Amid outcry over revelations that Internal Revenue Service specialists specifically targeted conservative groups for scrutiny before the 2012 elections, President Barack Obama said Monday that the tax agency employees' reported conduct was "outrageous" and "contrary to our traditions."

Alex Wong / Getty Images

President Barack Obama and British Prime Minister David Cameron hold a joint news conference in the East Room of the White House May 13, 2013.

Appearing at a White House press conference with British Prime Minister David Cameron, the president said he does not want to judge the findings of an Inspector General investigation "prematurely" but said that if the reports of political targeting are found to be correct, those responsible must be held "fully accountable."

"If in fact IRS personnel engaged in the kind of practices that have been reported on and were intentionally targeting conservative groups, then that’s outrageous and there’s no place for it," he said.

"I've got no patience with it," he added. "I will not tolerate it and we will make sure that we find out exactly what happened on this."

Reports surfaced Friday that an IRS official had apologized for the targeting by staffers in a Cincinnati field office, which singled out groups for additional review if they included the words "tea party" or "patriot" in their applications for tax-exempt status.

A partial draft report from the Treasury Inspector General for Tax Administration -- obtained by NBC News -- shows that top officials knew about the targeting nearly a year before then-IRS Commissioner Douglas H. Shulman, who was appointed by President George W. Bush, testified to Congress in March 2012 that no singling out of conservative groups ever occurred.

The House Ways and Means Committee announced after the president's remarks that it will hold a hearing on the alleged targeting on Friday, May 17. Acting IRS Commissioner Steve Miller and J. Russell George, the Inspector General who headed up the IRS report, are expected to testify.

And the IRS confirmed Monday night that Miller was informed in May of last year that "some specific applications were improperly identified by name and sent to the [IRS] Exempt Organizations centralized processing unit for further review."

In a statement earlier Monday, White House spokesman Jay Carney said the president is “concerned” about the reported conduct of “a small number of Internal Revenue Service employees.”

“If the Inspector General finds that there were any rules broken or that conduct of government officials did not meet the standards required of them, the President expects that swift and appropriate steps will be taken to address any misconduct," Carney said.

Lawmakers on both sides of the aisle have called for extensive investigation into the IRS practices.

In a letter to Treasury Secretary Jack Lew, Republican Sen. Marco Rubio of Florida called for the resignation of Acting Commissioner Miller, who previously served as Shulman’s deputy.

"[I]t is clear the IRS cannot operate with even a shred of the American people's confidence under the current leadership," Rubio wrote. "I strongly urge that you and President Obama demand the IRS Commissioner's resignation, effectively immediately. No government agency that has behaved in such a manner can possibly instill any faith and respect from the American public."

Top Senate Republican Mitch McConnell went further, calling the burgeoning IRS scandal "just one example of an administration-wide effort to silence critics."

"The Obama effort to shut up opponents isn't limited to the IRS," he told conservative outlet Breitbart News. "It applies to the FCC [Federal Communications Commission], SEC [Securities and Exchange Commission], FEC [Federal Elections Commission], HHS [Department of Health and Human Services]." 

A McConnell spokesman told NBC News that the senator was specifically referring to those agencies’ attempts to implement rules requiring that third-party groups and businesses disclose donors or political activities. 

Senate Finance Committee Chairman Max Baucus, a Democrat, also called the targeting "intolerable" and an "outrageous abuse of power."

And Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid also weighed in, saying the allegations would represent a "terrible breach of the public trust" and pledging that the chamber will "quickly take appropriate action" based on the inspector general's findings. 

NBC's Kelly O'Donnell, Luke Russert and Mark Murray contributed to this report. 

This story was originally published on Mon May 13, 2013 7:40 PM EDT

The White House’s terrible, horrible Friday spills over… Why the IRS story packs a bigger political punch… The White House’s slow response to both the IRS and Benghazi stories… Q&A time for Obama: He holds joint press conference with British PM David Cameron at 11:15 am ET… Recapping Rand Paul’s speech in Cedar Rapids, IA… New Gomez internal shows him trailing Markey by just 3 pts… New Cuccinelli ad focuses on the economy, taxes.. And Herseth Sandlin won’t run in SD.

Pablo Martinez Monsivais / AP

White House Press Secretary Jay Carney during his daily news briefing at the White House, Friday, May, 10, 2013. Carney responded on Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell, R-Ky, calling on top-to-bottom review of the Obama administration after the IRS admitted that it had targeted conservative groups during the 2012 election.

*** The White House’s terrible, horrible Friday spills over: Everything that happened last Friday -- the reporting on the revisions to the Benghazi talking points, the news that the IRS had targeted conservative groups, reporters pummeling White House Press Secretary Jay Carney at his briefing -- represented the White House’s worst day since the first presidential debate. And it all spilled over to the Sunday shows and today’s news. As the Washington Post now reports, “At various points over the past two years, Internal Revenue Service officials singled out for scrutiny not only groups with ‘tea party’ or ‘patriot’ in their names but also nonprofit groups that criticized the government and sought to educate Americans about the U.S. Constitution, according to documents in an audit conducted by the agency’s inspector general.” Indeed, the IRS story is bigger long-term problem for the Obama administration than perhaps it realized on Friday afternoon when its initial response lacked a real sense of outrage.

*** IRS story packs a bigger political punch: One reason why is because Benghazi has already been litigated so much (at congressional hearings, at two presidential debates, during Susan Rice’s consideration for the secretary of state job). But Friday’s revelation that the IRS had targeted conservative-sounding names (and not liberal-sounding ones) in applications for tax-exempt status will trigger new congressional hearings and new questions for the president and his team. More significantly, the IRS news is a political gift to a Republican Party whose base was strained on immigration (remember that Heritage Foundation study?) and even on guns (remember the tough questions Sens. Kelly Ayotte and Jeff Flake were getting?). Now, you’re seeing a GOP base united by two things they absolutely dislike: President Obama and the Internal Revenue Service. The news also is a gift to Republicans like Mitch McConnell, Lindsey Graham, or any incumbent Republican in Washington hoping to avoid a tough primary in 2014 -- they get to demagogue the heck out of this story and show they will stand up for the Tea Party.

*** Slow ride, take it easy: For the Obama White House, if there’s one common theme to both the Benghazi and IRS stories, it’s how slowly it responded to them. It’s something that Sen. Dianne Feinstein alluded to on “Meet the Press” yesterday when NBC’s David Gregory asked her what she would have liked to see Obama or Secretary of State Hillary Clinton do different after Benghazi. “Oh, to move faster. To say, ‘Yes, this was in fact a terrorist act.’ I mean, it was so evident.” When Gregory asked her why the administration dragged its heels, Feinstein responded, “I think this is a cautious administration. You see it in other respects.” That’s a kind interpretation. On Benghazi, the White House is essentially leading reporters to believe they were ultimately refereeing a bureaucratic turf fight between the CIA and State. But they also, when questioned, claim they’d do nothing differently other than -- perhaps -- delay giving a public accounting even further in the hours and days after the attack. When it comes to this Benghazi controversy, the questions for non-partisans (because partisans are searching only for what supports what they believe): Why did State push for the big change in the talking points? Was this about pushing back on the CIA, because it thought the agency was deflecting responsibility since the Benghazi outpost was more CIA than State? Was this about State doing CYA regarding CIA warnings about diplomatic security?

*** Q&A time for Obama: Don’t be surprised if these two stories -- Benghazi and the IRS -- come up at President Obama’s joint press conference with British PM David Cameron at 11:15 am ET. Afterward, Obama travels to New York City, where he hits two DNC fundraisers and then a joint DSCC/DCCC event. Also today, Vice President Biden delivers the commencement address at the University of Pennsylvania.

