“The conservative "thinks of political policies as intended to preserve order, justice, and freedom. The ideologue, on the contrary, thinks of politics as a revolutionary instrument for transforming society and even transforming human nature. In his march toward Utopia, the ideologue is merciless.”
― Russell Kirk
Below is my reply to a member of the American Far-Left who attempts to vindicate former Clinton Vice President Al Gore 's assertion from 1999 that by 2014 -- this year -- all of the world's polar ice caps would disappear. Clearly, this never happened, did not really come close to happening, and would probably take centuries or many millennia to occur in full.
Nothing pleasures me more in life than two things aside from being in the company of my beloved family members and closest friends: to write my poetry, for which I have a blog just for that; and to embarrass members of the Left due to their delusions of grandeur. And while this argument apparently continued well-beyond my reply to one Paul White and I never caught the remainder of it because I probably was busy writing poetry (which is what I spend most of my free time doing for pleasure), I think I stated very clearly my thoughts on the matter.
Kelsey Riffey shared ForAmerica's photo.
In 1999, Al Gore said that the polar ice caps would disappear by 2014. It’s 2014 and the ice caps are still there. Where’s Al’s apology?
Paul White actually you need to do your home work, summer 2013 saw the first pure liquid summer in the arctic. For the first time commercial shipping is possible in the northern reaches. Greenery is growing in places not before possible. Longer warming periods and record high temps in the region are a reality. 2014 will see 15 gigantic glaciers completely disappear.
Kelsey RiffeyThey also discovered volcanic activity there as well. I believe that climate change is due to a natural pattern that has occurred many times in nature. It was warmer during the middle ages than today. This cannot be blamed just on men in general. Al flies around on his luxury jets and he tells us that we shouldnt drive our cars. The has its own natural greenhouse due to Carbon without it the temperature drops almost 60 degrees. It is naive to think climate will not change.
Jonathan Henderson I suppose that in the past 214 years since the official beginning of the First Industrial Revolution in Europe that mankind has melted damn near every glacier and iceberg in the world, Paul, am I correct? What if I said to you that half of meteorologists and climatologists believe the entire phenomena behind man-manifested global warning to be untrue and impossible? The fact that for all time, the earth has experienced untold numbers of climate changing trends renders Al Gore's premise unproven and illogical since he is neither a damn meteorologist nor climatologist! I guess, though, that for the Left, the fact that over 48% of meteorologists and climatologists believe the theory that man-made global warming is false and lacking in any validity whatsoever is the inconvenient truth for you.
I find it both intriguing and interesting how over the past 40 to 50 years, government has passed untold numbers of pieces of legislation that were signed into law by Democrats and Republicans in the White House alike to curb "the tide of man-made global warming," and all were expected to make a dent in the situation, or what fear factors some of the nuts at Greenpeace wish to perpetuate. The federal government changed the manner in which the engines and exhaust systems of vehicles would forever be built in order to drastically cut back on carbon monoxide emissions; instead, the Left continues to claim to the contrary that we have further damaged the environment despite these new laws, and what is their answer? More legislation, more taxation, higher fuel costs, and higher prices for vehicles due to the new mileage guidelines required to be in effect by 2020. And I haven't even begun to discuss the failure of the Democrats to support the building of the Keystone XL pipeline to create thousands of new jobs; to largely end our reliance upon foreign oil from the Middle East; and furthermore, by decreasing our reliance upon Middle Eastern oil, we would then have the ability to largely leave that most unstable region that has never borne any fruit from international endeavors but more terrorism and the continued slaughtering of their own and our troops.
It is akin to the issue with mass poverty in the inner cities and rural areas, Paul: you can tax the rich and the middle classes beyond their capacities to pay and spread the wealth to the poor and lower the income gaps between the rich, middle, and sub-poverty line classes, but at the end of the day, all you have done is that you have made certain that the poor are poorer so longer as the rich and the middle class are less affluent. The wealthy have less with which to create jobs for the middle and lower classes if the conditions were to be legally allowed to be right to manifest them without socialism; the middle class is earning less money and many begin to slip below the poverty line threshold; and those who already were impoverished remain impoverished in order for the Democrats to receive their votes under the guise that they will continue the Robin Hood means of spreading the wealthy while making everyone else and the actual impoverished either poorer or still poor. If you continue to maintain the status quo with the poor, continue providing for them subsidies and creating more public expenditure programs as bureaucracies, of course they will vote for the Left; and what a policy! The middle class, the backbone of America, is being made poorer, and there are less millionaires in relationship to the total U.S. population today than there have been in decades. At the end of the day, it does not matter one damn bit if there are large gaps between incomes; what does matter is that all levels of income are better off than they were under the previous administration, with the people earning more in total income along with the rate of inflation continuing to decrease, the private sector thriving, and the greater focus on private small businesses in the inner cities and rural areas as opposed to erecting more public housing for the sake that the officials you champion have created more poverty. If the people are better off financially at all levels of income, have better jobs than before, have the capacity with all of these factors to buy what they need and spend on discretionary items due to a very low inflation rate, the liberal policy of using the already-historically failed ideals behind Keynsian economics will die in a blaze of futility.
