Not since 1998 and Monica Lewinsky's blue dress have the media been so compelled to write about a bodily fluid they would rather not write about.
Back then, it was... Well, can we say it? Hey, c'mon, it's 2015; we can say it straight out: The stain on the dress, which provided the physical evidence that Bill Clinton had lied about his affair, was Clinton's baby gravy. His man seed. His love potion.
Today the media must talk about Fox News' Megyn Kelly and her... Again we hesitate, but we must be candid and adult. It is her aunt Flo. Her cousin Red. Her Shark Week.
These terms are common parlance, but to me, they are far ickier (another scientific term) than just saying that it was Clinton's semen on Lewinsky's dress and Kelly's menstrual blood that Donald Trump may or may not have been speaking about after the Republican debate in Cleveland on Thursday.
Trump said of Kelly on CNN on Friday, "You could see there was blood coming out of her eyes, blood coming out of her wherever."
Her "wherever," many in the news media decided, was her vagina. And the blood, therefore, was menstrual blood, which also contains mucosal tissue. Menstruation is a normal bodily function for approximately half the planet's population from puberty to menopause.
But is that what Trump meant? Erick Erickson, a right-wing blogger, was so disgusted by Trump's statement that he rescinded his invitation for Trump to speak at Erickson's conference over the weekend.
"It is unfortunate to have to disinvite him. But I just don't want someone on stage who gets a hostile question from a lady and his first inclination is to imply it was hormonal," Erickson wrote.
Erickson, as some have noted, has quite a record of being a sleaze ball himself when it comes to women. According to my crack research staff (Wikipedia), "Erickson has tweeted controversial remarks regarding feminists, including (in response to a 2010 Super Bowl ad) the following: 'That's what the feminazis were enraged over? Seriously?!? Wow. That's what being too ugly to get a date does to your brain' and 'Turned on twitter today and there was a barrage of angry feminists upset with me telling them to get in the kitchen and learn to cook'; 'Good thing I didn't suggest the feminists ... you know ... shave.'"
One would think the other Republican candidates for president would refuse to appear at a conference organized by Erickson. But Jeb Bush, Mike Huckabee, Scott Walker, Ted Cruz, Chris Christie, Marco Rubio, Bobby Jindal, Rick Perry and Carly Fiorina had no trouble attending and kissing Erickson's ring.
Trump claimed he was misunderstood. "Only a deviant would think I was saying anything about blood somewhere other than her eyes or her nose," he said. He later added "ears" when he talked to George Stephanopoulos: "I was referring to nose, ears. They're very common statements."
"Very common statements"? Where? Transylvania?
The New York Times was not buying it. It stated flatly in the lead paragraph of its front-page news story, "Trump's suggestion that a Fox News journalist had questioned him forcefully at the Republican presidential debate because she was menstruating cost him a speaking slot Saturday night."
Even Rupert Murdoch, who owns Fox News, was growing a little weary of Trump and tweeted a few hours after the debate: "Friend Donald has to learn this is public life."
But after Trump heard that the debate had earned astronomical ratings, he felt justified in doing what he had done. People must love what he says. Why else would they watch him?
"Twenty-four million people weren't there to watch Carly Fiorina or Jeb Bush," Trump crowed. "I get big crowds. I get ratings. They call me the ratings machine."
It is easy to dismiss Trump as a gasbag whose gas will either rush out quickly this week or leak out slowly in the weeks and months ahead.
But there is a difference between criticizing Trump and being condescending to those who wish to hear him.
Alex Castellanos, a Republican political consultant who has worked in the past for Jeb Bush, recently wrote in the conservative Independent Journal Review, "Trump's core supporters are an angry mob of peasants with glazed, unblinking eyes."
"Peasants"? Really? I have seen the poor and the disheartened and the enraged in this country and those who think the American dream has been stolen from them and are tempted to turn to false prophets to get it back.
But I have never seen an American peasant.
Castellanos continued: "Trump may keep a good hunk of his 'mad-as-hell' base, but the field will eventually shrink and other candidates will grow. The Donald won't. ... The end of the story has now been written: The populist Trump fire burning through the GOP is now contained."
Maybe. Nobody I know thinks Trump can win the nomination. But it could be a long, mean and nasty fight, especially when the Republican elites sneer at Trump's supporters.
Figuratively speaking, punches will be thrown. And there will be blood.
Roger Simon is Politico's chief political columnist. His new e-book, "Reckoning: Campaign 2012 and the Fight for the Soul of America," can be found on Amazon.com, BN.com and iTunes. To find out more about Roger Simon and read features by other Creators writers and cartoonists, visit the Creators Web page at www.creators.com.