I think you missed the point. Rich powerful people live in a bubble and poor people get treated like crap, but have no power to do anything about it. The bubble itself isn't what the author criticises, it's the strong sense of entitlement that it encourages.
The article was well written and thoughtful. It pointed to a plausible cultural phenomenon using well thought out examples, made personal through the writer's own life story. You can agree with it or disagree, the things it discusses are very much open to interpretation. It is, after all, an article written by an artist, not a scientific survey. However, you chose to insult the author and that really only reflects badly on you. Consider the following points:
1) Calling the author "miss" in what is clearly meant to be an insult strongly suggests that you are sexist. It implies that being female is reason alone for intellectual belittlement. If you genuinely have gone through your whole life without noticing that one gender is not mentally superior to the other then you must be unbelievably dense.
2) The term "liberal" relates to opinions on personal freedoms. It doesn't have anything to do with the content of the article. Perhaps you meant "liberal arts major". Either way, this particular word is generally used to imply a bias on the part of the author. Since you don't really point out any concrete examples of bias, (you don't even seem to have understood the content of the article), in this context, this word probably just means "I disagree with the opinions and personal values of the author". Which I wouldn't consider an insult, given my opinion of you so far.
3) If you had used the word "socialist" instead of "liberal" then maybe you might have come a tiny step closer to making a coherent argument. The article does actually represent a socialist viewpoint. However, that word alone isn't really an insult, unless meant to imply a bias, as discussed above.
4) "Hissyfitpants" implies that the author was angry when she wrote the article. Moreover, it belittles her anger as being illegitimate and trivial. If the author had been angry about how rich people are treated at airports, then I suppose that would have been quite trivial. However, the tone of the article is measured and not at all angry. Also, the author is not critical of how rich people are treated at airports. She talks personally about how it feels to be treated differently and extrapolates from that about how the culture, values and attitudes of the rich have diverged from the rest of the population. I'm guessing your reading comprehension isn't great.
5) The insult should have been capitalised since the word "miss" implies that it is meant to be a name.