At the end of the day, Paul, all Robin Hood really did was rob from those whom had taken away the hard-earned wages of the people who earned them and returned them to their respective owners.
(Below is a pair of dialogues between two individuals of diametrically opposite extremes with regards to their perspective on government role in marriage and America's tolerance towards those of other faith opposed to Christianity. My take is not strictly a conservative perspective, but also very heavily libertarian in context. If you know me well from the nearly seven or eight months I have periodically posted articles here, you will see that my positions are almost obsessively-compulsive in their extreme consistencies. That being said, enjoy reading the two very entertaining dialogues akin to the era of Margaret Thatcher as Prime Minister of Great Britain when she schooled Neil Kinnock so completely and on a regular basis during the Prime Minister's Question Time.
(The one, the only "El Rushbo"!)
Rush Limbaugh's Post:I don't care what somebody's sexual orientation is. I don't care what their race is. I do not group people that way, nor do I want to take advantage of people by making them groups or victims. I want everybody to be as self-reliant as they can be, be as educated as they can be, 'cause that's how we're gonna have a great country.
#1.Darwin Gutierrez:Wow. Can't believe this actually came out of a republican's mouth!
My Reply:Believe it, Darwin, because a poll fairly recently administered recorded that 52% of Republicans favor some form of same-sex union. I myself believe the government should completely renounce itself from all authority over the issue of marriage, which is what Oklahoma is doing, and rightfully so. If a set sectarian religion wishes to abstain from recognizing same-sex marriage due to its religious beliefs amid its interpretations, that is their right as part of the First Amendment portion pertaining to "the free exercise of one's religion." There are religious sectarians however who do and will recognize same-sex marriage, so if said couples truly wish to be recognized in holy matrimony under God, they may find any church they so wish to perform the ceremony.
However, for the Left, this really is a completely foreign concept! They don't like it when the people enjoy liberty! It might mean that by cutting government out of marriage entirely that the Marriage Tax would therefore be forcibly dissolved! What would Obama and the Democrats do without squeezing every last penny they may from the people's wallets? Oh the marvels of political upside one may derive when a real solution involving human freedom and liberty is posited as a solution!
#2 Melissa Jones Callis:NO, Rush. Absolutely NOT. The way this country became great was that GOD was the LEADER of the country. People prayed to, and worshiped, HIM. Not Allah, not Mohammed, not Buddha. Jehovah, the one true God, is the One who can make this country flourish.
My Reply:Melissa, America was indeed founded upon the principles God set forth. In fact, the nation was founded for the reasons of God, glory, and gold, or what a high school history teacher will teach to the class upon the first day of instruction. Along with this concept was the manner in which you choose to worship, and that is guaranteed within the First Amendment's clause for "right to the free exercise of religion." As such, every person is beautiful under the Judeo-Christian God, even those sinners. God flooded the world due to the gross presence of sin in the world, and the world had already fallen to its Death upon Eve opting to fall into temptation by eating the forbidden fruit. At that point, according to which denomination or sectarian you adhere, all humanity was sentenced to die due to all being born of Sin. Adam and Eve manifested Sin because of the serpent, and it would take a messianic figure to save humanity for future generations.
What I want to know with regards to Christian dogma from you, Melissa, is who gets to decide which people are to be forgiven for Sin if he or she has given his or her life to Christ? Is it you? It is true that The Bible stated that is "an abomination" for one man to lay with another, presumably having sexual intercourse, and I believe having researched this issue thoroughly, there is no true consensus with regards to this issue biblically. For your benefit and to convince you that I am not lying, I will place before you the link to 25 references with regards to the issue of homosexuality. There are numerous interpretations::
(Edit from February 4, 2014: Below will be each verse from The Bible commenting on the subject of homosexuality.)
