Mr. Stand...
Posted on 09/10/2005 4:46:12 AM PDT by Colonel Kangaroo
Lincoln holiday on its way out
By Phil Kabler Staff writer
A bill to combine state holidays for Washington and Lincoln’s birthdays into a single Presidents’ Day holiday cleared its first legislative committee Wednesday, over objections from Senate Republicans who said it besmirches Abraham Lincoln’s role in helping establish West Virginia as a state.
Senate Government Organization Committee members rejected several attempts to retain Lincoln’s birthday as a state holiday.
State Sen. Russ Weeks, R-Raleigh, introduced an amendment to instead eliminate Columbus Day as a paid state holiday. “Columbus didn’t have anything to do with making West Virginia a state,” he said. “If we have to cut one, let’s cut Christopher Columbus.”
Jim Pitrolo, legislative director for Gov. Joe Manchin, said the proposed merger of the two holidays would bring West Virginia in line with federal holidays, and would effectively save $4.6 million a year — the cost of one day’s pay to state workers.
Government Organization Chairman Ed Bowman, D-Hancock, said the overall savings would be even greater, since by law, county and municipal governments must give their employees the same paid holidays as state government.
“To the taxpayers, the savings will be even larger,” he said.
The bill technically trades the February holiday for a new holiday on the Friday after Thanksgiving. For years, though, governors have given state employees that day off with pay by proclamation.
Sen. Sarah Minear, R-Tucker, who also objected to eliminating Lincoln’s birthday as a holiday, argued that it was misleading to suggest that eliminating the holiday will save the state money.
“It’s not going to save the state a dime,” said Minear, who said she isn’t giving up on retaining the Lincoln holiday.
Committee members also rejected an amendment by Sen. Steve Harrison, R-Kanawha, to recognize the Friday after Thanksgiving as “Lincoln Day.”
“I do believe President Lincoln has a special place in the history of West Virginia,” he said.
Sen. Randy White, D-Webster, said he believed that would create confusion.
“It’s confusing to me,” he said.
Senate Judiciary Chairman Jeff Kessler, D-Marshall, suggested that the state could recognize Lincoln’s proclamation creating West Virginia as part of the June 20 state holiday observance for the state’s birthday.
Proponents of the measure to eliminate a state holiday contend that the numerous paid holidays - as many as 14 in election years — contribute to inefficiencies in state government.
To contact staff writer Phil Kabler, use e-mail or call 348-1220.
Mr. Stand...
It would not have anything to do with the fact the 'Confederate' traitors were resoundingly defeated, thereby preventing a separate, expanded slave empire? Who needs little factoids such as that - right?
Are you serious quoting Franklin "doughface" Pierce, once again exposing your pro-slavery sentiments?
Pierce's popularity in the North nose dived sharply after he came out in favor of the Kansas-Nebraska Act, repealing the Missouri Compromise and reopening the question of the expansion of slavery in the West. This is a real hero of yours.
Jefferson Davis, the arch sellout, served as President Pierce's Secretary of War. (nuff said)
Pierce was a notorious alcoholic. After losing the Democratic nomination, Pierce reportedly quipped "there's nothing left to do but get drunk" (quoted also as "after the White House what is there to do but drink?")
His hitting the bottle resulted in ruining his marriage to Jane Means Appleton Pierce. He completely destroyed his reputation by declaring support for the 'Confederacy' during the Civil War, dying shortly afterwards of cirrhosis of the liver brought on by years of drinking.
Neo-confederates really know how to pick them....The bar is now open.
"I'll drink to that!"
Resoundingly? As in it took the Union over 4 years to defeat a foe with less than 1/4 it's population, a fraction of the industry and weaponry, and only then by resorting to waging war on innocent women and children?
If a founder stood an announced to all present in convention, that 'if we are unsatisfied with the proposed [national] government, we can renounce it, this is an additional safeguard to our state', would you consider them to be a crackpot? What if they stated that 'a power remains with the state until it is delegated'? Is that gentleman a lunatic? Are they insane?
Just curious, but do you drink Coca Cola?
Wrong. No one here is expressing an PRO-slavery sentiments - Abraham Lincoln was pro-slavery, as he supported a constitutional Amendment making slavery PERMANENT.
Your continued support for the 'neo-confederate' movement by way of always defending the likes of Jefferson Davis, pro-slavery sellouts such as Franklin Pierce, coupled with condemnation of anyone who worked for the end of slavery clearly indicates which side you wanted to win the Civil War.
A 'Confederate' (victory) would have reinforces existing slavery and expanding the Old South westward, not to mention wholesale slaughter for all Americans opposed no matter where they resided.
Attempting to spin it anyway you like and never being up front is very typical of your type. The comments you print repeatedly exemplify your positions to anyone who reviews them.
See, now here you're just out and out lying. I usually have more respect for you, even if I don't agree with your positions or interpretations. Nothing Lincoln ever said can be remotely construed as "pro-slavery." What he did offer the south was an amendment forbidding the federal government from outlawing the institution. And he'd already said many times that he didn't think he had the constitutional authority to outlaw it. That's why the Emancipation Proclamation didn't actually free the slaves. It took the 13th amendment to do that. There was, however, nothing in the proposed amendment that would have stopped the states from eliminating it on their own, as all of the northern states had already done.
You guys are good at miscontruing intentions. If the north didn't hang all the confederate leaders for treason, it's because they were anxious to repair the union and move on, not because the south was legally in the right. If Lincoln offered to prevent the federal government from outlawing slavery, it's because he was trying to save the union, not because he was somehow pro-slavery.
