[John D Harris]

Originally posted by Grojlach: quote: Originally posted by John D Harris: Sounds to me like they did exactly what you are trying to say they didn't do Groj. They let her speak and they choose not to listen. I don't argee with any vandelism, tearing down of property that doesn't belong to you, or spilling of drinks on property that doesn't belong to you. The concert hall does belong to the casino so they get to decide who they wish to preform and why. If anybody doen't like it buy the concert hall from the casino or buy your own concert hall and book the dittie tiwitts, whoopie, and linda wrongstant to preform for you.

There's a substantial difference between simply deciding not to listen and vandalising property, though.
And they could ban her for all I care, though it would be in the casino's best interest to put a number of those throwing a tantrum on a blacklist just the same. I don't think anyone could keep a straight face and claim that the audience's response to Ronstadt's remarks was in any way within acceptable and expectable parameters. [/QUOTE]Agreed as I stated in my post that you quoted. But your opening remark was not to the fact of vandelism it was to the fact of "letting somebody speak their position and choosing not to listen" vandelism is not the same thing as that. So which are you upset at the vandelism or the booing and walking out?