Cuts to embassy security don't just endanger the Libyan embassy. - Many others, Yemen for just one, are in dicey situ

Harry Reid's Democratic senate also voted to (sm) - Texan

They did not "pass out" Chevy Volts. The embassy... - sm

Were you there? Could they not have used their money - more wisely?

I agree. Who would have thought that - sm

This article explains it nicely. - SK1

What a bunch or bull! - backwards typist

"Was the refusal to provide more security caused by budget cuts to embassy security? “No, sir,” Charlene Lamb, the Deputy Assistant Secretary of State for International Programs"

Speaking before the Republican-controlled House Oversight Committee, Under Secretary of State for Management Patrick Kennedy responded to insinuations that the State Department was responsible for a lack of preparedness ahead of the Benghazi consulate attack.

“We regularly assess risk and resource allocation, a process involving the considered judgments of experienced professionals on the ground and in Washington, using the best available information,” Kennedy said.

The assault on the U.S. compound was “an unprecedented attack by dozens of heavily armed men,” Kennedy said.

His colleague, Deputy Assistant Secretary of State for International Programs Charlene Lamb, added that the state department “had the correct number of assets in Benghazi at the time,” drawing a sharp rebuke from committee chairman Rep. Darrell Issa, R-California.

“To start off by saying you had the correct number, and our ambassador and three other individuals are dead, and people are in the hospital recovering because it only took moments to breach that facility somehow doesn’t seem to ring true to the American people,” Issa said.

But, as Josh Rogin detailed, the most explosive moments came when State Department officials were grilled as to why blame was placed on the anti-Muslim film:

[Secretary of State for Management Patrick] Kennedy and Lamb were also pressed several times to explain why senior officials including U.N. Ambassador Susan Rice made statements in the days after the attack describing it as a reaction to an anti-Islam video, considering that the State Department was monitoring the events that night in real time.

Kennedy suggested that another government agency was to blame.

“There were reports that we received that there were protests, and I would not go any further than that,” Kennedy said, citing a reluctance to go into detail in open session. Other officials, including Rice, have said that they based their comments on the intelligence community’s initial, albeit caveated, assessment.

But Wood testified that there was no way anyone who was following the events in real time could conclude the attacks were anything but a terrorist attack.

“It was instantly recognizable as a terrorist attack. We almost expected the attack to come. It was a matter of time,” [Lt. Colonel Andrew]Wood said. “[Al Qaeda’s] presence grows there every day. They are certainly more established there than we are.”

At times, Wood appeared to be the only competent and honest witness there, confessing Al Qaeda is growing in Libya and is more established than the U.S. So much for the chest-thumping about our ”success” in “leading from behind” in the Libyan civil war. And finally, the Democratic talking point that the embassy attack was brought about by funding cuts championed by Republicans was entirely undone when Lamb said it had nothing to do with funding.

The Overseas Contingency Operations budget included increases in embassy security. The bill with the decrease, coupled with the addition of OCO increase, created a net increase in Embassy security spending of $33 million. 

Nice try to pin this one on Republicans, it still boils down to ignoring the warning signs then lying to cover it up after 4 Americans were needlessly slaughtered.