Please you post any proof that Confederate administration advocated the wholesale slaughter of Americans in disagreement with them.
Again, I have no problem with anyone ending slavery, yet defending President Davis et al is not expressing a desire for slavery. A support for the constitutional legality of secession yes.
I do agree that Lincoln's sole aim was to repair the union and move on.
Let me ask the question this way: If W worked for the passage of an amendment that said that Roe V. Wade was invalid, that the federal government had no business guaranteeing abortion rights and that it was a matter for the states to decide, would you say that he was pro-abortion?
The founders of the state came close to naming the state "Lincoln."
Teddy "The Swimmer" Kennedy can claim to be against abortion personally, but he cannot legally prevent it nor vote against it.
Ronald W. Reagan supported the Human Life bill, the Respect Human Life Act, as well as worked toward an Amendment ENDING abortion in every state. Who of the three is working to end abortion, and whose positions would extend/protect it?
Sure, Pepsi too, along with Root Beer & Cream Soda. One never becomes a stew bum with those drinks.
Would you have a problem drinking Coca-Cola, knowing that it was invented by John S. Pemberton, a Lt. Colonel in the 3rd Georgia Infantry?
Personally, I can't stand Pepsi - too sweet.
Scores of posts have already demonstrated if Southerners refused to take part in the insurrection they were brutally dealt with. Simply review a number of the postings in this thread for ample proof not all in the South favoured full scale rebellion for the protection of Slavery Inc.
"Again, I have no problem with anyone ending slavery.."
Talk is real cheap. Would you, as so many others did, diligently work to end slavery in the South?
"..yet defending President Davis et al is not expressing a desire for slavery."
Here, for example, is a quote from Davis using the Bible to defend the South's Slaveoracy: "It (slavery) was established by decree of Almighty God and is sanctioned in the Bible, in both Testaments from Genesis to Revelation 4."
While on the other hand Southerners Angelina and Sarah Grimke grew up in a slaveowning family where they became convinced that slavery was an evil institution, unlike Davis & his collection of 'Confederates'. Angelina, her husband, Theodore Weld, and her sister, Sarah, fought slavery vigorously by making public speeches and publishing tracts. They even wrote a book documenting slavery's abuses by culling newspapers for information about the treatment of slaves. The book, American Slavery As It Is, sold 100,000 copies in its first year and undoubtedly aided the antislavery cause.
Albert Gallatin Brown, U.S. Senator from Mississippi, speaking with regard to the several filibuster expeditions to Central America stated: "I want Cuba . . . I want Tamaulipas, Potosi, and one or two other Mexican States; and I want them all for the same reason -- for the planting and spreading of slavery."
Senator Robert M. T. Hunter of Virginia: "There is not a respectable system of civilization known to history whose foundations were not laid in the institution of domestic slavery."
Atlanta Confederacy, 1860: "We regard every man in our midst an enemy to the institutions of the South, who does not boldly declare that he believes African slavery to be a social, moral, and political blessing."
Richmond Enquirer, 1856: "Democratic liberty exists solely because we have slaves . . . freedom is not possible without slavery."
Lawrence Keitt, Congressman from South Carolina, in a speech to the House on January 25th, 1860: "African slavery is the corner-stone of the industrial, social, and political fabric of the South; and whatever wars against it, wars against her very existence. Strike down the institution of African slavery and you reduce the South to depopulation and barbarism." Later in the same speech he said, "The anti-slavery party contend that slavery is wrong in itself, and the Government is a consolidated national democracy. We of the South contend that slavery is right, and that this is a confederate Republic of sovereign States."
Methodist Rev. John T. Wightman, preaching at Yorkville, South Carolina: "The triumphs of Christianity rest this very hour upon slavery; and slavery depends on the triumphs of the South . . . This war is the servant of slavery."
# From your home state, the Georgia Constitution of 1861:"The General Assembly shall have no power to pass laws for the emancipation of slaves." (This is the entire text of Article 2, Sec. VII, Paragraph 3.)
Alexander Stephens, Vice-President of the Confederacy, referring to the Confederate government: "Its foundations are laid, its cornerstone rests, upon the great truth that the negro is not equal to the white man; that slavery . . . is his natural and normal condition." [Augusta, Georgia, Daily Constitutionalist, March 30th, 1861.]
James H. Hammond, Congressman from South Carolina: "Sir, I do firmly believe that domestic slavery, regulated as ours is, produces the highest toned, the purest, best organization of society that has ever existed on the face of the earth."
There are a lot more Pro-slavery 'Confederate' quotes I could list, but you know all of them by heart.
"No amendment shall be made to the Constitution which will authorize or give to Congress the power to abolish or interfere, within any State, with the domestic institutions thereof, including that of persons held to labor or service by the laws of said State."
All that says is that it's a matter for the states. Nothing in it says, "slavery shall be permanent forever and can never be outlawed anywhere." It says the federal government won't interfere with it.
Not in the least, Pemberton would be shocked to learn Coca-Cola is known world-wide. On a hot day an ice cold Coke is great, and even better in the old gas station style, small bottle form.
The statement in question was "[p]lease you post any proof that Confederate administration advocated the wholesale slaughter of Americans in disagreement with them."
I've read the thread, but found no evidence of what you allege. Nor have I memorized the quotes you cite. Yes, I would have worked to end slavery. I'm not pro-slavery, I'm pro-Constitution. I'm not stuck on stupid as some are.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.