Stand Your Ground: Cruz questions President, McCain questions law, GOP is engaged-a political crisis is brewing

The killing of Trayvon Martin and the acquittal of George Zimmerman engaged the President. He felt compelled to speak out.

Activist Al Sharpton and the protestors of the acquittal held “Justice for Trayvon” rallies in 100 cities. They felt compelled to speak out.

The Trayvon Martin case has now engaged GOP politicians who also feel compelled to speak out.

Gun violence, Stand Your Ground laws, race, black youth, racism and racial politics are swirling around and emerging as major hot button issues for policy debates and national political elections.

Republican Senator Ted Cruz questioned the motives of President Barack Obama in speaking out about the killing, the acquittal and race relations. Cruz sees President Obama’s comments as a political attack on the Second Amendment right of gun owners to keep and bear arms. LINK:

Republican Senator John McCain disagrees with Cruz’s assessment. But, McCain feels that Arizona’s Stand Your Ground laws should be reviewed because of the outcome of the Martin case. LINK:

So it seems that conservative blogger and political pundit Hugh Hewitt made a salient comment about race: “Race may be the only issue . . . which puts the country in a pretty difficult place for the next three plus years.” LINK:

Indeed, Hewitt apparently is correct.

It was difficult for policy makers and politicians to talk about and deal with women’s rights during the 2012 Presidential Election.

Imagine what the contours of the policy debates will be, what the media coverage will be and what the political outcomes could be should politicians take on and speak out on issues like gun violence, Stand Your Ground laws, race, black youth and racism in the 2014 and 2016 elections?

The lids will blow for sure!

Zimmerman stood his ground. He killed an unarmed black teenager and was acquitted.

Little could he imagine or foresee, however, that his bullet would trigger a national policy debate and a potential political crisis for the 2014 and 2016 elections.

Obama can do better at State Department than Susan Rice

Susan Rice, US Ambassador to the UN.

Susan Rice, US Ambassador to the UN. (Photo credit: Wikipedia)






That’s the conclusion of opinion writer Dana Milbank,, after pointing to specific instances of policy clashes and other flaps Ambassador Rice has had in her career.

Those flaps probably would diminish the notion that some of the opposition to her is sexist and racist.

But, Robert Kagan,, makes the salient argument in her favor (quote):

It seems a big reach to suggest that Susan Rice, of all people, should be barred from another job in the Obama administration because of what happened in Benghazi.

With so many potential crises staring us in the face in 2013, the country doesn’t need a nasty fight over who said what when or a brutal confirmation battle that may result in a new secretary of state wounded from the start by a partisan Senate vote. It’s hard to see what national interest would be served by such a spectacle at a time when many around the world wonder whether the United States can get its act together.

READ MORE: “Scapegoating Susan Rice does U. S. no good,” LINK:

Kagan nails it.

With the impending fiscal cliff and other big problems challenging the nation, and in view of her qualifications for the appointment, Republicans need to fold the tent on opposing Ambassador Rice’s nomination for Secretary of State and move on.