Gail Collins, "The State of the Speeches": Beating a Dead Dog?

"Beating a dead dog"? Isn't the expression, "beating a dead horse"? Well, anyone familiar with Collins's running Seamus joke during the 2016 presidential election knows that "beating a dead dog" is correct in Collins's case.

In her latest New York Times op-ed entitled "The State of the Speeches" (http://www.nytimes.com/2014/01/16/opinion/collins-the-state-of-the-speeches.html?ref=gailcollins&_r=0), Gail Collins begins:

"Let’s discuss state of the state speeches.

No wait! Don’t go away! We can start with Chris Christie.

This week, Christie gave his annual address, and everybody was wondering what he’d say about the traffic-jam scandal. It is possible the crowd of cameras set some kind of state of the state record.

'Mistakes were clearly made,' Christie told the New Jersey Legislature. It’s been more than a week, and he still hasn’t managed to get himself out of the passive voice.

Then the governor quickly switched gears, and announced that “the state of our state is good.” He dropped the George Washington Bridge brouhaha and began calling for more spending on education and economic development, coupled with lower taxes. Most of the cameras quickly switched off."

Once again, Collins, who is the founder of the Bonbon School of Journalism, which is best practiced from a cushy sofa while simultaneously playing Candy Crush, is again bringing Christie's Fort Lee fiasco to the fore. Don't get me wrong: I have already taken the position that Christie should resign over this scandal, but doesn't Collins have anything else to write? Apparently not.

Moreover, if you are going to hold Christie accountable, isn't it also time to hold Hillary responsible for Benghazi? As reported by her own newspaper (http://www.nytimes.com/2014/01/16/world/middleeast/senate-report-finds-benghazi-attack-was-preventable.html?hp), the Senate has determined that "the attack 16 months ago that killed four Americans in Benghazi, Libya, could have been prevented, singling out the State Department for criticism for its failure to bolster security in response to intelligence warnings about a growing security crisis around the city."

Given these findings, should Hillary be ruled out as the Democratic presidential nominee in 2016? I would think so, but perhaps the hyper-partisan Bonbon School of Journalism doesn't brook such foolish questions.