*** Cedar Rapids: Outside of Washington… Sen. Rand Paul (R-KY) had a pretty important weekend in Iowa. The dispatch from NBC’s Mike O’Brien: “On Friday, Sen. Rand Paul put his stake in the ground for a possible run in 2016 by mocking the Obama administration and delivering a blistering critique of former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton's handling of the terrorist attack in Benghazi, Libya, that killed four Americans, including Ambassador Chris Stevens. The administration has been criticized for failing to provide security during the attack and for its characterization of the incident afterward. Speaking at the Iowa GOP’s annual Lincoln Dinner, Paul questioned the initial response to the attacks and asked, ‘First question to Hillary Clinton: Where in the hell were the Marines?’ ‘It was inexcusable, it was a dereliction of duty, and it should preclude her from holding higher office,’ the Kentucky Republican added to loud applause” at the Lincoln Day Dinner in Cedar Rapids, IA. Also, speaking of Paul in Iowa, don’t miss the story in the Washington Post about Rand Paul’s concerted effort to reach out to evangelicals, a core GOP constituency that Rand’s father Ron, rarely courted and usually alienated.

*** New Gomez internal poll shows him trailing Markey by 3 points: In Massachusetts’ special Senate election, which takes place next month, the Gabriel Gomez (R) campaign has released an internal poll (conducted May 5-7) showing him trailing Ed Markey (D) by just three points, 46%-43%, with 11% undecided. That’s in contrast to independent surveys conducted around the same that finds Markey with larger leads (46%-38% per WBUR and 52%-35% per Suffolk). According to the Gomez internal poll, the Republican has a 14-point lead among independents (50%-36%) and is carrying Republican by a 94%-3% clip. Yet Markey leads among Democrats by just 73%-12%. (The question to ask: Does that continue to hold up?) The timing of the release of this Gomez internal poll is important: It comes after Democrats had hammered Gomez on news that he “claimed a $281,500 income tax deduction in 2005 for pledging not to make any visible changes to the facade of his 112-year-old Cohasset home… But Gomez and his wife, Sarah, were already barred from making any changes to the exterior of their home under the bylaws of the local Historical Commission, raising the question as to whether their donation — the price of which is based on the loss of value in their real estate — had any monetary worth.” Meanwhile, the National Republican Senatorial Committee has a new web video hitting Markey for the “bounced check” scandal of the early 1990s.

*** New Cuccinelli ad focuses on the economy, taxes: In Virginia, Ken Cuccinelli (R) is up with his second TV ad of the race, and the spot is all about the economy. “Small businesses are the backbone of our economy,” Cuccinelli says to the camera. “But they are being overtaxed and over regulated I’ve a plan to make Virginia an engine for job growth It starts with closing tax loopholes and putting an end to special interest giveaways. We’ll use the savings to cut taxes for those who’ve earned it.” Last week, NBC's Mike O'Brien reported that Cuccinelli's $1.4 billion tax plan "would cut the personal income tax rate to 5 percent (down from 5.75 percent) and reduce the corporate tax rate to 4 percent (from 6 percent)... [T]he attorney general would help offset the $1.4 billion price tag for his tax cuts by identifying and eliminating 'outdated exemptions and loopholes that promote crony capitalism.'" 

*** Herseth Sandlin won’t run in SD: And in South Dakota, here’s a big recruiting loss for the Democratic Senatorial Campaign Committee: Stephanie Herseth Sandlin won’t run for the Senate. MSNBC’s Jessica Taylor gets comment from the DSCC, which had been bullish on Herseth Sandlin’s chances of getting into the race: "There will be a strong Democratic candidate that can seize on the divisive GOP primary and provide South Dakotans with a clear alternative to the dysfunction on the Republican side. Mike Rounds is like the second coming of Tommy Thompson.”

Click here to sign up for First Read emails.
Text FIRST to 622639, to sign up for First Read alerts to your mobile phone.
Check us out on Facebook and also on Twitter. Follow us @chucktodd, @mmurraypolitics, @DomenicoNBC, @brookebrower

As procrastinating Americans raced to confirm brunch plans and flower deliveries for Mother’s Day, the president of the United States took a policy-oriented approach to the holiday, pitching the benefits of his health care reforms to moms nationwide.

Mandel Ngan / AFP - Getty Images

President Barack Obama speaks on the Affordable Care Act on May 10, 2013 in the East Room of the White House.

During an event at the White House, President Barack Obama decried “misinformation” about the law and urged parents not to be “bamboozled” by those critical of the law’s lingering criticisms about the 2009 legislation. 

Flanked by female supporters, the president praised the legislation’s provisions, including new rules that eliminate price hikes relating to women’s health and allow young people to stay on their parents’ insurance plans for longer.

“This is too important for political games,” he added. “Most moms and dads don’t think about politics when their kid gets sick.” 

The Affordable Care Act was passed in 2009 over the vigorous objections of Republicans, but most of its sweeping provisions are only beginning to be implemented now. The process of enacting the reforms has had a rocky start; bill drafter and Senate Finance Committee Chairman Max Baucus, a Democrat, warned that businesses confused about the law could face a “train wreck.” 

Obama conceded that “undoubtedly there will be some mistakes and hiccups as this thing gets started up” but that the program’s implementers are quickly responding to problems.

Touting the legislation’s specific benefits to women, Obama reminded foes that the 2012 election results mean the “law is here to stay.” 

“The same folks who fought tooth and nail a couple years ago and tried to make political hay out of ‘Obamacare’ are still telling tall tales about its impact,” he said. 

At the outset of his remarks, the president offered a tongue-in-cheek reminder to those who may have forgotten the upcoming Mother’s Day holiday.

He joked that, early in his marriage to wife Michelle, he wondered aloud why such a fuss is made over moms for one day in May. 

“Because every other day is Dad’s day,” she responded. 

This story was originally published on Fri May 10, 2013 3:47 PM EDT

The battle to define health-care’s implementation… Obama holds implementation event at 2:40 pm ET, while House Republicans hold another vote next week to repeal the law… When a talking point isn’t a talking point… The Gang of Eight sticks together during first day marking up the immigration legislation… Rand Paul speaks in Iowa tonight, and he represents the anti-“compassionate conservative” crowd… Bosom Buddies: Biden talks up his relationship with Obama… First Read’s weekly 2016 round-up… And grinding things to a halt.

Deborah Cannon / AP

President Barack Obama speaks during a visit to the Applied Materials facilities in Austin, Texas, Thursday, May 9, 2013.

*** The battle to define health care’s implementation: In recent weeks, President Obama has stressed the importance of the health-care law’s implementation at a Planned Parenthood conference, and he also argued at a White House news conference that implementation affects just a fraction of Americans (mostly the uninsured). Today, he returns to the topic when he holds a 2:40 pm ET event -- with women and families, just before Mother’s Day -- on the health-care law that’s fully up and running by next year. Per the White House, the audience for this event will consist of representatives from women’s organizations who “will help amplify the benefits of the Affordable Care Act for women and help us communicate … the benefits that are now available to them and their families.” This comes, of course, as Republicans are doing the opposite: emphasizing how chaotic the implementation will be. As Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell said yesterday, “The president should rethink the purpose of this event. I hope he will use it instead as a platform to prepare women for the actual consequences many of them will soon face under Obamacare.” This also comes as House Republicans will vote next week to repeal the health-care. GOP leaders say this will be the 38th vote to repeal or replace parts of the health-care law (four of which were changes that the president signed into law), according to NBC’s Frank Thorp.

