MORE ON THE BENGHAZI DEBACLE: After the Benghazi attack: “We’re going through a mission accomplished moment.” “Amazing that Obama was doing this on ‘Letterman’ and ‘The View’ — the day after the attack!”

Plus: “Connect what Woodward and Graham said. Woodward said the administration withheld security from Libya because they wanted to make things look normal, to convey a message that the conflict had wound down. And Graham is saying the video story was a message — a narrative — a story that [they] wanted to tell. It was the story that al Qaeda is vanquished, that the mission is accomplished.”

FACT-CHECKING THE NEW YORKER: “But let’s give her a little room for rhetorical license — surely there are plenty of middle-class Americans who pay, say, a 35 percent tax rate, and lots of millionaires and billionaires pay a 14 percent rate, right? Well, no, not at all: Yes, when you rank Americans who earn $1 million a year or more by tax rate paid, the average rate in their 25th percentile is 12.6 percent, meaning a bit more than 25 percent of them pay less than a 14 percent federal rate. But almost no one in the middle class pays a 35 percent rate: Even the 90th percentile of those most beholden to the IRS in the $100–200,000-a-year income group (to define “middle class” generously for Ms. Freeland) don’t pay a 35 percent rate; they pay a 24.6 percent rate. We’re told Newsweek doesn’t employ fact-checkers anymore — but The New Yorker still does, right?”

HOW PUBLIC SCHOOLS DEFINE “LIBERAL” & “CONSERVATIVE” (I KID YOU NOT):  My middle school-aged daughter was studying for a civics test on the American political system.  Two of her vocabulary words were “liberal” and “conservative.”  Here are the definitions she was supposed to memorize:

“Liberal:  favorable to progress or reform, as in political, social or religious affairs.“

“Conservative:  Disposed to preserve existing conditions, institutions, etc., or to restore traditional ones and limit change.“

So let me get this straight:  Liberals are “favorable to progress” while conservatives are “disposed to . . . limit change.”   Ugh.

I had to write my daughter’s teacher a note to politely point out that while these might be decent generic definitions of the words, they are not accurate in the specific context of a civics class or study of the American political system.  In that context, the relevant distinction between liberals and conservatives has nothing to do with being favorable or unfavorable toward “progress” or “change,” but a difference in view about the proper size and scope of governmental power, with liberals believing generally in bigger government, conservatives believing generally in smaller government.

If this is how our children are learning to define “liberals” and “conservatives,” we are in BIG trouble, folks. Anyone with kids out there needs to monitor their child’s civics materials carefully.

THE OBAMA BREAKING POINT: Victor Davis Hanson writes:

The election is not over, but it is starting to resemble October 29 or November 1 in 1980, when, after just one debate, the nation at last decided that it really did not like Jimmy Carter very much or what he had done, and discovered that Ronald Reagan was not the mad Dr. Strangelove/Jefferson Davis of the Carter summer television ads. Like Carter, Obama both has no wish to defend his record (who would?) and is just as petulant. In the next three weeks, he has only three hours left to save his presidency.

Needless to say, read the whole thing.

WATCH HIM WRIGGLE, WATCH HIM SQUIRM: Axelrod bobs and weaves over Obama’s level of engagement the day of the Benghazi attack.

DAN RIEHL: In Defense Of Buzzfeed.

GOT WRINKLES? TRY SNAIL SLIME:  Primarily marketed as an acne solution, the shelled slug’s mucus is also believed to reduce pigmentation and scarring, as well as beat wrinkles.  Ick– I think I will just learn to live with my laugh lines!

IF YOU DON’T LIKE IT, STOP BEING SO GODDAMN MOCKABLE, SCHMUCKS. Muslims protest ‘age of mockery’ as thousands descend on Google HQ.

After all, you just turned out en masse in response to a YouTube video. Joke’s on you. Again.

AFFIRMATIVE ACTION & THE PROBLEM OF “MISMATCH”:  Excellent op-ed in the Wall Street Journal by Richard Sander and Stuart Taylor about the problems caused by academic “mismatch” that results from race-based affirmative action in university admissions. The bottom line according to Sander and Taylor (both of whom confess to formerly supporting affirmative action):

There is now increasing evidence that students who receive large preferences of any kind—whether based on race, athletic ability, alumni connections or other considerations—experience some clear negative effects: Students end up with poor grades (usually in the bottom fifth of their class), lower graduation rates, extremely high attrition rates from science and engineering majors, substantial self-segregation on campus, lower self-esteem and far greater difficulty passing licensing tests (such as bar exams for lawyers).