"There’s an argument to be made that conservative intolerance does more harm than liberal intolerance, as it targets more vulnerable people. Consider the earlier list of groups maligned by liberals and conservatives. Rich people, Christians, men, whites and the police would generally seem to have more power today than immigrants, gays, blacks, poor people and goths. According to Brandt..."

Perhaps but who will they vote for in the end?

if they aren't tolerant they're not liberals , silly

I'm a liberal but I never laboured under the illusion of tolerance. There are things that should not be tolerated, like homophobia, white supemacy, etc. I will admit that I am prejudiced against people who espouse these things. Saying this is as bad as those who are prejudiced against sexualities or races is disingenuous at best. People choose to be racist, sexist, etc, and I am free to fault them for their choices.

At what point does "tolerance" become "enabling"?
At what point do the beliefs of one group, that seek to disenfranchise those who
are simply trying to "be", overrule the rights of others to stop them from inflicting
real harm?
At what point does the right to "Free Speech" become the right to roll over those
who are pushing back against what they see as an effort to control those who disagree?
When do those of us, in the middle, get to tell both sides to shut the fuck up and quit being assholes?

Good post, I agree.