echoswolf

Regardless of the fact that I was merely stating the popular view, did I say you couldn't judge her? God, no. That's a basic part of the human condition. However, in a self-acclaimed liberal bastion of tolerance, you'd think people would be able to control their baser instincts for long enough to avoid that downvote button.

If a well-known (in)famous political commentator-cum-celebrity isn't worth the trouble, then why bother having discussions at all?

As far as I'm aware, people didn't plot Reeves' plight days beforehand, regardless of his comments. The Rampart AMA, too, got downvoted, and rightly so. I'm not vetoing all use of that shiny blue arrow; I'm merely suggesting it gets used for its proper purpose.

"Did she give Obamacare a fair chance? Did she present a non-partisan viewpoint?

So, why should we?

So, she's a douchehorse. How does being douchehorses back make you any better? Sinking to her level just makes you as low as her.

No-one's saying you have to "do nothing". Why not at least offer a dissenting viewpoint, or some trenchant satire? Unless, of course, that's just too much for you to do; I mean, after all, if your views require time and effort to support, then we should all just skip over that part and take them as fact, right?

Stifling someone else's opinion, regardless of how infuriating it seems to you, is the direct opposite of liberalism. Unless, of course, you don't value the free speech this community prides itself upon. Today, /r/IAmA proved itself as hypocritical and intolerant as the person it was ridiculing. Congratulations.