Replies

When I read that RI was shortening its name, I had assumed that they had done it legally, not in an end run around the state constitution. I also was unaware that, as recently as 2010, 78% of Rhode Islanders supported slavery—that’s the implication of Gov. Raimondo’s statements, n’est pas?

I think that, given her opinion, Raimondo should have announced her support for the new referendum, and vowed to shorten the name in state checks, letterheads, etc. (even before the old checks and letterheads run out) *once the voters have approved the change*. But this is lawlessness, not to mention wastefulness at a time in which state governments shouldn’t be looking for new ways to spend money unnecessarily.

But Raimondo’s actions and statements on the issue of RI’s name are only the second dumbest that I’ve heard from a governor of the state. When the issue came up in 2010, ultimately successful gubernatorial candidate Lincoln Chafee expressed concern that changing the state’s name *might violate the U.S. Constitution* because it listed RI by its full, official name. How someone that stupid could be elected to the U.S. Senate and to the governorship is a testament to how the constitutional prohibition on titles of nobility does not prevent voters from electing people based on their father’s attributes.

The "Providence Plantations" thing certainly SOUNDS like kind of slavery terminology, but its like when they got their panties in a bunch over the word "niggardly" because it SOUNDS like an anti-black slur, when it reality the word just meant "cheapskate or miserly" and no connection to the anti-black slur aside from very similar spelling. I googled it, wondering if slavery was ever even in a thing in Rhode Island, give how far removed the state is from the antebellum culture of the deep south. A brief online search says Rhode Island had slavery during its colonial era, but very quickly abolished the slave trade in the revolutionary war era after it became an American state. Nevertheless, people were still allowed to keep the slaves they already had, and there was a small amount of slave owners despite repeated anti-slavery laws being passed. They only had four slaves left in the whole state by the 1840 census. Finally, in Rhode Island's 1843 constitution, slavery was permanently made illegal.

If the Governor is going to change the name of the state by Executive Order, she might as well go the full hog and rename it "State of Rhode & Narragansett Bay Islands", give that the vast majority of Rhode "Island" is on the U.S. MAINLAND and isn't a freakin' island.

Or better yet, take the suggestion from the Jim Carrey movie "Me, Myself & Irene" and rename it DISTRICT of Rhode Island, demoting those commies down to being a region within a much bigger state. They can have Massachusetts' Senators or something. ;-)