To Rush Limbaugh’s former waitress, Merritt Tierce:
Congratulations on making the news by turning over your two $2,000 tips, given you by Rush Limbaugh, to a nonprofit organization.
I’m sure your friends, the bloggers at the Dallas Morning News Arts Blog, the Huffington Post, the Daily Kos and MSNBC are all very proud of you and supportive of your generosity. You of course are entitled to give your money to anyone you please.
I, however, have a little nitpick.
It has to do with your motivations. You mentioned that you gave away the tip — which was a hell of a tip, in case you didn’t notice — not because you had been itching to find a way to help out a needy charity, but because the money came from Mr. Limbaugh, whom you characterized as the epitome of evil. You called his tips “blood money,” which is one of the most self-unaware statements I’ve heard in a long time.
Let’s just take a moment to consider this whole notion of you, Rush Limbaugh and evil.
Start with Mr. Limbaugh. I don’t know him, except through his radio program and a couple of his books. It’s safe to say that’s how most people know him.
Through those venues, however, he has never come across as an evil guy, unless you’ve got a particularly obtuse, self-conscious definition of evil.
He does come across as being a larger-than-life personality who has been tremendously successful not in the least part because he has a powerful ego — a necessity in his business.
Certainly, he’s bombastic, very loud and forthright about his opinions.
He’s clearly intelligent and glib.
And he seems — this is the part that most attracts his fans — to care about America and the direction its going.
Like anyone else, he has made mistakes. There was that addiction to prescription painkillers, for which he was investigated for several years and which was settled out of court. He finally managed to kick the addiction (unlike what your liberal friends and media outlets may have told you). He suffered almost total hearing loss over the course of three months, which some have suggested was linked to his painkiller addiction. He also loves cigars, which isn’t a moral quandary so much as just a bad habit.
Limbaugh is not a moral paragon. But he does have ideals, which seems to be a hard concept for liberals to understand. Ideals are not things you always accomplish, but they are lights you always try to move toward. Prominent among Limbaugh’s ideals are the same ideals that once made this country great — things like honoring our history, upholding freedom of thought and speech, defending human rights, civic involvement, free enterprise and standing up for liberty. He is also generous, as evidenced by the tips he gave you.
Now, dear lady, let’s have a look at your public record. As with Limbaugh, I only know you through your public actions. But unlike Limbaugh, your public actions thus far don’t reflect well on you.
Being human, you like Limbaugh and like everybody, are no paragon. I’m going to go out on a limb and assume you’re of the liberal persuasion.
I know you must have been a pretty good waitress to have earned a $2,000 tip, even at a swanky restaurant, which you should keep in mind you represent. It’s also safe to guess you don’t have a completely uncharming personality. The first stories about you and your Limbaugh encounters called you a waitress, but now it’s clear that you are a former waitress and a “writer” who is peddling a book, touted as an autobiographical novel.
According to the summary of your book, called “Love Me Back,” on the Dallas Morning News Arts Blog, it’s mostly about drinking, drugs, pointless sex with random strangers, punctuated with episodes of cutting and burning yourself.
While it’s not clear where the autobiographical ends and the novel begins, readers are led to assume from your book that you are self-absorbed, self-destructive and morally lax. Based on the Limbaugh story, which apparently isn’t in your book, but which you are now sharing to get publicity, I also know that you are an ingrate, vindictive and ultimately foolish.
You were given a magnanimous gift because Mr. Limbaugh evidently thought you were a person who was worthy of being given a break. No doubt he assumed you would use the money for something worthwhile, either a treat for you and your family, to save up for something you need, or maybe just to help pay your monthly bills.
You, on the other hand, upon realizing that it was Rush Limbaugh who gave you the money, acted like he was a carrier of bubonic plague. You spat upon everything he stands for, which is to say you spat upon what the majority of Americans believe, and you deliberately gave the money to an organization you believed was most diametrically opposed to him — one of which, coincidentally, you are the executive director.
Limbaugh was acting toward you out of kindness and generosity. You chose to use your gift to fund the abuse of women in crisis and the murders of their children. I can’t help but wonder how you handled the taxes on your little transaction with the group you’re in charge of.
After all, you told the Dallas Morning News, “It felt like laundering the money in a good way. He’s such an obvious target for any feminist or sane person. It was really bizarre to me that he gave me $2,000, and he’s evil incarnate in some ways.”
IRS? Paying attention? Or is the IRS’s investigative arm just for smacking down conservatives these days?
All of the above would have been your prerogative, Ms. Tierce, and nobody else’s business, except that you went public. To sell your book.
To fulfill your need for vengeance — which evidently stems from Limbaugh’s making the mistake of liking you and thinking you were a decent human being — you went crying to the liberal media to trumpet your tale of abuse at the hands of — gasp — an arch-conservative and to play up your self-cast role as some sort of liberal street-savvy heroine.
I’m not going to try to tell you what you are — that’s up to each person to determine for himself.
But you called Mr. Limbaugh “evil incarnate” because he stands up for a traditional worldview that people of low intelligence and liberal views disdain.
Consider this: In this scenario, who was acting out of generosity? Limbaugh. Who was acting out of spite and lack of concern for the lives of innocent human beings, maligning a fellow human being to sell her book, and engaging in a transaction she publicly called “money laundering”? You.
Evil incarnate? Look in the mirror, young lady.