Keating is truly one of the best MPs who has risen on the floor of the Reps to speak, in my opinion. A master, who was always on top of his brief, was as clever and acerbic as could be and as humorous and articulate as anyone who has graced the parliament. He bolstered his side and made the others quake and be uncomfortable.
The difference between Keating and his pale imitators since is summed up in your phrase ‘on top of his brief’ Yes he had the great insults and cutting one liners, but he earned the right to have fun with those lines by giving a true intellectual answer to the actual question first This is what sets him apart from Costello, Abbott, Turnbull and Morrison who had the insults without the intellect
Awesome stuff. You don't happen to have one that Phil Ruddock asked him later in this same question time do you? Has the iconic retort "if he is up here trying to outshine the Leader of the National Party he has only to be on his feet and dressed to do that" and it'd be great to see it!
You cannot have fearful invective without intellect. The unfortunate truth for Australia is, when it came to infrastructure and economic policy, the Liberals made it very easy for Paul Keating to use that intellect to come up with such incisive invective. After WWII, they rode the inevitable wave of growth and prosperity that occurred and did nothing to proactively further Australia's interests at home or abroad. Nothing. And when someone like Whitlam was prepared to tear down and remake not just standing policy but our very self identity as a nation, their best and only response was to have Fraser conspire with Kerr and hide in the wings for the dismissal. Then, when Hawke and Keating were prepared to reform our nation through fiscally responsible policies that unavoidably came with a cost because of the 40 years of inaction that came prior, they dared to criticise the price tag.
@@richardbarcaricchio I don’t listen to 2GB. Did you hear PK’s argument against AUKUS? It was nothing but personal insults. No intelligent analysis of current events in Asia and the sea shared by the Phillipines, VietNam, Malaysia and Taiwan. He is a legend in his own mind. His Accord destroyed the Union movement and allowed Howard, Abbott and ScoMo to apply far-Right looney ideas that have wrecked the place.
@@anEyePhil Hi Phil, I respectfully disagree with you on the AUKUS point. Yes, it DID involve insults, but not personal. And I agreed with Keating's points about the strategic viability of AUKUS, which he also made in addition to the insults about policy directed at Albanese and Wong. Consider that the submarines we are paying for are incapable of defending our mainland against seaborne attack, but are instead designed to be a small part of a seige against China should hostilities occur. A seige is not defensive, but preemptive. In Keating's view (and mine, but who am I?) AUKUS has nothing to do with a National Defence Policy, and everything to do with continuing to be a submissive part of US attempts to enforce Pax Americana in the Pacific. It doesn't have a direct benefit to our security - indeed, it makes diplomacy that much harder because of it - and can only benefit us should specific circumstances occur where a preemptive seige against mainland China would be the correct course of action for Australia. And we have to pay an obscene amount of money for the privilege. Madness. The point you make about his impacts to the Union movement are interesting to me, but I don't know enough about that yet to have a position. Thank you for raising that - I'm looking forward to learning more about it and judging his performance in that area.
![[UNCUT]“ฅนตื่นธรรม”ปะทะ“หมอปลา-ปู่มหามุนี-อั๋นโอกิ”สะเทือนกระทรวงเวทมนตร์ Iคนดังนั่งเคลียร์I10 ตค.67](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/peMD_SAkwNc/mqdefault.jpg)
Keating is truly one of the best MPs who has risen on the floor of the Reps to speak, in my opinion. A master, who was always on top of his brief, was as clever and acerbic as could be and as humorous and articulate as anyone who has graced the parliament. He bolstered his side and made the others quake and be uncomfortable.
The difference between Keating and his pale imitators since is summed up in your phrase ‘on top of his brief’
Yes he had the great insults and cutting one liners, but he earned the right to have fun with those lines by giving a true intellectual answer to the actual question first
This is what sets him apart from Costello, Abbott, Turnbull and Morrison who had the insults without the intellect
Can you imagine him in American or UK politics.
