This raises a question of what is and what is not acceptable on-line. Clearly the use of strong language is widely accepted in Canada in a face to face context -- but is it accepted on-line? My sense is not but I'm curious what others think?
The Canadian Press
OTTAWA — One of the NDP's most prominent MPs is making no apologies after strafing his Twitter followers with F-bombs.
Winnipeg MP Pat Martin erupted in anger-fuelled electronic profanity Wednesday after the Conservative government shut down debate on a budget bill.
"This is a (expletive) disgrace... closure again. And on the Budget," read a tweet on Martin's Twitter account.
"There's not a democracy in the world that would tolerate this jackboot (expletive)."
The exchange set off a stir in the Twitterverse after it was monitored by Martin's 1,600 followers.
In a followup tweet early today, Martin insisted his account had not been hacked, and that his comments were little more than a symptom of Tory-induced rage.
"You should have seen them last night laughing and joking in their smug ignorance," he wrote.
An hour after Martin's original tirade, he tweeted again: "For gods sake. In these uncertain economic times, don't you think our parliament should be debating our federal budget? Some due diligence?"
One fellow Twitter user tried calling him out for failing to capitalize the word "God," dubbing him a "foul mouth socialist" in the process.
"(Expletive) you," was Martin's blunt reply.
...
8 comments:
Oh please, you all act like you've never heard the "f" word or even the "s" word. Time to grow up and focus on WHY he used the words he did.
Indeed Anonymous is correct. Maybe those who opposed Hitler in the early days should have used a great deal more expletives. Words may offend some people's sensibilities but that is nothing compared to the erosion of our democracy. And though conservatives say that people are overreacting, you would have to be hopelessly naive not to realize that if a Liberal Government were doing the same things that this government is doing they would be telling us that that we already live in a fascist state!
I didnt think it mattered why Anon, or, to you does it. I have no problem with his language, I just find it amusing that he's complaining about the need for a democratic conversation then tells someone to go F off when he doesnt like what he hears. I"m just wondering if this falls into the hope instead of fear thingy that the NDP are flogging right now?
He's a bitter bitter man who just isnt that bright.
billg
Well, I'm not sure Hitler could have been stopped with strong language -- perhaps blunt and truthful language might have worked but telling the SA to, say, "fuck off" seems unlikely to have driven them off the streets. That said, a respect for forms is a respect of sorts. Certainly, telling someone who disagrees to "fuck off" is unhelpful and not very inclusive or democratic.
Martin has a history of belligerent behaviour.
My guess is that he'll be "asked" to apologize and probably will.
I didn't get a case of the vapors from the language Martin used. The Conservatives should have allowed a debate on the budget, but the story has become about Pat Martin's salty language. To shut the guy up, maybe Martin should have brought up the issues that the government wanted to avoid by cutting debate on the budget.
He's the $##!!&**# best spokesman the No Damned Pants party has. I hope they make him their leader.
Serious hypocrisy folks.
I think he understands that words are used to do things, as well as to say things. Just as the person calling him a 'foul mouthed socialist' was making no real effort to engage, just to harm.
And what he is doing with his words is opposing. Not merely discussing with the Conservatives, but actually bluntly taking action against the closure of the budget debate.
It's a nice change from the days when the Liberals *said* they were opposing, but never actually did anything.
Post a Comment