*** The name of the game: getting Americans to enroll: As we’ve indicated before, this is a different type of campaign and policy fight. White House will be doing events like today a lot more between now and April 2014 (the end of the enrollment period). The name of the game for them is convincing younger HEALTHIER uninsured Americans to enroll. Why? Because without younger healthier Americans, the numbers don’t work. As for the GOP, this is their last shot at stopping this law, and they know it. Once it’s in place and Americans are enrolled, they’ll have a harder and harder time trying to unwind it. Time is not on their side.

*** When a talking point isn’t a talking point: The news today on the Benghazi front once again puts the spotlight on Hillary Clinton’s State Department. The issue in question appears to be just how active the State Department was in trying to rewrite the talking points in the hours and days after the attack. Both the Weekly Standard and ABC News have versions of the same story, quoting specific email exchanges between the CIA, the White House, and State suggesting it was the State Department that kept insisting on revisions. While the politics of this continues to get ugly -- especially as it relates to conservative groups targeting Hillary Clinton, the latest is from Karl Rove’s American Crossroads -- every day creates more questions for Clinton’s State Department. So expect more Republicans to do what Speaker Boehner did yesterday (calling on the White House to release all emails related to the incident) or what Sen. Lindsey Graham did as well (calling on Clinton to come back and testify before Congress).

*** The Gang sticks together -- so far: NBC’s Carrie Dann covers the first day of the Senate Judiciary Committee marking up the Gang of Eight’s bipartisan immigration legislation. Bottom line: The legislation was largely kept intact. “As expected, Democrats on the 18-member Senate Judiciary Committee were joined by two Republican members of the bipartisan Gang of Eight in opposing the most stringent border security amendments offered by opponents of the bill, ranging from a massive influx of boots on the ground at the nation’s southern border to delays to the program that would make undocumented immigrants eligible for a probationary legal status.” More: “But the panel also adopted a total of 21 amendments, including eight proposed by Republicans. Those included measures to beef up oversight of the legislation’s implementation, offer greater flexibility to the Department of Homeland Security to allocate funds for technology and infrastructure, and include private landowners in a task force consulting on border security.” As leading opponent Sen. Jeff Sessions (R-AL), said: “The Gang stuck together – as we’d been told they would – on anything that significantly impacted their legislation that they drafted with their friends.”

*** Enter Rand Paul: Still almost 1,000 days before the first votes in the 2016 contest, Republicans right now are split into two camps about how to move forward after their two-straight presidential losses. The first camp -- highlighted by all the George W. Bush nostalgia from his presidential library opening last month -- wants the GOP to return to “compassionate conservatism.” These are the people (think Jeb Bush, the Bush campaign alums, the RNC, and Marco Rubio) who support comprehensive immigration reform, believe the party must do a better job of appealing to minorities, and think there’s a role for government (albeit not as much as Democrats do). The other Republican camp largely found its voice in REACTION to the Bush years and President Obama. These folks don’t believe in a role for government; they’re suspicious (if not downright hostile) to military force; and they don’t think it’s a priority for the GOP to woo minority voters. Representing this camp is former presidential candidate Ron Paul and his son Sen. Rand Paul (R-KY), who speaks tonight at the Iowa GOP’s Lincoln Day dinner in Cedar Rapids, IA. You could call this second camp -- which includes Sen. Ted Cruz (R-TX) -- the anti-“compassionate conservatives.”

*** Can a small political machine conquer the GOP? Politico has a different story on Paul: Can his relatively small team have success in 2016, if he runs? “When Rand Paul touches down in Iowa Friday, it will be almost exactly three years to the day after his landslide 2010 Senate primary victory – an unlikely and decisive triumph over the Republican establishment that instantly transformed Paul into a national political phenomenon. Now, as Paul weighs a 2016 presidential bid, a different kind of challenge confronts him: Can the plain-spoken former Bowling Green ophthalmologist build a campaign to back up his popular appeal? For all Paul’s success as a media brand and a mobilizer of the conservative grassroots, the Kentucky senator has done relatively little since 2010 to assemble a political machine around his own personality. For now, the Rand Paul project is a high-wire act that works largely without a net.”

*** Bosom Buddies: In other 2016 news, Vice President Biden spoke to historian Douglas Brinkley for an article in Rolling Stone, and the gist Biden gives Brinkley: “Look at how close Obama and I are.” As Brinkley writes, “Never before have a president and vice president been as close personally and professionally as Barack Obama and Joe Biden – just think about the past 80 years. FDR switched out VPs with the regularity of a farmer rotating his crops. Harry Truman had little use for the lightweight Alben Barkley. Dwight Eisenhower never really trusted Richard Nixon... Of course, Al Gore and Dick Cheney were formidable presences in the past two White Houses. But by the time both of those men left Washington, their relationships with their bosses were strained.” Biden tells Brinkley in the interview: “I spend an average of four to five hours a day with him, every single day… Literally, every meeting he has, I'm in. You don't have to wonder what the other guy's thinking; I don't have to guess where the president's going. So it's been really great.”

*** First Read’s weekly 2016 round-up: After the Benghazi hearing Wednesday, former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton (D) landed back in the GOP crosshairs after a four-year hiatus... But she’s still leading potential GOP contenders Chris Christie (R-NJ) and Bob McDonnell (R-VA) in potential 2016 matchups in their home states, despite their over-60% approval ratings, according to new NBC/Marist polls... Sen. Marco Rubio (R-FL) took aim at Clinton on FOX and in a USA Today op-ed… The political world discovered that Christie had lap-band surgery, and he also told NBC’s Brian Williams: “I'll worry about the presidency if and when I ever decide to run for it. But if you're saying to me, how do I feel as a Republican? I'm a damn good Republican and a good conservative”  … Vice President Joe Biden (D) told a Sierra Club volunteer that he was against the Keystone Pipeline but, he added, “I am in the minority.” … Gov. Bobby Jindal’s (R-LA) voucher plan was struck down by the Louisiana Supreme Court … Martin O’Malley is dealing with the fallout of a prison scandal and he went nose-to-nose with the Dalai Lama. No word if he gave him a Flacco jersey, too. … New York Gov. Andrew Cuomo (D) went on air with his “Clean Up Albany” campaign that sounds and looks like a message one could hear from a presidential candidate… And Paul Ryan (R-WI) criticized progressivism and again said Republicans have to do a better job selling their agenda to the nation.

*** Grinding things to a halt: Yesterday, we noted that there were some mixed numbers when it comes to measuring the state of the Republican Party’s brand. On the one hand, our NBC/Marist poll found the GOP with an upside-down fav/unfav in the crucial state of Virginia, 37%-53%, and a Pew poll found respondents blaming Republicans by 20 points (42%-22%) for failing to better work with President Obama on key issues. On the other hand, the same Pew survey showed the Republican Party either even or slightly ahead of Democrats on top issues like guns, the economy, and immigration. But here’s a legitimate question to ponder: Is the GOP’s full-scale obstruction is the best way to improve the party’s long-term standing? Consider all the recent activity, per CQ Roll Call’s David Hawkings: Senate Republicans have blocked Obama’s nomination to head the Labor Department, Tom Perez, from moving to the floor; Senate Republicans also BOYCOTTED a hearing to prevent advancement of Gina McCarthy’s nomination to lead the EPA; and Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell and Speaker John Boehner announced their refusal to name recommendations to serve on the federal health-care law’s Independent Payment Advisory Board. Several years ago, any of these stories would have been closely scrutinized news. Now? They’ve become routine.

Click here to sign up for First Read emails.
Text FIRST to 622639, to sign up for First Read alerts to your mobile phone.
Check us out on Facebook and also on Twitter. Follow us @chucktodd, @mmurraypolitics, @DomenicoNBC, @brookebrower

Kicking off his latest jobs tour at a high school in Texas, President Barack Obama told students that making quality education affordable and accessible was a key ingredient to jump-starting the U.S. economy.

