@ehBeth,
That's a pretty broad statement, and one I doubt you can back up with evidence.
In any case, the street preacher is not complaining about the girl, he actually uses his very subdued reaction to her antics as an example of how someone can override a negative impulse or deny a harmful desire.
Whether or not one can empathize with the crowds antagonism towards him, there is a line over which they cannot step in terms of how they express that antagonism. Calling the guy a retard doesn't cross that line, and it can be argued (as raprap has) that it is her legally protected right to do so. However, while making a feeble effort to grab the guy's mike may not be considered crossing the line either, she certainly didn't have a legally protected right to do so.
Raprap's claim that she was simply responding in kind (which you seem to agree with) is a common response when someone crosses the line in response to free speech that they find offensive. The fact of the matter is that no one has a legally protected right to physically accost someone who they find offensive, no matter whether that person is motivated by hatred, or not.
The sword cuts both ways.