Leviticus 18:22 ESV / 294 helpful votes
You shall not lie with a male as with a woman; it is an abomination.
1 Corinthians 6:9-11 ESV / 274 helpful votes
Or do you not know that the unrighteous will not inherit the kingdom of God? Do not be deceived: neither the sexually immoral, nor idolaters, nor adulterers, nor men who practice homosexuality, nor thieves, nor the greedy, nor drunkards, nor revilers, nor swindlers will inherit the kingdom of God. And such were some of you. But you were washed, you were sanctified, you were justified in the name of the Lord Jesus Christ and by the Spirit of our God.
Romans 1:26-28 ESV / 242 helpful votes
For this reason God gave them up to dishonorable passions. For their women exchanged natural relations for those that are contrary to nature; and the men likewise gave up natural relations with women and were consumed with passion for one another, men committing shameless acts with men and receiving in themselves the due penalty for their error. And since they did not see fit to acknowledge God, God gave them up to a debased mind to do what ought not to be done.
Romans 13:8-10 ESV / 223 helpful votes
Owe no one anything, except to love each other, for the one who loves another has fulfilled the law. For the commandments, “You shall not commit adultery, You shall not murder, You shall not steal, You shall not covet,” and any other commandment, are summed up in this word: “You shall love your neighbor as yourself.” Love does no wrong to a neighbor; therefore love is the fulfilling of the law.
Isaiah 56:3-5 ESV / 202 helpful votes
Let not the foreigner who has joined himself to the Lord say, “The Lord will surely separate me from his people”; and let not the eunuch say, “Behold, I am a dry tree.” For thus says the Lord: “To the eunuchs who keep my Sabbaths, who choose the things that please me and hold fast my covenant, I will give in my house and within my walls a monument and a name better than sons and daughters; I will give them an everlasting name that shall not be cut off.
Matthew 19:11-12 ESV / 189 helpful votes
But he said to them, “Not everyone can receive this saying, but only those to whom it is given. For there are eunuchs who have been so from birth, and there are eunuchs who have been made eunuchs by men, and there are eunuchs who have made themselves eunuchs for the sake of the kingdom of heaven. Let the one who is able to receive this receive it.”
1 Timothy 1:10 ESV / 125 helpful votes
The sexually immoral, men who practice homosexuality, enslavers, liars, perjurers, and whatever else is contrary to sound doctrine,
Leviticus 20:13 ESV / 103 helpful votes
If a man lies with a male as with a woman, both of them have committed an abomination; they shall surely be put to death; their blood is upon them.
Mark 10:6-9 ESV / 88 helpful votes
But from the beginning of creation, ‘God made them male and female.’ ‘Therefore a man shall leave his father and mother and hold fast to his wife, and the two shall become one flesh.’ So they are no longer two but one flesh. What therefore God has joined together, let not man separate.”
1 Corinthians 7:2 ESV / 87 helpful votes
But because of the temptation to sexual immorality, each man should have his own wife and each woman her own husband.
James 4:12 ESV / 71 helpful votes
There is only one lawgiver and judge, he who is able to save and to destroy. But who are you to judge your neighbor?
1 Corinthians 7:7-9 ESV / 63 helpful votes
I wish that all were as I myself am. But each has his own gift from God, one of one kind and one of another. To the unmarried and the widows I say that it is good for them to remain single as I am. But if they cannot exercise self-control, they should marry. For it is better to marry than to burn with passion.
Romans 1:32 ESV / 62 helpful votes
Though they know God's decree that those who practice such things deserve to die, they not only do them but give approval to those who practice them.
Hebrews 13:1-25 ESV / 61 helpful votes
Let brotherly love continue. Do not neglect to show hospitality to strangers, for thereby some have entertained angels unawares. Remember those who are in prison, as though in prison with them, and those who are mistreated, since you also are in the body. Let marriage be held in honor among all, and let the marriage bed be undefiled, for God will judge the sexually immoral and adulterous. Keep your life free from love of money, and be content with what you have, for he has said, “I will never leave you nor forsake you.”
