Dear Mark: A new report from the Senate intelligence committee is very critical of the State Department concerning the lack of adequate security at the U.S. embassy in Benghazi prior to the terrorist attack that killed four Americans. Hillary Clinton was Secretary of State at the time, so part of the blame should rest at her feet. Could this spell doom for her presidential ambitions in 2016? — Jonesboro Jake

Dear Jake: No, this doesn't spell doom for Hillary because Democrats can spell the words "liberal media bias." Without naming names, this bipartisan report is damning to the state department, and its lack of response to security requests during a significant anniversary in a dangerous part of the world. This report also came out two days after newly declassified documents showed the Obama administration knew within minutes that the Benghazi incident was a terrorist attack and not the result of a spontaneous protest over an anti-Muslim Internet video, as Hillary and Obama declared.

With these two bombshells, you'd think the media would be covering this story wall to wall, but, sadly, no. At the very least, the media could revisit why President Obama, Hillary Clinton, Susan Rice, Jay Carney and a myriad of other administration hacks lied to the American people about a supposed video causing the embassy murders.

If one simply looks at the egregious airtime imbalance, it's obvious that going after a Republican presidential contender over lane closures in New Jersey is far more important to the mainstream media than President Obama lying about a terrorist attack coincidentally just before his reelection.

New Jersey governor Chris Christie faced his charges head-on while President Obama and his minions have dodged, denied and equivocated for over 16 months now. In fact, when questioned at his daily press briefing, Presidential spokesman Jay Carney said the analogy between Chris Christie's "traffic jam" and the Benghazi attack was "bizarre." Of course, it sounds "bizarre" to the president's liberal mouthpiece, as it involves sound reasoning and logic.

As for Hillary, Senator Dianne Feinstein, the chairman of the Senate Intelligence Committee, has already emphasized that the committee's findings in no way implies any wrong doing or fault with then-Secretary of State, Clinton. The media has already bought hook, line and sinker the liberal spin on Benghazi that the State department was at fault but not Clinton who headed up the State Department. Somebody, pass the Tylenol.

Dear Mark: The Treasury Department just released data showing the United States now owes China over $1.3 trillion. Congress should be ashamed of its inaction in reducing the deficit. Don't you agree? — Tighten Those Purse Strings

Dear Tighten: Of course I agree, but don't forget that it was candidate Barack Obama who in 2008 claimed that "taking out a credit card from the Bank of China" was "irresponsible" and "unpatriotic." Please see the above letter concerning liberal media bias.

Dear Mark: I've read excerpts from former Secretary of Defense Robert Gates' book and found many of the revelations fascinating. However, there is one weird incident he cites involving Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid. Gates claims Reid wanted the Pentagon to spend money researching irritable bowel syndrome. Why in the world would the Pentagon need to research that disease? — Proud Vet in Lodi

Dear Proud: I'm surprised the Pentagon didn't request funds for this research on its own, as liberal politicians have been a pain in the Pentagon's butt for years. Here's what Secretary Gates thought about Reid's request. "With two ongoing wars and all our budget and other issues, I didn't know whether to laugh or cry."

Mr. Secretary, when it comes to Harry Reid, I vote for laugh.

Dear Mark is a public platform for your enrichment and entertainment. E-mail your questions to marklevy92@aol.com. To find out more about Mark Levy, and read features by other Creators Syndicate writers and cartoonists, visit www.creators.com.