Speaking at Manor New Technology High School in Austin to 400 students and teachers, Obama praised the school’s innovative education approaches, saying that both superior education and more policies to help the middle class were key to creating good jobs and attracting skilled workers.

“Thanks to the grit and determination of the American people, we’ve cleared away the rubble of the worst economic crisis in our lifetimes,” said Obama, “We’re poised for progress.”

To “reignite the true engine of middle-class growth,” the president said, the country has to become a magnet for good jobs, help people develop the education and skills for the jobs, and ensure workers can “achieve a decent living.”

With a veiled jab at inaction in Congress, Obama said where he could, he was “just going to go ahead and take actions on my own” and later today would be issuing executive orders “that I'm convinced will spur innovation and help businesses create more jobs.”

Those two executive orders, first laid out in the president’s State of the Union address, will focus on strengthening manufacturing and ensuring government data is available in machine-readable formats.

Obama praised Manor Tech for the way it is working to equip its students. The school, focused on preparing students for STEM careers in science and mathematics, selects students each year through a blind lottery, and has won plaudits for its academic success since its opening in 2007.

The president pointed out how students had been putting their knowledge to work, pointing out projects he saw on his tour of the school, including building musical instruments from mathematics equations and the use of robots and other technology.

Saul Loeb / AFP - Getty Images

President Barack Obama greets students after speaking on the economy and job creation after touring Manor New Technology High School in Manor, Texas, May 9, 2013.

And, according to the president, too much public speaking can never be a bad thing. “While most high school students in America give a handful of speeches by the time they graduate,” he noted, “a student at this school might give as many as 200.”

Obama joked, “That’s a lot of speeches. I can relate.”

But, the president pointed out, one reason the school has been a success is that it has been available to all students, regardless of their socioeconomic status.

 “The majority of students in Manor don’t come from wealth or privilege,” Obama said, noting the success the school had not only in keeping its students in school but helping them attend college.

“Folks around here are doing something right,” Obama added, “and I think the rest of the country can learn from what you’re doing -- because I’ve always believed that the best ideas usually don't start in Washington, they trickle up to Washington.  So I’ve come to listen and learn and highlight some of the good work that's being done.”

“There are too many kids in America who are not getting the same kinds of opportunity through no fault of their own,” said Obama. “We can do better than that. Every young person in America deserves a world class education. We’ve got an obligation to give it to them.”

“We’re not just a collection of individuals, we’re one American family,” said the president. “If we follow Manor's example, if we give every child the chance to climb new ladders of opportunity, if we equip every American with the skills and education they need to succeed in the jobs of the future, if we make sure that hard work pays off and responsibility's rewarded, if we fight to keep America a place where you can make it if you try, then you're not just going to be the ones that prosper, we'll all prosper, and together we'll write the next chapter in America's great history.”

This story was originally published on Thu May 9, 2013 5:37 PM EDT

House Speaker John Boehner (R-OH) is asking the White House and State Department to hand over emails related to the Sept. 11, 2012, attack on the U.S. Embassy in Benghazi, Libya, which House committees were able to see, but not keep or share, during their investigation into the response to the attack.

"Last I remember, the president said, and I'll quote, 'Would be happy to cooperate with the Congress in any way the Congress wants,'" Boehner said. "Well, this is his chance to show his cooperation so that we can get to the truth of what happened in Benghazi."

Boehner is asking for two sets of emails, both of which are related to whether the White House tried to change the initial characterization of the attack in Benghazi from a potential terrorist attack at the hands of Islamic radicalists to a spontaneous demonstration in response to an anti-Islam YouTube video.

The emails, according to Boehner, show a senior State Department official telling her superiors that the Libyan ambassador said the attack "was conducted by Islamic terrorists." This email was sent the day after the attack, which was days before U.N. Ambassador Susan Rice said on Meet the Press and other Sunday news shows that it was the result of a spontaneous demonstration.

The second set of emails, Boehner said, were between the White House and State Department officials, where they "insisted on removing all references to the terrorist attack to protect the State Department for providing inadequate security."

Asked if he thought the White House was lying about the response to the attack, Boehner said, "You can characterize it any way you want, but somebody clearly decided they didn't like the references to Islamic terrorism and made changes in this document."

Boehner's comments come after an emotional House committee hearing Wednesday into the Obama administration’s response to the attack, in which Gregory Hicks -- the former deputy chief of mission in Libya for the United States and the No. 2 diplomat there -- provided testimony saying he was "stunned" when the Obama administration was still claiming the attack was related to the viral anti-Islam video when they had been told otherwise.

"My jaw dropped, and I was embarrassed," Hicks told the committee Wednesday when he was asked about Rice's comments on the talk shows. 

Hicks told the committee he asked Undersecretary of State Beth Jones after Rice's interviews why they were saying "there was a demonstration when the embassy had reported only an attack."

Hicks said Jones answered by saying, "I don't know," but "the sense I got was that I needed to stop the line of questioning."

This story was originally published on Thu May 9, 2013 12:56 PM EDT

GOP shifts its focus to Hillary…  Beyond  the politics of yesterday’s Be nghazi hearing…  Deep in the heart of Texas: Obama heads to Austin, TX to talk jobs, manufacturing, and technology at 2:05 pm ET and 5:40 pm ET… Census: African Americans had a higher turnout rate in 2012 than whites did… The editing of the Senate immigration bill begins… GOP brand -- is it struggling or improving? Some mixed numbers…  A Democrat enters SD SEN race, but it’s not a top-tier candidate... And Jessica Taylor looks at the seats Dems have to defend to keep their Senate majority.

Jonathan Ernst / Reuters

Former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton makes remarks after being honored with a Distinguished Leadership Award from the Atlantic Council in Washington, May 1, 2013.

*** GOP shifts its focus to Hillary: Wednesday’s congressional hearing probing last year’s attack on the U.S. consulate in Benghazi revealed this political development: Key parts of the conservative movement are turning their attention from President Obama to former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton. “I find it stunning that four and a half months after the attack, Secretary Clinton still has the gall to say it wasn’t us,” Rep. Jason Chaffetz (R-UT) said at yesterday’s House Oversight and Government Reform Committee hearing. Added Rep. Jim Jordan (R-OH): “Tell me, who is Cheryl Mills?... She is the fixture for the secretary of state; she is as close as you can get to Secretary Clinton.” In addition, for the first time since Feb. 2008 (when Obama overtook Hillary in the Democratic presidential contest), Republican groups inundated our inboxes with emails about Clinton. The GOP oppo organization American Rising: “Benghazi Hearing Raises Serious Questions About Clinton.” The Karl Rove-backed American Crossroads: “Hicks told Clinton at 2am it was terrorism.” Here was Citizens United’s David Bossie (who was behind the “Hillary: The Movie”): “The Need For A Select Committee Is More Evident Than Ever.” And Drudge’s front page for most of yesterday looked like a time warp to when the Clintons were the constant focus of conservative attacks.

EDITOR'S NOTE: NBC's Lisa Myers reports that Hicks never told Clinton at 2 am that the attack was terrorism. He said in his testimony that he had previously told that to the State Department and said it was not necessary to say it again. "I had already reported that the attack was -- had commenced and that twitter feeds were asserting that Ansar Sharia was responsible for the attack," former Benghazi Deputy Chief of Mission Greg Hicks told Oversight Committee Chairman Darrell Issa Wednesday during testimony. Issa asked, "You didn't have that discussion with her only because it was assumed that, since you had already reported that the cause of the attack was essentially Islamic extremists, some of them linked to al- Qaida?" Hicks responded, "Yes." Myers followed up with Hicks' attorney who affirmed that Hicks did not tell Clinton personally that this was a terrorist attack.

