News-Record.com

"You owe his family a public apology, and we owe it to ourselves to remove you from office."

Ahhhh, here we go again. Breaking PC code can have dire consequences Ms. Foxx, people will want you taken down for one ill advised statement.

Only difference in that letter from the last calling for her head is that an apology is required before removal from office.

" Evidently, Foxx doesn’t know that his killers admitted slaying him and hanging him to a fence post due to homophobia."
Did these killers really say they had a fear of homosexuals?

"It sounds like you are a hater."
Unlike your display of love for people with whom you do not agree.

The reason why a crime is commited or what the killers thoughts might have been should in no way require another law.

Ghost: That was not the point of Foxx's comments.

For the twentieth time, her comments were aimed at the crime after whom the law was named. She stated as fact something that had not been proven.

For that error -- not just the ise of the word hoax --she should apologize. She was wrong. Period.

Howie G, perhaps you are correct, hoax is not the proper word to discribe "hate crimes", BS is I think better.

The hetrophobes and their willing accomplices in the media are going to milk this for all it's worth...and then some.

Emotion rule in their world.

Ghost said:
"The reason why a crime is commited or what the killers thoughts might have been should in no way require another law."

Precisely! Otherwise, we'd have to start making new laws simply because of anyone's motive for breaking any law, anymore. Matthew Shepard was murdered. His killers deserve to rot in jail, end of story.

"Matthew Shepard was murdered. His killers deserve to rot in jail, end of story."

I'll just point out here that Rep Foxx was the one who brought up the Shepard case -- not anyone of the "willing accomplices" in the media. And it wasn't an off the cuff remark or a "PC blunder" -- it was calculated and deliberate. So any scrutiny she gets is her own fault. And the story will end when she does the right thing.

I am down to the last few ways to shuffle the words around to get this point across, but I'll try again. I do NOT believe Mrs Foxx should apologize for voting or even speaking against hate crimes laws. She has a valid point.

However, she was wrong about the case after whom the law is named. And for that she HAS NOT apologized. Two results of her unwillingness to admit her error are: 1) she is an embarassment to NC, and 2) she makes some Republicans look ignorant, unrepentant, and closed-minded to obvious evidence to the contrary of what has been said. (Note: Only one of these two consequences matters to me.)

Howie G is as full of crap as a Christmas turkey, if he really thinks this is about "whom the law is named" after. This is nothing more than a bunch of libs trying to lynch a conservative simply because they are conservative. Howie and other libs can mumble all they want about Mrs. Foxx being "wrong about the case after whom the law is named". They know that is NOT what this is about. They just can't push their pro "hate crime bill" adgenda with real facts.

Howie G

You said, However, she was wrong about the case after whom the law is named. And for that she HAS NOT apologized.

It is called the Matthew Shepard act. I found it on Google.

I think she was wrong in calling it a hoax but it is my understanding that she did apologize.

Also, no life is more important than the other so if someone is murdered, the killers should pay the price regardless of all else. So, therefore I see no reason for the so called hate law. If and when this goes in effect you will see a lot more than just a law against the Matthew Shepard's.

Maggie,

I know it is called the Matthew Shepard Act, and it has already been in place since 2007. Furthermore, Hate Crime legislation first appeared in 1969, was expanded in 1999, and a few times since. So I think we're safe from retribution. And you are right that Mrs Foxx apologized for the use of the word 'hoax'. But she has not apologized for misrepresenting the facts of the Matthew Shepard case to make an irrelevant point.

Apparently this nuance is lost somewhere in the way that I am trying to explain it. Take Beachalker, for example. I have explained this twenty different ways and he/she is still too dense to get the point. Somehow, even though I've never divulged it, Beachwalker has determined my opinion on hate crime law. No one has asked my opinion. Instead, Beachwalker insists on arguing a point that is irrelevant to make his/her own point.

I sincerely hope that my Christmas turkeys are completely devoid of all crap. I hate to think of people in the world eating fecal-laden turkeys at family gatherings.

I better check up on butterball and make sure their poo-removal techniques are sufficient.

In any event, I agree with Howie. While I am opposed to hate crimes legislation, Foxx all but handed the proponents of it a stunning victory with her factual error. She was clearly wrong, not necessarily in her opposition, but in her presentation. Wrong as in factually incorrect.

Howie G said:
Apparently this nuance is lost somewhere in the way that I am trying to explain it.

That is obvious, because you make NO sense.