Despite what the Republicans want you to believe, meeting requests for additional security in Libya would NOT have saved Ambassador Steven's life.

Darrell Issa, the 2012 version of Cotton Mather.

Courtesy of The New York Times:  

In the weeks leading up to the attack last month on the American diplomatic mission in Benghazi, Libya, that killed Ambassador J. Christopher Stevens and three other Americans, diplomats on the ground sounded increasingly urgent alarms. In a stream of diplomatic cables, embassy security officers warned their superiors at the State Department of a worsening threat from Islamic extremists, and requested that the teams of military personnel and State Department security guards who were already on duty be kept in service. 

The requests were denied, but they were largely focused on extending the tours of security guards at the American Embassy in Tripoli — not at the diplomatic compound in Benghazi, 400 miles away. And State Department officials testified this week during a hearing by the House Oversight and Government Reform Committee that extending the tour of additional guards — a 16-member military security team — through mid-September would not have changed the bloody outcome because they were based in Tripoli, not Benghazi.

So there you have it. The case that the Republicans are making, which has compelled them to launch a Congressional with hunt, that if requests for additional security had been met, then Ambassador Stephens would still be alive, is simply bullshit.

The Republicans are using this incident in an attempt to make President Obama appear weak on defense.  (I guess being the Commander in Chief when Osama Bin Laden was brought to justice is not enough for these idiots.)  But what it demonstrates instead is that the Republicans are disgusting opportunists willing to use the death of an American ambassador for political gain.

I find is unbelievable that the American people cannot see through these transparent smear tactics.