*** But underneath the politics: Before wiping away yesterday as entirely a political exercise (and a LARGE part of yesterday had the feel of politics), don’t overlook what was discovered and what is clearly a very credible whistleblower in Greg Hicks. Ironically, what yesterday’s House hearing “revealed” was something that was already uncovered by the Pickering-Mullen report on Benghazi: systemic mistakes at the State Department when it comes to the issue of diplomatic security. The “coverup” charges appear to be an overreach, but what’s not an overreach is the focus on the failures at State and the apparent attempt by some at the White House to help State buy time before having the fingers pointed at its failings in the initial hours and days of the attack. And this happened on Clinton’s watch, pure and simple. If she is going to be running for president, her time atState is going to be an issue -- the good, the bad and the ugly. And it doesn’t take a political media genius to use Hicks’ description of his phone call back to State and resurrect Clinton’s famous 3:00 am phone call TV spot. Benghazi probably won’t haunt Clinton in 2016 in a big way, but it’s not going away, either.

*** The “vast right-wing conspiracy” is back: Yet as Democrats prepare for Hillary’spossible political comeback, so are Republicans and conservatives. Consequently, the GOP’s shift in focus shouldn’t be surprising, especially with 2016 on the horizon. But what’s striking is how sudden the transition seemed yesterday. Also striking is that it comes at a time when Clinton is enjoying her highest polling numbers, even among Republicans. In the April NBC/WSJ poll, 56% of respondents had a favorable view of her, including 23% of Republicans. (Compare that with Obama’s 8% among GOP respondents in the same poll.) Make no mistake: That Republican number is going to change for Clinton if she runs for president. So mark May 8, 2013 on your political calendars. That’s the date when Republican Party returned to what was its favorite pastime for a good part of the last 16 years (from 1992 to 2008): going after the Clintons. Folks, the “vast right-wing conspiracy” is back…

*** Deep in the heart of Texas: Turning from yesterday’s Benghazi hearing to today’s top political event… President Obama heads to Austin, TX to kick off his new “Middle Class Jobs and Opportunity Tour.” Per a White House official, the president today will announce launching a promise he made in his State of the Union to establish “three new Manufacturing Innovation Institutes, which are partnerships among business, universities and community colleges, and government to develop and building manufacturing technology.” Obama also will call upon Congress “to take action on his proposal to create a one-time $1 billion investment to create a network of 15 manufacturing innovation institutes across the country.” As the AP wrote earlier this week, “President Barack Obama is launching a series of quick jaunts around the country to remind Americans he’s still got jobs and the economy on his mind.” As our own recent NBC/WSJ poll showed, the public seems frustrated that Washington isn’t focused on the economy anymore. The White House is attempting to respond to that. We’ll see if they can sustain the effort -- something they’ve been unable to do before. Here’s Obama’s schedule today in Austin: He delivers remarks at Manor New Technology High School at 2:05 pm ET, and then he speaks at Applied Materials Inc. at 5:40 pm ET. 

*** Census: African Americans had a higher turnout rate than whites did in ‘12: With Obama today in Texas -- where whites make up a minority of all residents -- perhaps it’s only fitting to relay this U.S. Census data from 2012: “About two in three eligible blacks (66.2 percent) voted in the 2012 presidential election, higher than the 64.1 percent of non-Hispanic whites who did so… This marks the first time that blacks have voted at a higher rate than whites since the Census Bureau started publishing statistics on voting by the eligible citizen population in 1996.” The New York Times has more on this data: “The overall turnout rate nationwide was 61.8 percent in 2012, a decline from 63.6 percent four years earlier. Researchers cautioned that their estimates might overstate how many people voted across all categories, because they are based on surveys in which people were asked whether they had voted — a ‘socially desirable’ activity. Some researchers cautioned against treating 2012 as a watershed moment for the black vote. For example, Michael P. McDonald, an associate professor at George Mason University — using the same data but with a slightly different calculation — determined that black voters first turned out at a higher rate than whites in 2008.”

*** Let the editing of the immigration bill begin! The Senate Judiciary Committee today begins marking up the “Gang of Eight” bipartisan immigration bill. NBC’s Carrie Dann: “With the Gang of Eight’s immigration measure coming under the legislative magnifying glass this week, senators on a key committee are sharpening their red pencils in preparation to edit the 844-page bill. The 18 members of the Senate Judiciary Committee have proposed 300 amendments to the legislation, ranging from protections for gay couples, to border-security fixes, to efforts to dismantle the bill’s central goal of creating a path to citizenship for undocumented immigrants.” More Dann: “While observers do not expect that the bill willundergo dramatic changes in the committee process -- with bipartisan proponents of reform on the panel likely to stick together to resist substantial changes to their core legislation -- the high-profile debate is sure to elevate the often-dull ‘markup’ process to must-see TV for anyone with a dog in the immigration fight.”

*** GOP brand -- is it still struggling or improving? After the 2012 election, the Republican National Committee embarked on a soul-searching mission to see what was wrong and deliver recommendations for how to fix them. The result was a 97-page reportwith suggestions on issues ranging from women, Hispanics, blacks, Asians, gays, and young voters. Yet beyond that report – and besides about half of the Republican Party working to pass comprehensive immigration reform – how is that re-branding effort going? Well, there are mixed numbers. Yesterday, our NBC/Marist poll found the Republican Party’s fav/unfav rating at 37%-53% among registered voters in Virginia – a state Republicans need to win in future presidential contests. Also yesterday, a Pew poll found respondents blaming Republicans by 20 points (42%-22%) for failing to better work with President Obama on key issues. On the other hand, the Pew poll showed the Republican Party either even or slightly ahead of Democrats on top issues like guns (GOP 42%, Dems 39%), the economy (GOP 42%, Dems 38%), and immigration (GOP 38%, Dems 38%).

*** Democrat enters SD SEN race, but it’s not a top-tier candidate: So the first Democrat has announced he’s running in South Dakota’s open Senate contest: two-time Housecandidate Rick Weiland. The Hill: “According to the Argus Leader, Weiland already has the support of his former boss, former Senate Majority Leader Tom Daschle (D). The two spoke prior to Weiland's announcement and, Daschle said, ‘I encouraged him with great enthusiasm.’” Weiland told the paper that he had also spoken with U.S. Attorney Brendan Johnson (D) — son of retiring Sen. Tim Johnson (D) — before announcing his plans, and Johnson had indicated he was unlikely to enter the race. ‘He’s focused on his job. I wouldn’t be here if I didn’t feel that Brendan (wasn’t) going to get into this race,’ Weiland said.” The Democratic Senatorial Campaign Committee says that this DOES NOT mean that former Rep. Stephanie Herseth Sandlin (D-SD) is passing on the race. But if Weiland is the only Dem candidate, it’s hard to think that Democrats will have a puncher’s chance in South Dakota in 2014.

*** Democrats on defense: And speaking of the 2014 Senate races, MSNBC’s Jessica Taylor looks at the seats Democrats have to defend to hold on to the majority.

