An acquaintance of mine wants those nasty Republicans to “get off this dead horse” – i.e., the investigation into what really led up to the deaths of four Americans in Benghazi, Libya. 

Never mind that oversight is an important aspect of Congress's constitutionally designated duties, even though some would prefer that the Executive Branch of our government (as composed under Obama) have free rein over all of their horses – regardless of any ethical, moral, legal, or constitutional considerations.  And never mind that congressional Democrats have not done their job in any of the hearings having to do with the Obama administration's handling of Benghazi.  They are rabidly partisan and clearly don't want the truth to be known.

Nevertheless, my acquaintance and others of his ilk think the entire effort is a witch hunt.  I suppose that can be said if you think Hillary Clinton might be a witch.  Let's face it – everybody knows that she and Obama have shamelessly lied about this and many other issues.  Have you ever tried to have a reasonable discussion with an unrepentant, congenital liar, or with his/her ideological supporters?  If so, you know how frustrating it can be.  But that doesn't mean you should stop trying to get to the truth.

Paraphrasing Ben Shapiro, Hillary's most obvious lies during her testimony on Thursday, Oct. 22 included: 1) still claiming that the Benghazi attack had something to do with the YouTube video; 2) stating that she had not used Sidney Blumenthal as an advisor for official business (against Obama's wishes) and that his emails were unsolicited; 3) insisting (again) that she had been fully transparent about her emails; and 4) suggesting that Chris Stevens, the dead ambassador, was responsible for his own death, while pretending to care about him and the others.  These despicable, bald-faced lies lend a lot a credence to the witch hypothesis.

Despite her proven lies, hardcore Democrats are now gleefully boasting about Hillary's “victorious,” “presidential” appearance before the Benghazi Committee.  Unfortunately, much of the general public probably also sees it that way.  This seems a perfect example of ignorance failing to identify itself.

Charles Krauthammer commented on Thursday evening (while the hearing was still in session) that “[w]e're not going to get the facts; we're not going to get the real story underlying it.  We're living in an age where what you say and its relation with the facts is completely irrelevant.”  All too often, that's true.  And it's very sad.

While some level of obfuscating, misleading, and intentional lying has always been a part of our political landscape, it has arguably never been so predominant as it is in today's Democratic Party.  I would urge the reader to check out an internet blogger's extensive list of “1,150 well sourced examples of Obama's lying, law breaking, corruption, cronyism, hypocrisy, waste, etc.”

The items listed vary in importance, but they are indeed well-documented and serve to demonstrate Krauthammer's point in a most indisputable way.  Facts are facts.  It's too bad they seem to be taking a back seat to radical leftist ideology and tactics.

We must continue to seek truth as to how well our government is “serving” us.  What's the alternative?

Fred Bindewald, a conservative retiree, can be reached at bindewal@hotmail.com.