People do that occasionally -- it's allowed as long as it's a well-thought out argument (regardless of who agrees). If you have a problem with the argument, why don't you contribute a reasoned disagreement? If you have a prejudice against reading vanities, don't read them.
The problem wasn't that it was an opinion from a Freeper, but that fact that it was a ruse designed to look like an indepentent media article that caused my incredulity.
The article was an attempt to by-pass the very well-thought out type of argument you advocate, as if to silence principled critics of this SCOTUS nomination.