Article

2004-07-22 Home Front: Culture Wars

NYT sides with Ronstadt against rude casino patrons

Archived material is restricted to Rantburg regulars and members. If you need access email fred.pruitt=at=gmail.com with your nick to be added to the members list. There is no charge to join Rantburg as a member.

Posted by Super Hose 2004-07-22 03:07|| || Front Page|| [2 views since 2007-05-07] Top

#1 This behavior assumes that Ms. Ronstadt had no right to express a political opinion from the stage. It implies - for some members of the audience at least - that there is a philosophical contract that says an artist must entertain an audience only in the ways that audience sees fit.

Damn right she does not have the right to express her opinion during a concert which the patrons paid money for. Ms Ronstadt was not paid to express her opinion but to "Shut [the f--k] up and Sing".

I cannot express my opinion at work -- cannot hand RNC/Bush-Cheeney posters outside my cubicle. This is right and fair because I am not being paid to express my opinion but to develop software.

Posted by CrazyFool 2004-07-22 3:18:34 PM|| 2004-07-22 3:18:34 PM|| Front Page Top

#2 Not the NYT!!! Well, knock me over with a feather.

Posted by 98zulu 2004-07-22 4:27:20 PM|| 2004-07-22 4:27:20 PM|| Front Page Top

#3 Not the NYT!!! Well, knock me over with a feather.

Posted by 98zulu 2004-07-22 4:29:26 PM|| 2004-07-22 4:29:26 PM|| Front Page Top

#4 Perhaps her praise for Mr. Moore, even at the very end of her show, did ruin the performance for some people. They have a right to voice their disapproval - to express their opinion as Ms. Ronstadt expressed hers and to ask for a refund. But if their intemperate behavior began to worry the management, then they were the ones who should have been thrown out and told never to return, not Ms. Ronstadt,..

Sorry NYT, but you just don't get it. The old saying applies here more than ever: "The customer is always right."

Posted by Bomb-a-rama 2004-07-22 5:50:43 PM|| 2004-07-22 5:50:43 PM|| Front Page Top

#5 Methinks they probably supported Maurice Chevalier's "free speech" rights to sing for the occupying Wehrmacht...

______________________the 'good 'ol days" when "occupation" meant OCCUPATION!!!

Posted by borgboy 2004-07-22 11:34:23 PM|| 2004-07-22 11:34:23 PM|| Front Page Top

12:09 alex B.
11:54 Anonymous6488
10:43 Anonymous5901
13:27 Anonymous5891
00:06 Zenster
00:05 Fred
23:48 AzCat
23:46 Zenster
23:39 borgboy
23:38 borgboy
23:36 borgboy
23:34 borgboy
23:32 Super Hose
23:30 borgboy
23:26 OldSpook
23:23 Jarhead
23:15 Silentbrick
23:01 cheaderhead
22:57 J Chirac
22:54 ed
22:51 ed
22:49 jackal
22:46 cheaderhead
22:33 Barbara Skolaut