Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Lincoln holiday on its way out (West Virginia)
West Virginia Gazette Mail ^ | 9-8-2005 | Phil Kabler

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.


TOPICS: Government; US: West Virginia
KEYWORDS: abelincoln; lincoln; sorrydemocrats; westvirginia
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 821-840841-860861-880 ... 1,421-1,437 next last
To: 4CJ
Or that the SHORTEST route between Europe and the United States is the CHEAPEST route, so naturally products would ship there.

How is it cheaper to ship goods to New York, land them, load them on a coastal packet, then ship them to New Orleans rather than ship them direct. Wouldn't that be the shortest route?

Additionally, New York had the deepest harbour, Charleston being only 12 feet deep large ships could never enter the harbour unless it was dredged - which was contemplated circa 1860 to attract trade.

Charleston harbor - which is located where two tidal rivers, the Ashley and the Cooper, meet - is actually quite deep. The channels that lead into the harbor are what needs care, but even in 1860 one of the four channels was 17 to 22 feet deep and the shallowest two were 11 feet deep.

And lastly, with the secession of the states, Southern exporters would see a rise in revenues and profits, and as a consequence, agricultural interests would seek more mechanical means of increasing production.

How so?

841 posted on 10/05/2005 5:45:06 PM PDT by Non-Sequitur
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 826 | View Replies]

To: Colonel Kangaroo
Excellent point! "When Alexander Stephens' statement about the cornerstone of the Confederacy is mentioned, the silence from our pro-CSA friends is deafening." and watch not one those with rabid cases of Confederatitis will dare touch Stephens bigoted attacks. Why? Because these masked fanatical cowards have the exact same sickness and will be totally exposed if they fully lay their deceptive cards on the table of truth.

"Whatever role tariffs had, and I won't deny that they were an additional cause of friction, was a mere sideshow to the cornerstone issue."

Bingo, spot on! Every leading 'normal' American historian have honestly attributed the origins of the Civil War has having its root triggering cause deeply based in the Confederates die-hard insistence on expanding their Cotton Empire, which was based on the demonic, barbaric, Nazi-like system of forced labour of over three million souls who languished in the sweltering heat & humidity - as slaves.

Notice this Howell Cobb referred to the Confederate insurrection as the revolution and he is not the only spokesman for the Rebellion Inc who utilized the term the revolution. What you stated he is totally correct as well. "If the fight was about tariffs, why would the white soldiers lose faith in the rebellion? It seems that the white soldiers of the Union didn't have such a problem with black soldiers fighting for the United States."

Notice how all the neo-confeds have a self-convicting habit of going out of their minds, viciously attack anyone & everyone who worked for abolition of slavery (abolitionists), which begs the question, if one is/was so vehemently against the abolition of slavery in 'Confederate' states, in the identical way this very same backward element is/was against abolishing Southern state mandated forced racial segregation, (Jim Crow "laws") the only logical conclusion is the "tariff" counter attack is nothing more then another smoke screen attempting to remove the main focus off their phobias & hatred.

842 posted on 10/05/2005 9:38:32 PM PDT by M. Espinola (Freedom is never free)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 835 | View Replies]

To: stand watie
"btw,when are you going to DISAVOW the hate-FILLED, arrogant IGNORANCE & moronic parroting of the REVISIONIST, South-HATING AND freedom-HATING nonsense & propaganda (out of the most extreme LEFTIST fringe of northeastern academia), as posted by "m.eSPINola"???"

There might be medical cure for your advanced stages of Continuous-Rebellionmania & Debilitating-Redneckism. The problem IS, can you locate a medical specialist willing to risk going off the deep end himself while trying to treat your case? lol

In terms of someone "hating America". Was it not you who stated on numerous occasions your willingness to force a so-called "pro-Confederate, Dixie Republic" on the American public, in the near future, by whatever means necessary?

843 posted on 10/05/2005 9:55:55 PM PDT by M. Espinola (Freedom is never free)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 756 | View Replies]

To: Non-Sequitur
How so?

One of my minors is in Economics, but it's not a subject that one can understand in a few sentences. A trip to your local library should allow you to find a beginner's book on economics - the laws of supply and demand, Laffer curves, etc are not complicated. International economics & tariffs are only slightly more difficult, but a tax on imports IS an indirect tax on exports. Alternatively, you can learn online 'Mises Institute Home Study Course in Austrian Economics' for $350. Your study can also explain how economies of scale work to reduce costs by shipping > trans-shipment and the role of warehousing, and how tariffs are passed on, and the advantages of open markets which raise the standard of living in all participating countries. When higher profits are realized, they are almost invariably followed by investment in some means of mechanization - where possible - to futher reduce costs and increase profits.

844 posted on 10/06/2005 7:03:12 AM PDT by 4CJ (Tu ne cede malis!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 841 | View Replies]

To: M. Espinola
Alexander Stephens was one man out of millions, with his own misguided beliefs. I'm sure you share the beliefs of John Kerry, Chuck Schumer, Dianne Feinstein, Hillary Clinton and Ted Kennedy right? <sarcasm>
845 posted on 10/06/2005 7:05:35 AM PDT by 4CJ (Tu ne cede malis!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 842 | View Replies]

To: Heyworth
"Even if we accept that the sum of $331 million in southern imports from Europe and the north"

I really don't care whether or not you "accept" that data. It does not come from me. It comes from United States government documents.

If you don't "accept" it means that you do not believe or do not want to believe the records.

What is the point is the following comment from Grand Old has been completely refuted:

To: 4CJ

Tariffs collected at southern ports were nil, because southern imports were nil.


611 posted on 09/27/2005 7:48:11 PM EDT by Grand Old Partisan

Now, that is a comment from someone who is ignorant of his ignorance. Some people do not realize what they do not know, yet sit around making commentary that is totally absurd, while oblivious of the truth.