Click here to sign up for First Read emails.
Text FIRST to 622639, to sign up for First Read alerts to your mobile phone.
Check us out on Facebook and also on Twitter. Follow us @chucktodd, @mmurraypolitics, @DomenicoNBC, @brookebrower

This story was originally published on Thu May 9, 2013 9:06 AM EDT

NBC/Marist poll shows it’s neck and neck in Virginia… McAuliffe 43%, Cuccinelli 41% among registered voters… Cuccinelli 45%, McAuliffe 42% among likely voters… Good news for McAuliffe: It’s early, he has room to grow, and the GOP’s fav/unfav is way upside down in the state… The bad news for him: The poll doesn’t show Cuccinelli with an ideological problem just yet… Voters are relatively down on the VA GOV field, but are upbeat about the state’s direction… Looking ahead to 2016 in Virginia: Hillary tops McDonnell, while McDonnell beats Biden… Separate NBC/Marist poll shows Christie crushing Buono, 60%-28% among registered New Jersey voters… Looking ahead to 2016, Hillary is ahead of Christie, but the New Jersey governor leads Biden… From Appalachian Trail to Comeback Trail: Sanford beats Colbert Busch, 54%-45%... And House committee holds Benghazi hearing at 11:30 am ET.

*** Neck and neck in Virginia: Six months out until Virginia’s gubernatorial contest, Democrat Terry McAuliffe and Republican Ken Cuccinelli are locked in a close contest, according to a new NBC News/Marist poll. McAuliffe, the former Democratic National Committee chairman, gets the support of 43% of registered voters and Cuccinelli, the state’s attorney general, gets 41%; 16% say they are undecided. That’s a different result from a recent Washington Post poll of the race, which had the Republican leading by five percentage points. But a deeper look in this NBC/Marist survey, and it’s clear Cuccinelli has a slight advantage. It starts with intensity: 53% of Cuccinelli backers strongly support him, versus 47% who express similar support for McAuliffe. What’s more, among likely voters -- not always the best way to measure a contest this far out -- Cuccinelli has a slight edge over McAuliffe, 45%-42%. The race also features a clear gender gap, with McAuliffe leading among female registered voters (50%-34%) and Cuccinelli ahead with men (49%-34%).

Patrick Kane / AP

Ken Cuccinelli, Republican candidate for governor of Virginia and Virginia attorney general, speaks during the 65th Annual Shad Planking Wednesday, April 17, 2013 at the Wakefield Sportsmen's Club in Wakefield, Va.

*** Good news, bad news: The good news for McAuliffe is that he has plenty of room to grow (44% of voters say they’re unsure/never heard of him, compared with 32% who say that about Cuccinelli). And the Republican Party is a potential drag for Cuccinelli: The GOP has a 37%-53% fav/unfav rating in the state, versus the Democratic Party’s 44%-46% score. Yet so far, before any negative advertising begins, the poll doesn’t show the party dragging Cuccinelli down -- his fav/unfav is 42%-27%. In addition, despite what some opinion leaders might believe, Cuccinelli doesn’t have an ideological problem right now, either. Per the poll, 27% say he’s too conservative, but a plurality of 39% think his ideology is just right. By comparison, 28% see McAuliffe as too liberal, and 33% say he’s just right. And the two men essentially run even on candidate-quality questions, although Cuccinelli has a slight edge on some of them, including ones where Democrats usually outperform Republicans.

-- Who better understands people like yourself? (Cuccinelli 34%, McAuliffe 30%.)
-- Who do you trust more to do what’s best for Virginia? (Cuccinelli 39%, McAuliffe 33%.)
-- Who is closer to you on social issues? (Cuccinelli 33%, McAuliffe 31%.)
-- Who cares more about the middle class? (McAuliffe 31%, Cuccinelli 30%.)
-- Who shares your values? (Cuccinelli 35%, McAuliffe 29%.)

*** Down on the gubernatorial field but upbeat on the state’s direction: Strikingly (and perhaps not surprisingly), only 52% say they are satisfied with the field of gubernatorial candidates in Virginia. That’s compared with 61% who say that it in New Jersey (more on that gubernatorial contest down below). That said, all the state’s politicians are pretty popular. Republican Gov. Bob McDonnell’s approval rating is at 61% (what scandal?); Cuccinelli’s approval rating as attorney general is at 51%; and President Obama’s approval in the state is at an equal 51%. What’s more, if McDonnell were allowed to run for re-election, he’d lead McAuliffe by 15 points, 51%-36%. And a whopping 61% believe the state is headed in the right direction. Bottom line: The state is in good shape, and the Cuccinelli-McAuliffe contest could largely come down to which candidate can do a better job of selling that he would follow the Warner-Kaine-McDonnell path -- the conservative attorney general or the former DNC chair? It’s clear voters don’t really want change. It’s why when you look at this survey, everything points to the GOP holding the slight advantage as the party in power.

*** Looking ahead to 2016: And our NBC/Marist poll has some fun 2016 numbers to chew on when it comes to Virginia. In a hypothetical matchup, Hillary Clinton leads McDonnell in the state by 11 points, 52%-41%. Let those numbers sink in -- despite McDonnell’s 61% approval rating, he trails Clinton by double digits. However, in a hypothetical contest against Vice President Biden, McDonnell leads, 49%-42%. That said, nearly six-in-10 (58%) don’t want McDonnell to run for president. The NBC/Marist poll of Virginia was conducted April 28-May 2 of 1,095 registered voters (margin of error of plus-minus 3.0 percentage points) and 692 likely voters (plus-minus 3.7 percentage points).

*** In New Jersey, Christie is crushing his Dem opponent: In this year’s other gubernatorial contest -- in New Jersey -- Republican Gov. Chris Christie leads his Democratic challenger Barbara Buono by more than 30 points among registered voters, 60%-28%, according to a separate NBC/Marist poll. Strikingly, 42% of Obama voters are supporting the incumbent governor. What’s more, 69% approve of Christie’s job performance, and 82% back his handling of the aftermath of Hurricane Sandy. Meanwhile, 56% of registered voters approve of President Obama’s job in the state, and 46% approve of Sen. Bob Menendez’s (D-NJ) job.

*** Christie and his party, and Christie and 2016: The poll also explains why Christie is disagreeing with his national party some of the time. The GOP’s fav/unfav in the survey is 34%-59%, versus the Democratic Party’s 50%- 43% score. Yet despite Christie’s sterling numbers in this political environment, Hillary Clinton tops him in a hypothetical 2016 contest in New Jersey, 52%-41%. But Christie beats Biden by pretty much the same margin, 51%-40%. That said, 55% of registered voters in New Jersey don’t want their governor to run for president. The NBC/Marist poll of New Jersey was conducted April 28-May 2 of 1,080 registered voters, and it has margin of error of plus-minus 3.0 percentage points.

*** From Appalachian Trail to Comeback Trail: Turning from future contests to last night’s contest, former South Carolina Gov. Mark Sanford (R) beat Elizabeth Colbert Busch (D) in the special congressional election in South Carolina, 54%-45%.. MSNBC’s Jessica Taylor put it well: Sanford’s political career since ’09 has had plenty of ups and down -- “more ups and down than the mountains of the Appalachian Trail.” And his victory last night represented one of the ups. Interestingly, Sanford now comes to Congress owing nobody, and he has a bully pulpit at his disposal if he wants to use it. Yet the biggest takeaway from last night is that in today’s political climate, ideology trumps all. You could be a disgraced politician, and you could have been fined for breaking state ethics rules. But as long as you belong to the right political party in your state or district, you’re likely going to win. That said, Democrats are certainly trying to use this silver lining after their defeat: “House Republicans’ outreach to women voters now has Mark Sanford as the face. Republicans now have to defend him and stand with him until Election Day,” DCCC Chair Steve Israel said in a statement last night.

