The Hill's A.B. Stoddard takes your questions on the recent controversies surrounding the Obama administration. 

Why Sarah Palin? Because when I write a blog here on Jeb Bush or President Obama, it will bring in maybe 10 comments. A piece on Sarah Palin last week brought 135. Same every time. She strikes a chord which runs deep.

She has a purpose here. She may be today the most important person in American culture and politics. She may always have been.

The flak you draw tells of your truth and importance, and no one has taken more flak than Palin. Most has been neutralized now as Tea Party meets the mainstream with the IRS affair in particular, but with Kentucky’s Sen. Rand Paul (R), Utah’s Sen. Mike Lee (R) and Texas Sen. Ted Cruz’s (R) acceptance to the common culture as well. Cruz is smart as paint. Rand is folkloric. Others are just ahead. Kristi Noem (R-S.D.) may run for Senate and Alaska's Joe Miller, a former magistrate and 2010 candidate, is right behind.

It's easy to get caught up in the firestorm — Benghazi, the IRS, the fishing expedition the Department of Justice carried out within The Associated Press. But political junkies shouldn't miss what is developing with the all-but-declared candidacy of Sen. Rand Paul and his tour of the early presidential nominating states.

On Monday he will be with Republican National Committee Chairman Reince Prieubus in New Hampshire. He has already spoken at the Iowa Republican Party's Lincoln Dinner and is making stops in South Carolina as well. He isn't just traveling but transitioning from libertarian to "libertarian Republican" as he seeks enough establishment support to move beyond the reputation of his dad's Ron Paul brand to his own Rand Paul brand.

In recent remarks that were stunning and profound, Pope Francis harshly criticized what he called "the cult of money" and condemned what he called the "dictatorship" of economies that are socially unjust and morally unfair.

These remarks, reported in The Daily Telegraph and highlighted on the Drudge Report (but not in major American media) suggest a papacy with the potential to transform the global economic and financial debate.

Most recent popes, including Pope John Paul II and Pope Benedict, raised the same issues that Francis dramatized this week. What makes the Holy Father different today is that he views economic and social injustice as a defining, and possibly THE defining, theme of is papacy.

“The patina of high-mindedness the president enjoyed is gone ... Something big has shifted.”  — Peggy Noonan, The Wall Street Journal, May 17, 2013

The spookiest thing of all perhaps is that with the overnight rise of Obama from nowhere in Chicago to the Oval Office is the uptick again in the world of global "New Superior Man." 

Granted, it is a hot, foamy latte version of the beast that stalked the heart of Russia in the early 1800s and would rise to shake the world in 10 days, then tear its fabric for 100 years. The rise of Superior Man also brought the world one of its greatest literary works: Dostoyevsky's Crime and Punishment, and the anti-hero who would echo today through Nietzsche, Lenin, Trotsky, Bulworth, Bono, Bill, Obama.

The White House has asked Sen. Chuck Schumer (D-N.Y.) to reintroduce a press shield law, …   The move comes after questions were raised about the seizure of Associated Press phone records by the Justice Department as part of a national security leak investigation. — Politico, May 15, 2013

ERIC HOLDER: IT WASN’T ME. — The Daily Beast, May 15, 2013

Poor President Obama. He needs good counsel and isn’t getting it from his attorney general. While a federal shield law is overdue, it won’t cure the problem that generated these blurbs above. 

Whether reporters are protected from government investigations of their sources is a matter of policy rather than constitutional law. Eminent journalists such as the late Anthony Lewis and jurisprudential scholars like the late Ronald Dworkin agree. 

But the policy considerations are so strong that the Supreme Court and most jurisdictions recognize the need to protect the independence of media, through case precedents and statutes. Thirty-one states and the District of Columbia have shield laws, and most others have limited protections which balance reporters’ rights with legitimate government secrets. Congress has wrestled with passing a federal shield law for decades, unsuccessfully.

As Alexandra Jaffe reported in the Hill, a new PPP poll is out that shows Hillary Clinton dominating Sen. Marco Rubio (R-Fla.) and Sen. Rand Paul (R-Ky.) by 10 points in a 2016 match-up.

Only New Jersey Gov. Chris Christie (R), who I have praised and who earned his street cred by praising Obama and criticizing certain Republicans, comes within 3 points. Dare I suggest a little humility (wink) from certain Republicans who keep falsely predicting the demise of Obama and Clinton?

This morning from The Washington Post’s Kathleen Parker: "Breaking news: Conservative organizations suddenly have found common cause with one of their favorite objects of contempt — the benighted Mainstream Media ... Or as the tea party queen and former Alaska governor likes to put it, the ‘lamestream media.’ In a twist of irony, the two groups have coalesced around a common enemy: the U.S. government.”

The Tea Party queen here is, of course, Sarah Palin. Interesting, because Parker was among the first to announce, when Palin first arrived on the scene, that Palin was “out of her league.”

First, I propose readers ignore those who imitate the usual suspects in "Casablanca," whether they are Republicans who offer their latest ritual condemnation of President Obama and predictions of great GOP victories or Democrats, if you can find any these days, who offer their latest ritual defense of whatever President Obama does. 

Some things have clearly gone wrong. Serious people discuss why. Regarding the IRS scandal, two thoughts: It is entirely legitimate to test whether overtly partisan political groups meet the legal standards of the tax code they employ to minimize taxes. And it is entirely illegitimate, morally wrong, politically indefensible and wholly unacceptable to use the tax code as a weapon to single out any political party or point of view without applying the same standards to all.