This request has been fulfilled:


From Grand Old Partisan:

"You were going to post a link to a source other than MSN, remember? You said the figures were from the U.S. Treasury, so post the link."

846 posted on 10/06/2005 7:09:05 AM PDT by PeaRidge
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 838 | View Replies]

To: Heyworth

"and $31 million in northern imports only coincidentally adds up to the $362 million in foreign imports stated in the Treasury Report"

Where in the Treasury Report do you find $362?



847 posted on 10/06/2005 7:11:37 AM PDT by PeaRidge
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 838 | View Replies]

To: PeaRidge
!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

in all too many cases, the members of the DAMNyankee coven are TOO DUMB to understand such concepts, so your work is likely in vain. PITY.

free dixie,sw

848 posted on 10/06/2005 7:12:11 AM PDT by stand watie (being a damnyankee is no better than being a racist. it is a LEARNED prejudice against dixie.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 837 | View Replies]

To: Heyworth

"it still means that if $31 million in imports was consumed by the north, the other 90+% consumed by the south and it again fails the common sense test."

You are quoting incorrect data.


849 posted on 10/06/2005 7:13:10 AM PDT by PeaRidge
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 838 | View Replies]

To: M. Espinola; All
yet ANOTHER DUMB-bunny comment from FR's resident DUMB-bunny-in-chief = "m.eSPINola".

free dixie,sw

850 posted on 10/06/2005 7:14:01 AM PDT by stand watie (being a damnyankee is no better than being a racist. it is a LEARNED prejudice against dixie.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 843 | View Replies]

To: Heyworth
"And while you're quick to point to the warehousing and navigation acts as causes for the decline of southern shipping...:"

You harped for days about the trade data. When you got an answer, you want to try to change the subject. Seems as if you want to shape shift the discussion away from the answers you got, and to begin another with insults.

Toss that bait somewhere else.
851 posted on 10/06/2005 7:24:37 AM PDT by PeaRidge
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 838 | View Replies]

To: Heyworth

"But according to Encarta, the number was $31 million."

You will have to ask them about that number.


852 posted on 10/06/2005 7:35:13 AM PDT by PeaRidge
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 839 | View Replies]

To: PeaRidge; 4CJ
It is going to take a lot of information to educate these people, and they are going to be unwilling to do their own research and learn a little.

It's like teaching a pig to sing.

You accomplish nothing, and it really pisses off the pig.

853 posted on 10/06/2005 7:37:10 AM PDT by Gianni
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 789 | View Replies]

To: Non-Sequitur

"The only possible, reasonable explanation is that there was, in fact, little demand for imported goods in the south."

The data shows that your statement is a contention and not a fact.


854 posted on 10/06/2005 7:48:36 AM PDT by PeaRidge
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 840 | View Replies]

To: Gianni; PeaRidge
You accomplish nothing, and it really pisses off the pig.

Bingo. Their mindset is that ALL imports arriving in New York are for Northern consumers, ALL cars imported into Jacksonville are for Floridians, and ALL TV's from Japan entering into Seattle are for Washingtonians. Anyone living in Iowa NEVER purchases an imported product </sarcasm>

I guess they also think that it's cheaper for the same ships - instead of delivering to Seattle - to sail up the Mississippi to deliver products to Illinois.

855 posted on 10/06/2005 8:02:19 AM PDT by 4CJ (Tu ne cede malis!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 853 | View Replies]

To: PeaRidge
You are quoting incorrect data

And yet it's from a source that you directed me to and cited approvingly.

856 posted on 10/06/2005 8:05:35 AM PDT by Heyworth
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 849 | View Replies]

To: PeaRidge
Where in the Treasury Report do you find $362?

I posted the Treasury Report in post #700. You'll find the information halfway down the third column of the first page. "The exports of the last fiscal year reached the enormous sum of $400,122,296 and the imports for the same period were $362,163,941, yielding a revenue from customs of $53,187,511.87."

857 posted on 10/06/2005 8:15:43 AM PDT by Heyworth
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 847 | View Replies]

To: Heyworth

You are quoting incorrect data

"And yet it's from a source that you directed me to and cited approvingly."

"it still means that if $31 million in imports was consumed by the north, the other 90+% consumed by the south and it again fails the common sense test."

90+% consumed by the south? No source that I provided said that. You and your pal 'non' conjured up that data as an illogical straw man argument, threw it out, and wanted to argue its fallacy.

Since you were so hell bent to have the data, you are now either wanting to change the subject or playing little "blemish" games rather than discuss it. So, it appears that you have no personal or scholarly interest in the truth. So be it.

Hey guys, you were right. They won't consider anything except their little arguments.


858 posted on 10/06/2005 8:18:28 AM PDT by PeaRidge
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 856 | View Replies]

To: Non-Sequitur; PeaRidge
Nope, but I can see once again where you are as full of crap as a Christmas turkey.

I stuff mine with croutons and seasoning.

Must be an Iowa thing.

859 posted on 10/06/2005 8:18:41 AM PDT by Gianni
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 824 | View Replies]

To: Colonel Kangaroo
Tariff contentions could be resolved through the normal Constitutional political process, but the resolution of the main issue impelled the slaveowning interest to rebellion and resolution on the battlefield.

This is a strange conclusion.

Through the normal Constitutional Political process, maintenance of slavery was the one thing that was undoubtedly and rigidly safe within the Union. It would appear as though the Radicals were the ones who used the war to circumvent the process.

860 posted on 10/06/2005 9:07:12 AM PDT by Gianni
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 835 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 821-840841-860861-880 ... 1,421-1,437 next last

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson