March 04--There are many words to describe last night's Republican presidential primary debate. According to a focus group run by GOP pollster Frank Luntz, the main words were: disgusting, embarrassing, childish and sophomoric.
But those aren't the words I took away from that two-hour conservative yell-splosion. No, what echoed in my head was something simpler and more profound: presidential penis test.
About 10 minutes into the debate, Donald Trump let his fellow candidates, the audience and all of America know that he has a big penis. He didn't elaborate, but the implication was that his penis is preposterously gigantic, quite possibly Mexican-border-wall sized.
Responding to Marco Rubio's past mockery of Trump's small hands -- and make no mistake, they are freakishly small -- the real estate mogul held up his mitts and said: "Look at those hands. Are they small hands? And he referred to my hands -- if they're small, something else must be small. I guarantee you there's no problem, I guarantee."
Boom! Finally we have a presidential candidate bold enough to highlight the importance that male genitalia size plays in leading the free world. I don't know about you, but I don't want a poorly endowed president with his penis on the button, potentially unable to launch our nuclear arsenal simply because his "little vice president" isn't up to the task.
I have no factual information to support this claim, but I'm absolutely certain that every American president throughout history has had a large penis. (They say Abraham Lincoln's required its own room, a part of the White House we still call "the Lincoln Bedroom.")
Also, a recent report claimed that Adolf Hitler had "a micro-penis." If that doesn't support this whole theory I don't know what will.
At the debate, as Trump tried desperately to make his mouse-like hands look larger, Rubio stretched his fingers out and displayed their considerable span.
It was a serious moment, one we can all be proud of, a scene that reflected the gravitas of our quadrennial presidential election. And it raised the question: Which candidate is telling "we the people" the truth?
Fingers, as most people know, are often referred to as "hand penises," so there's reason to believe hand size correlates with male endowment. However, while Trump has perversely shrunken phalanges, he still boasts of a mighty pants-presence.
So how do we separate fact from fiction and determine who has the largest Super PACkage?
It's simple: Each candidate needs to drop his pants and expose his Bill of Rights on live television.
It is sensible, fair and right, and it's clear the American people are ready for some honest campaign penis talk. Fox News host Bill O'Reilly said after the debate that people "chortled" about Trump's boast.
"He's running for president as a populist," O'Reilly argued, apparently implying that all populists enjoy talking about their enormous penises.
Since the GOP candidates and the cheering debate crowd made clear that genital heft is a crucial matter, the Democratic candidates will also be pressured to "release their tax returns," so to speak.
That immediately disqualifies Hillary Clinton, though she could re-enter the race by picking an impressively endowed running mate, like famous American pornographic actor Ron Jeremy. (Clinton/Jeremy 2016! Change You Can Bel ... OH MY GOD!)
Bernie Sanders also would be disqualified because his campaign followers have collective ownership of his penis and don't believe in genital exceptionalism.
So the Democrats don't matter. But we should still embrace this moment and encourage Trump, Rubio and the other Republican candidates to stand and deliver.
It's an idea that once would've sounded ridiculous. But after a leading presidential candidate defends the size of his penis during a nationally televised debate, even the ridiculous starts to sound reasonable.
rhuppke@tribpub.com
