There is a surplus of news every day — more than one can read or write about. I’m left with many questions at the end of a busy news week.

Here are some:

1.Why is Andrea Mitchell still covering the 2012 race? My colleague Erik Wemple aptly documented her use of a misleading video and her blatantly unfair introduction to a piece on Mitt Romney's comments about Wawa’s technology. She hasn’t explained what she did, let alone apologized. It is mystifying how her employer could regard her as an unbiased reporter at this point.

2.Why has the Obama campaign taken Vice President Joe Biden to an undisclosed location? By muzzling him, it’s taken away the most likable member of the administration. (Damning with faint praise, I know.)

3. W hy did President Obama bail out Attorney General Eric Holder with a flimsy executive-privilege claim? Not even generally sympathetic newspaper editorial boards buy it. From the Des Moines Register:

“There is more than a little irony in the Obama administration asserting ‘executive privilege’ to block Congress from access to internal documents shortly after the 40th anniversary of Watergate. Those with long memories may wonder when they will begin hearing words like ‘stonewall’ and questions of ‘what did he know and when did he know it?’ . . . Is the U.S. Justice Department deliberately concealing documents that would expose how early administration officials were aware of a disastrous program that put weapons in the hands of Mexican drug gangs? Congress has every right to demand to know how this ill-conceived project was allowed to happen and why it wasn’t throttled before the illegally obtained guns were used in, by one estimate, hundreds of murders in Mexico and the death of a U.S. Border Patrol agent.”

It seems the president took an awful big risk. It is always peculiar when the boss takes a hit for a subordinate. Holder has put his boss in jeopardy. Will Obama continue to take fire on his attorney general's behalf?

4. Why is Sen. Marco Rubio (R-Fla.) showing so little policy muscle on immigration? First he delays on his Dream Act, and then he says very little of substance to Hispanic leaders. (He said three separate times on immigration reform: “It’s complicated.”) He’s not been very impressive for the first time in his young Senate career. I wonder if it is staff failure or whether mounting a major policy initiative is out of his wheelhouse.

5. Why does Mitt Romney avoid talking about Obama’s executive imperialism (fake privileges, extra-constitutional rewriting of immigration law, all the czars)? Maybe no one is interested. I hope it’s not because he’s planning on pulling the same stunts if he gets elected. There is a good case to be made that Obama’s inability to work in collaboration with Republicans and his resort to these power grabs make it impossible to tackle big problems like entitlement reform. It seems like Romney should at least mention this.

6. Why is the White House so blasé about the collapse of its Iran policy? The talks have stalled. Sanctions haven’t worked. And Israel isn’t going to wait much longer. Other than leaking about the “Flame” program ( the joint U.S.-Israel cyber-attack on Iran’s nuclear program), the administration is curiously inert. The president and his advisers can’t possibly think no one will notice, can they?

7. Why is Jay Carney still the White House press secretary? He conveys no sense of authority and regularly gets his ears boxed by many of the White House reporters. I guess he must be the best they could get.