This is only a Preview!

You must Publish this diary to make this visible to the public,
or click 'Edit Diary' to make further changes first.

Posting a Diary Entry

Daily Kos welcomes blog articles from readers, known as diaries. The Intro section to a diary should be about three paragraphs long, and is required. The body section is optional, as is the poll, which can have 1 to 15 choices. Descriptive tags are also required to help others find your diary by subject; please don't use "cute" tags.

When you're ready, scroll down below the tags and click Save & Preview. You can edit your diary after it's published by clicking Edit Diary. Polls cannot be edited once they are published.

If this is your first time creating a Diary since the Ajax upgrade, before you enter any text below, please press Ctrl-F5 and then hold down the Shift Key and press your browser's Reload button to refresh its cache with the new script files.


  1. One diary daily maximum.
  2. Substantive diaries only. If you don't have at least three solid, original paragraphs, you should probably post a comment in an Open Thread.
  3. No repetitive diaries. Take a moment to ensure your topic hasn't been blogged (you can search for Stories and Diaries that already cover this topic), though fresh original analysis is always welcome.
  4. Use the "Body" textbox if your diary entry is longer than three paragraphs.
  5. Any images in your posts must be hosted by an approved image hosting service (one of: imageshack.us, photobucket.com, flickr.com, smugmug.com, allyoucanupload.com, picturetrail.com, mac.com, webshots.com, editgrid.com).
  6. Copying and pasting entire copyrighted works is prohibited. If you do quote something, keep it brief, always provide a link to the original source, and use the <blockquote> tags to clearly identify the quoted material. Violating this rule is grounds for immediate banning.
  7. Be civil. Do not "call out" other users by name in diary titles. Do not use profanity in diary titles. Don't write diaries whose main purpose is to deliberately inflame.
For the complete list of DailyKos diary guidelines, please click here.

Please begin with an informative title:

Beyond the sad deaths of four American, Benghazi has other lessons we should take from this tragic event. It is a metaphor for what is wrong with our Congressional politicians.


You must enter an Intro for your Diary Entry between 300 and 1150 characters long (that's approximately 50-175 words without any html or formatting markup).

The recent appearance of Secretary of State Hillary Clinton resurrected the issues surrounding the tragedy at Benghazi, and the deaths of four stalwart Americans. Well, this is not more commentary on the facts concerning the debacle – they have been vetted already. And the final details are yet to come. Additionally, Secretary Clinton needs no help in defending herself. This is more about how dysfunctional is our government, how disingenuous are our politicians, and how hypocritical are those in our Congress. Benghazi is a metaphor for each of these qualities.

First a bit of background. The dangers our diplomatic corps faces daily are well known, and have a well documented history. Congress should know them well. We have thousands of men and women who staff the more than 260 embassies, consulates, and missions we maintain in 180 separate countries.  Since the 1980 burning of the U.S. Embassy in Islamabad Pakistan, a total of 88 U.S. diplomatic personnel have died in the diplomatic service of the their country. Military personnel accounted for 23 and central intelligence personnel accounted for 14 more. But most these fatalities were in the U.S. Foreign Service, U.S. Agency for International Development, or staff from other departments and agencies assigned to U.S. embassies overseas. So, when it comes to funding the security of our diplomats, there should be no surprises.

Never the less, Congress, in its lack of wisdom, decided differently – and disingenuously as well. In 2009, House Republicans voted for an amendment to cut $1.2 billion from State operations, including funds for 300 more diplomatic security positions. Democrats enacted a budget of $1.803 billion for embassy security, construction and maintenance for fiscal 2010, when they still controlled the Senate and House. In fiscal year 2011, lawmakers shaved $128 million off of the administration's request for embassy security funding. After Republicans took control of the House and picked up six Senate seats, Congress reduced the enacted budget to $1.616 billion in fiscal 2011.

House Republicans drained off even more funds in fiscal year 2012 -- cutting back on the department's request by $331 million with a budget of $1.537 – well below what the administration had requested with added security proposals.

Again, last February, The Obama administration actually requested modest increases in funding for the State Department and USAID for fiscal 2013 when it released its budget. While the Congress doesn't divide up the accounts the same way as the administration, in an apples-to-apples comparison, the House Appropriations Committees' allocation for State and foreign operations for fiscal 2013, was a 12 percent cut from the administration's request, including a 14 percent cut to the administration's request for non-war related diplomatic and development activities such as embassy security.

So, what is Benghazi really about? As Secretary Clinton noted in her hearing, what happened in Benghazi is less important than what we will do in the future to secure and defend our diplomatic corp.  Money alone would not likely have saved the four American at Benghazi, but clearly more security is demanded in the future. That will take money. That will require more robust funding. That will take some honest introspection on the part of those who approve security appropriations, and much less excoriating of those who are attempting to provide that security.

Moreover, most Americans are tired of the politicizing of tragic events such as Benghazi. They are tired of  disingenuous members of Congress who would rather seek confrontations rather than develop mutually beneficial solutions. They are tired of seeing the hypocrisy that is rampant in congresspeople (of both parties) in recent years. And finally, they are tired of a Congress that is angry and dysfunctional rather than working in a collegial manner to push forward an agenda to make our country better. That should be the collateral lesson of Benghazi.

Extended (Optional)

Originally posted to myles spicer on Sat Jan 26, 2013 at 11:36 AM PST.

Also republished by Community Spotlight.

Your Email has been sent.