John 8:7-11 ESV / 56 helpful votes
And as they continued to ask him, he stood up and said to them, “Let him who is without sin among you be the first to throw a stone at her.” And once more he bent down and wrote on the ground. But when they heard it, they went away one by one, beginning with the older ones, and Jesus was left alone with the woman standing before him. Jesus stood up and said to her, “Woman, where are they? Has no one condemned you?” She said, “No one, Lord.” And Jesus said, “Neither do I condemn you; go, and from now on sin no more.”
1 Timothy 5:8 ESV / 52 helpful votes
But if anyone does not provide for his relatives, and especially for members of his household, he has denied the faith and is worse than an unbeliever.
1 Timothy 1:10-11 ESV / 51 helpful votes
The sexually immoral, men who practice homosexuality, enslavers, liars, perjurers, and whatever else is contrary to sound doctrine, in accordance with the gospel of the glory of the blessed God with which I have been entrusted.
Galatians 5:14 ESV / 50 helpful votes
For the whole law is fulfilled in one word: “You shall love your neighbor as yourself.”
Galatians 3:28 ESV / 50 helpful votes
There is neither Jew nor Greek, there is neither slave nor free, there is no male and female, for you are all one in Christ Jesus.
Matthew 22:39 ESV / 48 helpful votes
And a second is like it: You shall love your neighbor as yourself.
Genesis 19:1-38 ESV / 47 helpful votes
The two angels came to Sodom in the evening, and Lot was sitting in the gate of Sodom. When Lot saw them, he rose to meet them and bowed himself with his face to the earth and said, “My lords, please turn aside to your servant's house and spend the night and wash your feet. Then you may rise up early and go on your way.” They said, “No; we will spend the night in the town square.” But he pressed them strongly; so they turned aside to him and entered his house. And he made them a feast and baked unleavened bread, and they ate. But before they lay down, the men of the city, the men of Sodom, both young and old, all the people to the last man, surrounded the house. And they called to Lot, “Where are the men who came to you tonight? Bring them out to us, that we may know them.”
Matthew 7:12 ESV / 46 helpful votes
“So whatever you wish that others would do to you, do also to them, for this is the Law and the Prophets.
1 Kings 14:24 ESV / 46 helpful votes
And there were also male cult prostitutes in the land. They did according to all the abominations of the nations that the Lord drove out before the people of Israel.
Jude 1:7 ESV / 43 helpful votes
Just as Sodom and Gomorrah and the surrounding cities, which likewise indulged in sexual immorality and pursued unnatural desire, serve as an example by undergoing a punishment of eternal fire.
Judges 19:22 ESV / 22 helpful votes
As they were making their hearts merry, behold, the men of the city, worthless fellows, surrounded the house, beating on the door. And they said to the old man, the master of the house, “Bring out the man who came into your house, that we may know him.”
************************************************************************ My favorite verse to one and all is John 8:7-11, which is perhaps the important line of the entire with regards to how one treats his or her fellow man if that individual is found to be in violation of a codified law, or in this case, Sin:
"Let he who has not sinned cast the first stone at her."
- Jesus Christ, The One True Savior and Lawgiver of Mankind
Sin is sin; God considers the murder of another to be akin to murderous thoughts in the mind. If you have never sinned, Melissa, or if anyone else is perfect, please behoove one and all by letting others know of your perfection. If all sin is the same in the eyes of God, does that not make homosexuality the same? And furthermore, as homosexuality is a sin and Jesus stated that one should not judge others as each individual is his or herself a sinner, what right does the layperson, you, have to socially ostracize and castigate individuals when that is true? The Bible is filled with those 25 verses which in some manner regarding the biblical laws regarding homosexuality, which indeed suggests it to be punishable by death, and what Jesus said about sin in general, which essentially states to not judge those who are in every relevant manner equal to you.
If you cannot accept what Jesus stated to be true and you assume all other figures to be correct instead, would that not entail that you are listening to false prophets since the majority of these verses imply some form of severe, draconian punishment as these other mouthpieces of The Word of God are only finite and fallible? I suppose if this is true, you really are not a good Christian. Jesus forgives and will save everyone who accepts Him into their lives. And, as a person who would deny others the legal right to not be judged based upon one's lifestyle in the bedroom and amid the amorous activities, but also because they do not worship as do the majority of Americans, you are judging them based again upon what Jesus stated for followers to not do. All people have prejudices, and that is natural. To act upon them is something else entirely. Government has no place in any form of regulating religion, how one worships, and furthermore, the rite of marriage.
