According to the Globe's John Ibbitson, NDP MP Pat Martin's F-Bomb tirade was justifiable considering the Tories management of the Parliamentary agenda. As the headline goes, "NDP profanity marks Parliament’s hastened decline under Tories". As Ibby puts it, the tweets were "in poor taste. But he makes an important point." The theory goes that given how the Tories have handled debate in Parliament, we should expect opposition MPs to express frustration. If you have to drop a few F-Bombs to get people's attention, then you gotta do what you gotta do. Maybe it is in poor taste, but you have to make an important point, right? Can you really blame Pat Martin for being frustrated with the Conservatives, who have been limiting (though not eliminating) debate in order to speed up their parliamentary agenda to fulfill election promises?
How much more debate exactly are we supposed to have regarding the gun registry? Parliament and the media have already dedicated thousands of hours of televised debate on this subject. The Tories campaigned on scrapping it, and they were elected to a majority. Should we shut down the rest of the Parliamentary agenda to rehash a debate that we've already had nationally? It is called fulfilling election promises, not justification for temper tantrums.
That's just my opinion. Today's poll question; are the Tories responsible for Pat Martin's F-Bomb tirade?