*** House committee holds Benghazi hearing: The final story we’re watching is today’s Benghazi hearing before the House Oversight and Government Reform Committee, which takes place at 11:30 am ET. The Washington Post: “Republican lawmakers, who have spent months seeking to tie President Obama to last year’s deadly attack on the U.S. diplomatic mission in Benghazi, are increasingly focusing their probe on a new target: former secretary of state Hillary Rodham Clinton. The GOP-led investigation of the Sept. 11, 2012, assaults that killed U.S. Ambassador J. Christopher Stevens and three others now centers heavily on the State Department and whether officials there deliberately misled the public about the nature of the assault.”

Click here to sign up for First Read emails.
Text FIRST to 622639, to sign up for First Read alerts to your mobile phone.
Check us out on Facebook and also on Twitter. Follow us @chucktodd, @mmurraypolitics, @DomenicoNBC, @brookebrower

President Barack Obama said Tuesday that he has “no tolerance” for sexual assault in the military, comments made in the wake of a new Pentagon report showing the instances of such crimes have spiked since 2010. 

The president said he had spoken today with Defense Secretary Chuck Hagel to urge him to “exponentially step up” efforts to identify suspects in assaults, and aggressively prosecute those cases. 

“The bottom line is: I have no tolerance for this,” Obama said at a press conference following his meeting with South Korean President Park Geun-hye. 

‘I expect consequences,” Obama added. “So I don’t just want more speeches or awareness programs or training, but ultimately folks look the other way. If we find out somebody’s engaging in this, they’ve got to be held accountable – prosecuted, stripped of their positions, court martialed, fired, dishonorably discharged. Period.”

Related: Military sees sharp increase in sex assault cases

The Pentagon released startling new statistics on Tuesday showing that sexual assaults in the military rose by 35 percent since 2010. The troubling report was compounded by news that an Air Force officer in charge of the branch’s sexual assault prevention program was arrested and charged with sexual assault this past weekend. 

“For those who are in uniform who’ve experience sexual assault, I want them to hear directly from their commander in chief that I’ve got their backs,” the president said. “I will support them. And we’re not going to tolerate this stuff, and there will be accountability.”

The new report has already prompted new questions from lawmakers on Capitol Hill, who have pointedly asked military leaders how such a situation was allowed to escalate. 

Kevin Lamarque / Reuters

President Barack Obama faces a news conference in the East Room of the White House, May 7, 2013.

The underlying purpose, though, of today’s visit by Park was to reaffirm an alliance between the U.S. and South Korea in the wake of increased saber-rattling by the North Korean regime and its nuclear program. North Korea removed two ballistic missiles from launch pads and downgraded their military’s readiness status following weeks of public warnings about its ability to respond to threats by the U.S. or South Korea. 

Obama warned that such provocative action would lead to a “dead end” for the North Korean regime. But he told the nation’s young leader, Kim Jong-Un, that it was not yet too late to reverse course. 

“President Park and myself very much share the view that we are going to maintain a strong deterrent capability – that we’re not going to reward provocative behavior,” Obama said. “But we remain open to the prospect of North Korea taking a peaceful path of de-nuclearization, abiding by international commitments, rejoining the international community and seeing a gradual progression in which both security and prosperity for the people of North Korea can be achieved.”

This story was originally published on Tue May 7, 2013 6:15 PM EDT

The “Seinfeld” special election in SC… Sanford vs. Colbert Busch is entertaining, but it means absolutely nothing for 2014 or 2016… What will decide the close race: GOP and African-American turnout… Polls close at 7:00 pm ET… A sign for 2016? Chris Christie has weight surgery… When will the budget negotiations truly begin?... Republicans vs. Republicans on immigration… Democrats vs. Democrats on guns… And Benghazi surfaces again.

*** The “Seinfeld” special election: On the one hand, you couldn’t dream of a more entertaining and colorful special congressional election featuring a disgraced politician (Republican former South Carolina Gov. Mark Sanford) and the sister of comedian Stephen Colbert (Democrat Elizabeth Colbert Busch). On the other hand, it’s a race that appears to signify, well, nothing, especially as it relates to 2014 and 2016. If Sanford wins -- in a district where Mitt Romney beat President Obama by 18 percentage points, 58%-40% -- it will be due simply to the district’s GOP tilt. And if Colbert Bush wins, it will be due simply to Sanford’s flaws and past baggage. As political observer Charlie Cook writes, “If Sanford wins by any kind of margin, it means that Republican voters simply held their noses and voted for him anyway. If Colbert Busch wins, it most likely means that a lot of Republicans chose to stay home rather than vote for either a candidate whom they thoroughly disapprove of or one with whom they thoroughly disagree.” Folks, this is the “Seinfeld” special election: It’s entertaining as heck, but it means absolutely nothing.

*** The two factors to watch: That said, the toss-up election hinges on two things. One, do Republicans and conservative voters turn out? If they do, Sanford is going to win; if they don’t, he’ll lose. Two, do African-American voters show up? “In the 2010 general election, African-American participation was about 18%. If it's that strong Tuesday, Colbert-Bush may win,” longtime GOP political consultant Richard Quinn told MSNBC’s Jessica Taylor. Polls close at 7:00 pm ET, and the congressional contest is to replace Republican Tim Scott, whom Gov. Nikki Haley (R) appointed to serve in the U.S. Senate.

Randall Hill / Reuters

Former South Carolina Governor Mark Sanford makes a point to the moderators during a debate with Democrat Elizabeth Colbert Busch in Charleston, S.C. April 29, 2013.

*** Sanford’s ups and downs: As MSNBC’s Taylor points out, Sanford’s political career “has had more ups and downs than the mountains of the Appalachian Trail.” Just consider: He was a one-time conservative star (and potential 2012 presidential candidate) bucking the Obama administration on the stimulus. Then he disappeared from the state in 2009, telling his staff he was hiking the Appalachian Trail -- only to be discovered that he was in Argentina with his mistress, whom he later called his “soul mate.” Sanford left office after paying an ethics fine for state travel. But a year later, his protégé -- Nikki Haley -- became governor. Then this year in 2013, he ran for his old House seat, winning the GOP run-off for the nomination. Afterwards, more adversity surfaced: An AP report showed that his ex-wife, Jenny Sanford, accused him of trespassing. Now? He finds himself in a toss-up contest. Later tonight, we’ll find out if Sanford truly revived his political career or if it’s officially over.

*** Christie weighing his options? New Jersey Gov. Chris Christie (R), who’s  up for re-election this year, told the New York Post that he secretly had "lap-band stomach surgery" to lose weight. From the article: "He told The Post he was thinking of his four kids and how it was time to start improving his health when he decided to have the procedure. 'I've struggled with this issue for 20 years,' he said. 'For me, this is about turning 50 and looking at my children and wanting to be there for them.'  He also insisted that, contrary to what observers may say, the effort to slim down was not motivated by thoughts of a presidential bid. 'It's so much more important than that,' he said." The Post adds that Christie checked into a surgery center on Feb. 16 -- under a false name -- to undergo the procedure.  If this isn’t a sign he’s thinking about running for president, we don’t know what is. Remember, Christie had previously said that his health was pretty good… In fact, he called himself one of the healthiest fat guys in the country. So if this is for health reasons, then he wasn’t totally forthright before. For what it’s worth, we know the issue of his weight has been discussed with him by supporters and consultants as a political issue, and that it’s something he needed to deal with in some form if he ever did decide to run for national office.