Bill O'Reilly: True Liberty-Loving Conservative? Or a Socialist in Disguise?
Written by Jonathan Henderson
Monday, February 3, 2014 @ 4:04 AM
Introduction: Announcing My Segue Back to Blogging on This Site
First of all, this is a bit of a segue into returning to my political blog titled Conservatively Speaking: A Conservative-Libertarian Blog on Today's Issues. The blog was launched on May 3, 2013 in response to the seemingly-daily revelations of a new scandal emanating from the Obama Executive Branch, as each have been proven to have occurred, and yet President Obama continues to deny his superiors, the American people, their right to know. I wrote nigh feverishly on the blog until I posted an article on July 25 regarding the birth of Prince George and Hillary Clinton's response. I had started writing a humorous but very newsworthy piece on Anthony Weiner titled "The Weiner Flops Again," which was filled with nearly every copy of the text messages between Weiner and the 23 year old Democratic Party intern who now is a porn star possibly exposed to the HIV virus while shooting her first film: a parody about Weiner. For whatever reason, I never completed the article, and still to this day it remains lying in state as it resides in the Land of Misfit Toys.
From July until nigh Thanksgiving, I began writing and posting articles for about a week, though far softer in my tone of rhetoric. One was about the issue of people working and shopping on Thanksgiving and Christmas. Another two old Facebook clippings of updates were from where I debated liberals. (And, might I add, I angered one so much by what I said to him without slipping even one four-letter word that he blocked me!) Lastly, I wrote the first part to what I believe will become two posts examining the life and legacy of the late Nelson Mandela from every possible angle, as well as Apartheid as its variant usage in Israel, the Gaza Strip, and the Golan Heights. I define based upon the parameters of Apartheid's precedent set in South Africa beginning in 1948 as existing when a white minority political party (National Party) implemented that law. Again, Mandela's life will soon be examined and comparisons to other historical figures of the global liberation movements -- Henry David Thoreau, Mohandas Gandhi, Martin Luther King, Jr., etc., -- with regards to tactics and philosophy. After that, I will fly as the wind blows.
If upon your receiving this you find it to be an undesirable article (this was originally an E-mail, and since it was written prior to the butt-crack of dawn and I had slept, I just proofread the thing to my great horror), write to me again to inform me not to send more fliers.
Have a wonderful Monday! (JPH)
Who is Bill O' Reilly? Whose Side Exactly Butters His Bread?
Bill O'Reilly is not quite so diametrically President Obama's polar opposite with regards to economic policy. He is calling upon Washington to pass legislation and forward it to Obama to sign into law a minimum wage hike to $10 per hour. I am sure once the RINO establishment within the GOP, to whom O'Reilly shows undying affection and loyalty, decides to step into a single file line behind the 55 Democrats in the U.S. Senate under Sen. Harry Reid's rank and file, that a $10 or more minimum wage hike is just what the American people will receive. And, just as those sheep love to do -- the ones who were so foolish to vote those lawmakers championing socialist policies or have leanings in this direction -- they are indeed blithe enough to seriously believe that they will be paid more in subsides and at the cost of no other set of individuals than the American taxpayer.
Upon this occurring, the costs for goods and services due to the artificially-inflated prices which Obama and his Democratic "ditto heads" would have passed and then his signing the legislation into law will initiate the end of America's 238 year dance with opportunity and prosperity. The old practice of artificial price-fixation to cut the costs of products for sale, which might lower the prices of goods and services for people to buy with respect to the minimum wage workers, but those Americans who previously had worked in middle manager or some other portion of the private sector within the middle class will largely lose their capacities to pay for these crucial, vital necessities should the Democrats and Obama not engage in a new standard in middle income-fixing afterwards. The real disaster to the economy, however, ensues once the costs of production are far more expensive than the demand for those products, at which point the most fundamental free market principle posited to all by Adam Smith from his pamphlet The Wealth of Nations (1776) stating "supply must meet demand" will, in fact, not coincide as they should. Upon that, the natural price for goods and services available to consumers will rise exponentially, and the implementation of the higher minimum wage law while those in the middle class earn no such raise in rate of pay will lead the economy into financial ruin, stores barren of products, people living in slums and low-rent motels, and both the poverty threshold and misery index made so popular under the LBJ and Carter presidencies will then extend to the majority of the middle class, which will return the Democrats and others on the very Far Left to the times when they each sing "Happy Day are Here Again." This, in a nutshell, is how President Obama has determined to narrow the gap between the richest 2% and the lowest 98%. A nation of the poor -- what was once sub-poverty line and the the middle class -- will essentially be peasants, while the wealthiest Americans, most of whom are Obama's and the Democratic Party's biggest supporters and campaign donors, will be the individuals who through blind ideological euphoria appointed among the president's Cabinet or other government-based positions based upon nepotism, and thus will be among the oligarchy, the ruling party. All of this, of course, will be hypothetically possible as now that the Obamacare mandate is in place, most still have no access to the service, and several have already died due to government determining it was not financially-prudent to save a person's life, or what is popularly termed as "the death panel" policies. A depression, recession, and stagflation all in one will commence, and a new Dark Age will as well. That is the "Change" Obama wanted you "to be in" during his 2008 campaign.
