The IUSB Vision Weblog

The way to crush the middle class is to grind them between the millstones of taxation and inflation. – Vladimir Lenin

Archive for the ‘Limbaugh’ Category

MSNBC’s Chris Mathews is a Dirty Liar

Posted by iusbvision on August 11, 2011

This is how far the left has gone folks. Once again they have resorted to just making stuff up out of thin air. Mathews claimed on his show that Rush Limbaugh said that we should reverse the reintegration of the military that happened at the end of WWII. Mathews is lying in the worst form of smear. It is no different when MSNBC made up the false quotes about Limbaugh when he was trying to buy an NFL team.

Audio and transcripts of every Rush Limbaugh show are posted online every day.

Keep in mind it was Democrats led by Woodrow Wilson that re-segregated the military after Republicans had integrated it. The NAACP before it was hijacked by the neo-marxist left, was a solidly Republican organization that formed largely in response to Wilson who was also known as “the first progressive president”.

This is indicative of what we will see in the upcoming campaign.

Posted in 2012, 2012 Primary, Chuck Norton, Journalism Is Dead, Leftist Hate in Action, Lies, Limbaugh, True Talking Points | 1 Comment »

Julie Limbaugh on her own intolerance & the intolerance of the left.

Posted by iusbvision on April 1, 2009

Julie Limbaugh has a piece at She is the lefty Limbaugh who admits that she doesn’t really listen to his show and hates Ann Coulter although while admitting that she has never read her books and hasn’t listened to her either. Julie also complains about the intolerance of the left and how she had to avoid leftist professors in fear of having them tank her grade just because of her last name.

Our friend RW Sparkle has a nice analysis piece that pretty much says what we were planning to say about the piece. So here is en excerpt of what Sparkle (who is a hugely popular and influential blogger) had to say; be sure to visit her site and see the rest:

Julie Limbaugh, Rush’s cousin has a piece at Salon.

It’s a well written piece where she whines about how she is treated as a “Limbaugh” by those oh so tolerant liberals who don’t even realize that she actually doesn’t’ agree with Rush (she wants to make that very very clear). How is she treated? Rudely, of course.

In her piece she accidentally reveals two things. One is that Rush is really the nice generous person those of us who do like him hope that he is.

Second, that she is a typical liberal. She hates Ann Coulter although she has never read any of her books or listened to anything she has to say. She bases it all on the media’s perception of Ann. At least Julie admits that and realizes this:

“And suddenly I realize that I have become the person I can’t stand.”

I am assuming the “person she can’t stand” is one who judges people before she knows them. One who is so closed minded that she cannot bring herself to actually listen to her cousin Rush on the radio, and maybe open her mind to the possibility that he might have some great ideas (but of course she listens to Jon Stewart).

Julie is a good writer and she realizes some of her flaws, but not all.

Posted in Chuck Norton, Leftist Hate in Action, Limbaugh | 1 Comment »


Posted by iusbvision on March 15, 2009

Kyle Smith has this great column in the New York Post today. It very cleverly makes the same point that we did earlier today.



March 15, 2009

Dear Mainstream Media:

I’m a conservative who believes that other conservatives are fat, drug-stuffed, money-grubbing warthogs like Rush Limbaugh, or scary inbred backwoods retards like Sarah Palin.

So can I please be your go-to guy whenever you need a conservative viewpoint?

When you assemble an op-ed page or a panel discussion that has three or four liberal commentators – plus a liberal moderator (if this is TV) or a liberal news section (if this is print) – I volunteer to be the one voice you allow to speak for the loyal opposition.

I am available to write cover stories for Newsweek, hold down the other side of the New York Times op-ed seesaw against Paul Krugman and Co., or fill in whenever David Gergen is unavailable to supply analysis of President Obama’s next magnifiquent speech for CNN.

I promise that the only conservatives I will ever praise will be safely dead (Churchill, Reagan, or, if this is PBS, Edmund Burke).

Sample phrases with which I plan to begin my columns:

“As a conservative, I am deeply troubled by the comments of (name of conservative), who just this week said (conservative things).”

Or try this one: “I’m a conservative, but nationalization is starting to look like the only viable option. I don’t mean just banks. It’s time for FedEx to be taken over by the postal service.”

Or: “It breaks my heart to see what my party has become – jingoistic, hysterical, intolerant. Also, Ann Coulter should be gagged with my sweaty undershorts.”

David Brooks and David Frum get it. The Republican Party is a fossil in pleated khakis and penny loafers. As Meghan McCain said: It’s unhip. It is to Washington what Donny Osmond is to the Billboard charts. It has won but seven of the last 11 presidential elections and only six of the last eight Congressional elections.

All that remains of the Griping Old Party is a tattered remnant, an embittered rump faction of 46%. I have devised a simple one-step solution to reversing our losing position in the last election: Move to the side that won.

Posted in Chuck Norton, Journalism Is Dead, Limbaugh | 1 Comment »

Patterico: Proof Democrats Wanted the War to Fail. They said so.

Posted by iusbvision on March 9, 2009

[This Post has been stickied to the top of the page – scroll down for new posts – editor]

UPDATE– Top Democrat Strategist James Carville told reporters he wanted Bush to fail on September 11th 2001! link HERE.

Patterico had this great post todayto remind normal people of what they already knew, and to shove it in the face of the elite media and the Democratic leadership who are once again trying to rewrite history:

Let’s put aside arguments about Rush Limbaugh for the time being and recognize that he’s undeniably right about this:

Were the liberals out there hoping Bush succeeded or were they out there trying to destroy him before he was even inaugurated?

I think we all know the answer to that — but here’s some hard proof. Reader jimboster passes along a 2006 poll(.pdf) that proves the point. Check out question 10 — and pay particular attention to how the answers break down by party:

Recall that in August 2006, we were in the thick of a war whose outcome was uncertain. And Democrats didn’t want Bush to succeed.

Have this poll handy the next time some Democrat gets snooty about Rush wanting Obama to fail. It’s proof that the Democrats didn’t want Bush to succeed. They have no standing to claim the moral high ground. None.

Now, in a way, this question is meaningless — because wanting a President to “succeed” (or “fail”) is such a vague concept that it can be infused with several meanings.

But that’s part of the point. Limbaugh might not have been crystal clear about the details of what he meant — but it certainly wasn’t an anti-American sentiment. He clearly wanted what was best for America in the long run. His definition of success was every bit as clear as the definition in the poll.

So if it’s supposedly evil for him to say he wants Obama to fail, why was it OK for Democrats to say they didn’t want Bush to succeed?

Don’t let the Democrats take the moral high ground on this. Even as we perfect our message, it’s vitally important to fight back against those who would distort it.

UPDATE: Jimboster e-mails to say that credit for this find goes to Garden State Patriot.

UPDATE x2: Third Base Politics had this on March 2. has some good comments HERE on this story.

Related Story – FACT CHECK: Did Limbaugh really say he “Wants Obama to fail” or are you being spun? – UPDATED!

Posted in 2012, Chuck Norton, Journalism Is Dead, Limbaugh, Obama and Congress Post Inaugration | 1 Comment »