*** When will the budget negotiations truly begin? Yesterday, there were two interesting moving parts as it relates to budget debate. The first: President Obama golfed with two Senate Republicans (retiring Sen. Saxby Chambliss and Sen. Bob Corker) who are viewed as POTENTIAL partners on a possible budget deal. The second development: Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid, frustrated by Sen. Ted Cruz’s (R-TX) objection to go to a House-Senate conference on the budget, called the freshman senator “a schoolyard bully,” Politico reports. “‘My friend from Texas is like the schoolyard bully,’ Reid said. ‘He pushes everybody around and is losing, and instead of playing the game according to the rules, he not only takes the ball home with him but changes the rules. That way no one wins except the bully who tries to indicate to people he has won. We’re asking Republicans to play by the rules and let us go to conference.’” And these two moving parts raise this question: When do the budget negotiations, if they’re ever going to happen, begin? At a conference committee? (Republicans, despite their demand for regular order, appear to be resisting that. Not only on the Senate side, but House Republicans haven’t exactly been aggressive in trying to get the conference started.) So does that mean there will be formal talks outside of GOP leadership? That’s the White House hope. They have targeted the Georgia and Tennessee GOP senators (Isakson, Chambliss, Corker and Alexander) as credible negotiating partners. If the negotiations are going to occur, they need to start taking place soon. It’s now May.  

*** Republicans vs. Republicans on immigration: Immigration has become a political battle … solely on the right. NBC’s Carrie Dann: “A new study from the conservative Heritage Foundation estimates that granting a path to citizenship for illegal immigrants will cost US taxpayers at least $6.3 trillion. Heritage Foundation scholar Robert Rector co-authored the long-anticipated study, which is sure to be cited frequently by foes of the immigration reform effort as lawmakers take up legislation to overhaul the nation’s system. But the study also drew swift criticism from Republicans supporting the reform effort, who called the Heritage Foundation's estimate politicized, exaggerated and flawed in its methodology.” In fact, check out this comment from former Mississippi Gov. Haley Barbour (R): “The Heritage Foundation document is a political document; it’s not a very serious analysis… This study is designed to try to scare conservative Republicans into thinking the cost here is going to be so gigantic that you can’t possibly be for it.”

*** Democrats vs. Democrats on guns: Is Mayors Against Illegal Guns turning into the Club for Growth, or as First Read called them back in 2009, The Club for (Democratic) Growth? Politico reports that Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid’s staff has tried to persuade the Bloomberg-backed group not to target vulnerable Democrats in red states on guns because it could lead to a shrinking majority or make it easier for a Republican takeover of the Senate. “It didn’t work,” Politico notes. “Ads from the Bloomberg-funded Mayors Against Illegal Guns are going up soon in Alaska, Arkansas and North Dakota — three states with Democratic senators who broke with the White House on last month’s background checks vote.”

*** Benghazi surfaces again: And speaking of political battles, the GOP-led House Oversight and Government Reform Committee will be holding a hearing on the Benghazi attack on Wednesday. And here’s the news that has already leaked out: “A small team of Special Forces operatives was ready to fly from Tripoli to Benghazi last year after Libyan insurgents attacked the U.S. mission there, but was told it was not authorized to board the flight by regional military commanders, according to a career State Department official scheduled to testify before Congress on Wednesday,” per NBC’s Lisa Myers. This career State Department official -- Gregory Hicks -- seems like a credible witness (though he’s represented by high-powered GOP lawyers Joseph diGenova and Victoria Toensing). The thing to watch on Wednesday is whether Hicks’ testimony reveals that all the attention on Benghazi is MORE than a politically motivated investigation into not only the Obama White House but also the Hillary Clinton-led State Department. At a minimum, one thing this investigation has revealed is that there was an attempt to change the initial talking points regarding what happened. Question now is who was pushing for this change at the time? Was it the White House or was it State? Seems like there is more evidence that this was a bigger issue for State than for the White House. Of course, within a few days, the talking points became out of date and moot.

Click here to sign up for First Read emails.
Text FIRST to 622639, to sign up for First Read alerts to your mobile phone.
Check us out on Facebook and also on Twitter. Follow us @chucktodd, @mmurraypolitics, @DomenicoNBC, @brookebrower

President Barack Obama extended his recent effort to broaden outreach to Congress with a round of golf on Monday – two Republicans, and one Democrat.

Obama hit the links with Sens. Saxby Chambliss, R-Ga., Bob Corker, R-Tenn., and Mark Udall, D-Colo.at Andrews Air Force Base, the site of the president’s occasional weekend rounds of golf.

The foursome comes amid a broader attempt by the White House to reach out to members of Congress, particularly Republican senators. The president has hosted several private dinners with senators, Democratic and Republican alike, in hopes of building a better relationship with Congress.

While Obama typically golfs with a group of White House aides considered to be friends of the president, he’s been known to mix business with pleasure before. He’s golfed with former President Bill Clinton, and hit the links with House Speaker John Boehner, R-Ohio, during the height of a summer 2011 showdown between the two men regarding the debt ceiling. 

Coincidentally, two of the invitees to today’s matchup are considered some of the best golfers in Congress. Udall has a handicap of 2, according to Golf Digest, while Corker has a handicap of 2.1.

Obama’s weekend golf excursions, though, have also made him the butt of Republicans’ jokes about the frequency with which the president golfs. 

Monday’s outing was a rare weekday foray for Obama; the weather in Washington was hardly inviting, either, with overcast crowds and evening showers in the forecast.

And the event showed Lady Luck to be a Republican or the day: Chambliss hit a hole-in-one.

"It was number 11 on the South Course, and 156 yards, and I hit a choked down five iron," he said later. "It was pretty special. the ball actually flew the route I wanted it to go. I didn't skull it."

This story was originally published on Mon May 6, 2013 12:33 PM EDT

As the Obama administration grapples with evidence that chemical weapons may have been used in conflict-torn Syria, officials on both sides of the political aisle urged President Barack Obama Sunday to move towards arming rebels against Syrian president Bashar al-Assad, a position once rejected by a White House reluctant to commit to military involvement in the rebellion.  

But lawmakers also warned that U.S. forces must be careful that weapons do not fall into the hands of radical Islamist groups.  

"Our problem in who to supply is that some of these groups are strong Islamists, Al Qaeda and others," Senate Judiciary Chairman Patrick Leahy said on NBC's Meet the Press. "And we've seen -- like in Libya, Egypt and elsewhere -- that Islamists tend to get the upper hand if they get in there."

"If we know the right people to get them, my guess is we'll get [weapons] to them," he added.

Former House Homeland Security chair Rep. Peter King, a Republican, similarly warned on CNN's State of the Union program that Al Qaeda has "a lot of control within the rebel movement."

"Obviously Assad is evil, and everyone’s interested he go," King said. "But if we are going to arm the rebels, we have to make sure that those arms are not going to end up in the position of Al Qaeda supporters, nor at the end game is Al Qaeda going to be in a position to take over this movement.”

Rep. Tom Cotton, a Republican member of the House Foreign Affairs Committee, expressed optimism on NBC's Meet the Press that "we are moving closer to arming the reform-minded pro-Western rebels."

"This is something that should have been done many months ago," he added, also voicing support for a no-fly zone using aircraft and naval gunfire. 

Former Rep. Jane Harman, who now serves as the head of the Woodrow Wilson International Center for Scholars, told NBC's David Gregory that there's "no chance" that the United States will have "boots on the ground" in Syria but that the complexities of the region's humanitarian and security issues must be addressed  with support for the rebels. 

"This is a big, escalated problem," Harman added. "I wish we had acted sooner."

Obama said last August that the use of chemical weapons in Syria would be a "red line" that - if crossed - would "change my calculus" on military intervention in the region.

“We have been very clear to the Assad regime but also to other players on the ground that a red line for us is [if] we start seeing a whole bunch of weapons moving around or being utilized," the president said at the time. 

A new report Sunday from the New York Times indicated that some Obama advisers were taken aback by that "unscripted" comment.

This story was originally published on Sun May 5, 2013 10:53 AM EDT