From Term Limits to the 'National Enquirer,' the Crazy Election Gets Crazier

The Daily Beast is claiming that Donald Trump’s calling Tuesday for congressional term limits via a constitutional amendment is actually a not-so-covert swipe at House Speaker Paul Ryan.


If so, so what? Term limits is an idea whose time had come decades ago.

But there’s a problem. The federal bureaucracy — notably, these days, the State Department, the Justice Department and the FBI, but there are plenty more, including the IRS — are lifers causing more difficulties than the Congress, if such a thing were possible. And then there’s the mainstream media –lifers all — whose control over our culture dwarfs the government itself, as Trump himself knows very well.

No, if Donald wishes to “drain the swamp” of D.C., as he insisted in his Colorado speech, seemingly a warm-up for Wednesday’s debate of debates, he has a lot of work to do.  Actually, it would be a herculean task way beyond the compass of a single person, even a president, without a massive buy-in from the American public.  It will be interesting to see if Donald can get anything close to that, even though what he’s saying is logical.  Unfortunately, it’s not likely at this late date.

Not that there won’t be plenty for that American public to chew on, if they wish to open their minds (again not very likely but still…)

For the Bernie Sanders crowd, there’s the new WikiLeaks revelation that John “Loose Lips” Podesta called their hero a “doofus.”  That makes three “doofuses”(doofusim?) in my book:  Sanders for believing in socialism (surely Podesta’s intention as a good corporatist), Sanders’ fans for believing Bernie, and Podesta himself for being such a “doofus” as to put his contempt for Bernie in an email.  What is it with these Democrats? Don’t they realize how the Internet works? I thought Al Gore invented it. At least one Republican has the brains to keep his digital mouth shut.  I have to say I miss him.


But when it comes to keeping your mouth shut, one place that rarely does that is the National Enquirer , which is teeing up a salacious story on Hillary for Wednesday, via Drudge. Well, maybe not that salacious.  The news that Hillary goes both ways is not exactly a a mindblower at this point. Or even that she had an affair with the late Vince Foster.  Democrats don’t seem to care about the already obvious — that she’s a criminal.  Why bother to get upset by an illicit amour, even if it ends in a suicide?

Nevertheless, you can be sure they will be on the warpath against the “untrustworthy” supermarket rag Enquirer.  They prefer such responsible organs as the New York Times and the Washington Post.  Excuse me if I prefer the Enquirer — and not just because of their near Pulitzer Prize-winning scoop about the extra-curricular activities of John Edwards.  I know I’m not going to make friends with some of the Republican faithful by pointing out that Ted Cruz has yet to sue the Enquirer about his sexual japes. Will all this Hillary stuff net another near-Pulitzer for the king of the supermarkets?

Like everybody else, I’ll be watching closely, because, as we know, gossip trumps policy (pun intended) any day, especially in our puerile democracy.  Personally, I’ll be watching from Vegas where I’ll be covering the debate, most likely from the sports book at the Wynn. I understand you can place a bet on how many times Donald says “huge.” This time, I’m betting on zero — if he’s smart.


See you on the Strip.


Trending on PJ Media Videos

Join the conversation as a VIP Member