Reader riposte: Fair go for Greens
by Reader riposte
-
2 September 2010 1:36PM
This post is part of a debate - click here to see how this debate started and developed.
Steve Hind writes:
I think Sam Roggeveen's criticism of Reynolds' defence of the Greens is disingenuous in two ways.
- Reynolds did address the substance of Greens policy, which you claimed she did not. Amongst other things, she showed that policies that were criticised for their 'eccentricity' were in fact broadly supported by the Australian people.
- Your implication that if the Greens could be slurred in 600 words, Reynolds could defend them in 750 doesn't make an enormous amount of sense. Most of Shearer's attacks involved outlining a policy position and then asserting that it's wrong/extreme/undesirable. A rebuttal that sought to do more than level counter-assertions would necessarily have to be significantly more lengthy.
