent black and overwhelmingly poor.

Maybe the mummies have dark hair because they're EGYPTIAN?

That's UNC. Coach K at Duke is known for being strict about athletics. The other schools are academic powerhouses, with the possible exception of the U——which is no doubt a football school. I'm sure the Ivies graduate student athletes legitimately.

The goal of college athletics is SUPPOSED to be to turn out scholar-athletes. It's not supposed to be the farm club for NBA/NFL, and those students are not supposed to be exploited, used up, and tossed aside.

Isn't it possible that minorities(and when we say that in regards to college athletes, we mean black people) don't place the same importance on getting an education that others do? They've been coddled and passed through since they were in middle school, just because they showed a talent for athletics. And because…

They manage to do it at the military academies. Oh, and they have to do all the other things involved with being a cadet.

The players are given these scholarships because they make money for the school, of course. They really should be attending classes, but since they don't want to(or are incapable of doing so), this sort of scam happens.

So which sports were the worst offenders? I'm assuming football and basketball, right?

Any school with a successful bigtime sports program has this sort of thing going on. Guaranteed.

The articles "debunked the TM SYG argument"—-BECAUSE PEOPLE WERE CLAIMING TRAYVON WAS STANDING HIS GROUND, which is exactly what I wrote. The Trayvon cultists did claim SYG for Martin. Thanks.

Because the "Trayvon was just standing his ground" nonsense was bandied about by Gawker commenters from the jump, that's why. Oh, and not just Gawker commenters.

You realize "Stand Your Ground" was never used by the defense team, right? This was a simple self-defense case. SYG was never claimed, at all.

Trayvon Martin was a violent piece of shit who attacked a shorter, older, smaller man because he thought he could get away with it. If George Zimmerman had been a 6'4" 300 pound biker, Martin wouldn't have done what he did..

George Zimmerman shot and killed Trayvon Martin because Trayvon Martin pinned him to the ground and beat him savagely.

"Stand Your Ground" doesn't mean you get to confront people and then preemptively suckerpunch and assault them. He MAY, given the strictest interpretation of the law, have been able to throw the first punch——but in no way was he allowed to mount Zimmerman and pummel him past the point of Zimmerman being able to defend…