What is a "national dialogue"?

[Anonymous]

It's a phrase you hear around major issues - Zimmerman verdict and race relations, Snowden wanting a national dialogue on the NSA programs, a national dialogue on childhood obesity.

What does it mean other than giving media a given topic to discuss? And, who do you discuss it with other than your same circle of friends, acquaintances, and colleagues?

I mean, I'm a 30-something white woman in the burbs, am I supposed to head over to a corner diner in Herndon and strike up a conversation with the day laborers hanging out there? Is a young black man from SE DC supposed to come knock on my door? Yes, these examples are flippant yet they also kind of illustrate my point which is how do you truly have a national dialogue that effects change?

[Anonymous]

I think the term is meaningless. That being said, I want a national dialogue about where's the outrage about brown men killing brown men and not just a Latino shooting.

[Anonymous]

It requires multiple teachable moments.

[Anonymous]

a bromide.

[Anonymous]

I disagree in part.

A national dialogue on Trayvon Martin won't produce much, because there is no policy issue on the table. There are lessons to be learned: do's and don'ts for neighborhood watch, don't prejudge based on race. But basically this is more of an object lesson that does not require huge discussion beyond coming to terms with the verdict itself.

OTOH a dialogue on NSA is really important because the public is just realizing how much the government collects on us in the name of security. And we have to decide whether we will continue to allow this. So yes, there is a point to it.

[takoma]

How about the discussions we have here being considered part of a national dialog, along with those on lots of other similar websites? At least when they are discussions rather than insult-fests.

[Anonymous]

uh TM policy issue is relative ease of conceal carry and lax self-defense laws relating to 'proportional force'.

GZ would not have killed TM in DC or Manhattan or Mass unless he was carrying illegally given the standard it takes to require to get a permit.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I think the term is meaningless. That being said, I want a national dialogue about where's the outrage about brown men killing brown men and not just a Latino shooting.

hasn't there been outrage considering chciago murder rates have been headline news for quite some time and most of that is minority on minority?

[Anonymous]

Because it matters more when white folks get outraged. Believe me black people in Chicago and other metro cities are outraged about black on black crime but their voices go unheard and have gone unheard for decades. So until others outside of those communities get outraged nothing will happen.

[Anonymous]

Question: are black on black crimes not prosecuted because of who they are, or is it too hard to find the perpetrators?

[Anonymous]

It means liberals want to lecture us all on how what we are doing inour own lives is bad for them and how we must change.

[Anonymous]

In JUST this past weekend, 64 people were shot & wounded in Chicago with 11 dead. 100% black on black crime for every one of these.

Where is your fucking outrage over this? Maybe we should have a 'national dialouge' on things that matter instead of trying to make people 'feel better' about it.

[Anonymous]

I do think there is a problem. However, I think-especially after listening to the juror--that this is not race based. The reaction to this is by African Americans is going to make it worse.

[Anonymous]

Did you listen to Rachel on Piers last night? A lot of people are not going to understand that bashing someone is no big deal.

[Anonymous]

As a young teacher in the projects of a Florida city, I was stunned at the amount of fighting among the kids. It was a way of life to them. The "experts" said that since the kids did not have toys, they "maniupulated" each other. Seriously.