I'm sorry to intrude on your back and forth, but I can kind of see how this would ultimately be large aspect of why he was let go. One of Bob's, in my view, biggest problems maybe from the standpoint of an employee, was that Bob, in all areas of his commentary has an utter contempt for people who disagree with him so much so that even if you take the stance like "I disagree but what he says is still entertaining" you'll eventually be driven away by the extremes to which he will drive home the point that he cannot stand dissenting opinion. And he not only understands this about himself but he views it as one of his most virtuous qualities and looks for it in others. He thinks that this is called bravery. He thinks that people on the other side are evil and worthy of his disdain, but also that neutral parties are almost worse in their enabling of those he disagree's with to exist at all.
I never cared too much about GamerGate, but his outspoken support for the harassment and bullying of those who might have been sympathetic (not even so far as support) was producing comments that made me completely cringe. He has on numerous occasions called South Park cowardly for more often then not entertaining the idea that there are two sides to some issues.
Unless you're company is marketing itself as being in the theater of the extreme (Like your Foxs and MSNBCs), and even then, you're probably going to find yourself without a job at one point or another when you start radicalizing too much in one direction. To defend that point, Both Fox news and MSNBC got rid of Glenn Beck and Keith Olbermen respectively at a point with the only possible conclusion being that they were more extreme then their respective employers were ready to stand 100% behind, and their loss of immediate revenue would pay off in the long run. I think similarly you'll notice about these layoffs as well is that there were a lot of the more outspoken voices among them. Ross Lincoln for example was certainly in this extreme category, and to a milder extent Greg Tito was the same. And that's not to position them good or bad, but for better or for worse these guys are guys who would be more at home discussing the political implications behind games as much as the games themselves, and I have to wonder if that's a safe position at the moment. After all a company has to secure sponsors, and while you could say well X company might be cowardly for not wanting to advertise a controversial figure who some see as "righteous" if you're a company that depends on these sponsors then likely you want to make their decision as painless and risk free as possible.