@@YortOKAs a British citizen, our Australian cousins are very impressive. Keating would wipe the floor with our current dastardly Tory government.
Absolutely!@@liamb8644
He'd DEVASTATE the opposition! 😂@@YortOK
2024 and the LNP once again let the country rot from 2013 to 2022.
Best PRIME MINISTER of AUSTRALIA in living memory ... without a doubt!
NO LIBERAL comes close or has ever come close!
Him and Beasley stuffed the military. A total prick.
JUST REMINDS ME HOW MUCH I MISS A REAL POLITICIAN !
Thanks for uploading these Greg! Keep them coming!
Hear, hear. You're a legend, Greg. Thanks!
Awesome stuff. You don't happen to have one that Phil Ruddock asked him later in this same question time do you? Has the iconic retort "if he is up here trying to outshine the Leader of the National Party he has only to be on his feet and dressed to do that" and it'd be great to see it!
I want to see that too.🤣
Decades later and the Libs haven't changed in that regard.
Such a shame Keating was nt PM for a decade . A lost opportunity.
Yes Australia deserves tasty Mayonnaise from the member for Mayo
We didn't let the country rot. We brought a sense of dynamism to the country.
...note the little miserable, groveling, private schooled Howard! 🙄
A hat of bore water for the old horse👌👍
Yeah a revolution
Ease of items🤔🤔🪓🪓👊👊👊
Just stuck in this box, life?🤔
Sussex Street Labor Right Thug. They feared his invective not his intellect. Mahler agrees.
Only a 2GB listener could say that!
They DID fear his intellect!... Who wouldn't?!...He was more intelligent than all the dumb arse liberal politicians, put together!
You cannot have fearful invective without intellect. The unfortunate truth for Australia is, when it came to infrastructure and economic policy, the Liberals made it very easy for Paul Keating to use that intellect to come up with such incisive invective. After WWII, they rode the inevitable wave of growth and prosperity that occurred and did nothing to proactively further Australia's interests at home or abroad. Nothing. And when someone like Whitlam was prepared to tear down and remake not just standing policy but our very self identity as a nation, their best and only response was to have Fraser conspire with Kerr and hide in the wings for the dismissal. Then, when Hawke and Keating were prepared to reform our nation through fiscally responsible policies that unavoidably came with a cost because of the 40 years of inaction that came prior, they dared to criticise the price tag.
@@richardbarcaricchio I don’t listen to 2GB. Did you hear PK’s argument against AUKUS? It was nothing but personal insults. No intelligent analysis of current events in Asia and the sea shared by the Phillipines, VietNam, Malaysia and Taiwan. He is a legend in his own mind. His Accord destroyed the Union movement and allowed Howard, Abbott and ScoMo to apply far-Right looney ideas that have wrecked the place.
@@anEyePhil Hi Phil, I respectfully disagree with you on the AUKUS point. Yes, it DID involve insults, but not personal. And I agreed with Keating's points about the strategic viability of AUKUS, which he also made in addition to the insults about policy directed at Albanese and Wong. Consider that the submarines we are paying for are incapable of defending our mainland against seaborne attack, but are instead designed to be a small part of a seige against China should hostilities occur. A seige is not defensive, but preemptive. In Keating's view (and mine, but who am I?) AUKUS has nothing to do with a National Defence Policy, and everything to do with continuing to be a submissive part of US attempts to enforce Pax Americana in the Pacific. It doesn't have a direct benefit to our security - indeed, it makes diplomacy that much harder because of it - and can only benefit us should specific circumstances occur where a preemptive seige against mainland China would be the correct course of action for Australia. And we have to pay an obscene amount of money for the privilege. Madness.
The point you make about his impacts to the Union movement are interesting to me, but I don't know enough about that yet to have a position. Thank you for raising that - I'm looking forward to learning more about it and judging his performance in that area.