Conclusion: “The Devil's out of fashion.” - Dodie Smith, I Capture the Castle
And, in case you still have not determined "which team Mr. O'Reilly plays for," check out the interview with him as given by the intelligent and beautiful Megyn Kelly:
This is a rush transcript from "The Kelly File," January 2, 2014. This copy may not be in its final form and may be updated.
MEGYN KELLY, HOST: Well, tonight, a preview of Bill O'Reilly's upcoming Super Bowl interview with President Obama this Sunday. Earlier I spoke with Mr. Bill, host of "The Factor."
(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)
KELLY: O'Reilly.
BILL O'REILLY, HOST, "THE O'REILLY FACTOR": Yes, you were just on my program.
KELLY: This is so weird.
O'REILLY: This is strange.
KELLY: I'm still sitting on your set, but now I'm interviewer and you're the interviewee.
O'REILLY: Be gentle.
KELLY: I may or may not give you the last word.
O'REILLY: All right.
KELLY: This is actually a big deal, even for you, even for Mr. Bill O'Reilly it's a big deal. Are you a little nervous?
O'REILLY: No.
KELLY: Come on.
O'REILLY: I'm not.
KELLY: I don't believe you. You know why? Sometimes I see you going out on Letterman. I know you, I see just a hint of nerves. So I can't even imagine interviewing the president of the United States there isn't a little.
O'REILLY: You're probably seeing indigestion, but not nerves. I can't even remember the last time I got nervous, ever. I'm just not a nervous guy.
KELLY: It's like a 100 million people are going to be watching the Super Bowl.
O'REILLY: I don't care, that is why I am not nervous. I don't care. I know what I want to do and I know the questions I'm going to ask. Not all of them. Still formulating, OK? But I know where I want to go. The difficulty is time.
KELLY: How many minutes you get?
O'REILLY: I don't know exactly, but I have to deal with Fox Sports, I got to deal with the White House and I got to deal with a lot of things I can't control. This program that I do, "The Factor" I can control, you know, time and everything like that. I can't.
KELLY: He doesn't want to come in here.
O'REILLY: Who?
KELLY: President Obama. He is not going to come here in "The Factor" studios.
O'REILLY: No, no, he is not a bad guy, I think people misread him. However, my interview this time is going to be very precise. Not philosophical, alright?
KELLY: You did a little philosophy, you know --
O'REILLY: He has a five-year record, and I want to clear up a lot of things that are confusing. I will probably be able to clear up three in the time I have. But remember, there's going to be a taped interview afterward that we'll show on Monday's "Factor." But no. Nervous impedes my ability. I don't want to even think about that.
KELLY: Well, it impedes everybody's ability. But sometimes we can't help it. Like before I come on "The O'Reilly Factor" on Thursday nights, I sit in the green room... no, I don't.
O'REILLY: But you're an emotional mess, I'm a rock.
KELLY: Let me ask you this. I want to talk about the dynamics of the interview. Where does it take place, exactly?
O'REILLY: You know whatever room he wants, the red room, the green room, whatever the White House wants.
KELLY: You walk in first or he walks in first?
O'REILLY: Oh, yes.
KELLY: After you, you're all settled.
O'REILLY: Always the lesser being walks in first, and that's me. That's me.
KELLY: Interesting, because on your show, you walk in first, I walk in second. I'm just stating it for the record.
O'REILLY: The lesser being always walks in first.
KELLY: So put down your pen, there is a power brokerage thing that happens in the hand shake.
