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 1-5051-100101-150151-200 ... 1,401-1,437 next last
Another authentic hero of Anerica gets pushed to the background. Of course, it was the Democrats providing the bulk of the backing to eliminate the Lincoln holiday. Democrats have been against Lincoln for 145 years now.
1 posted on 09/10/2005 4:46:14 AM PDT by Colonel Kangaroo
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

Comment #2 Removed by Moderator

To: Colonel Kangaroo

The only person's birthday we celebrate as a national holiday is Martin Luther King's. The others we share.

What's that tell you?


3 posted on 09/10/2005 5:19:08 AM PDT by Loud Mime (War is Mankind's way of ridding the world of the tyranny caused by liberalism)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Colonel Kangaroo

I wish they wouldn't sully the memory of George Washington with Abe Lincoln. Why don't they combine Lincoln with MLK day instead?


4 posted on 09/10/2005 5:23:02 AM PDT by DeeOhGee (If you don't know where you're going, any road will get you there.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: DeeOhGee

Why not really get creative and combine Mlk's birthday with Robert( Sheets) Byrd's birthday?


5 posted on 09/10/2005 5:24:23 AM PDT by Kozak (Anti Shahada: " There is no God named Allah, and Muhammed is his False Prophet")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: Kozak

Now you're on to something...throw in Abe and have a trifecta!


6 posted on 09/10/2005 5:29:54 AM PDT by DeeOhGee (If you don't know where you're going, any road will get you there.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: DeeOhGee; NameItClaimIt
If Washington had been alive in 1861, he'd have been standing beside Lincoln to preserve the Union. Both were Federalists who believed in a strong Union to preserve American peace and freedom.

On the other hand, Jefferson Davis pursued a despicable line that would invite foreigners to move against fellow Americans. Washington would have been horrified by the policies of the CSA.

7 posted on 09/10/2005 5:32:34 AM PDT by Colonel Kangaroo
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: Colonel Kangaroo

There's a littl more to it than that. The state of West Virginia was formed during the War Between the States. This is a state where brother truely fought against brother. The first land battle of the War was fought here. The blue - gray animosity goes much deeper than Dem - Rep.
JMHO


8 posted on 09/10/2005 5:37:10 AM PDT by Roccus (Able Danger? What's an Able Danger?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Loud Mime

Lincoln and Washington just don't fit in with modern trends. If the homosexuals could prove their ridiculous "Gay Abe" fable, we might see a new Lincoln holiday.


9 posted on 09/10/2005 5:38:40 AM PDT by Colonel Kangaroo
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: Roccus

I guess the war was the source of many of the long-running feuds that many associate with the mountains of WV,KY,TN,NC,GA and AL.


10 posted on 09/10/2005 5:49:10 AM PDT by Colonel Kangaroo
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: Colonel Kangaroo

Washington would not have suspended the Constitution. While he was a federalist, he recognized that states were a part of the union of their own will, and had the right to secede if they wanted.


11 posted on 09/10/2005 6:05:41 AM PDT by DeeOhGee (If you don't know where you're going, any road will get you there.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: Colonel Kangaroo

Excellent point about about Jefferson Davis! The Confederates were begging forein nations to come into the war on their side -- and kill fellow Americans.


12 posted on 09/10/2005 6:09:03 AM PDT by Grand Old Partisan
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: Roccus

If it weren't for Abraham Lincoln, West Virginia would still be part of Virginia. The Constitution forbids creating a new state out of an existing state without that state's consent. Lincoln found a way around that.


13 posted on 09/10/2005 6:09:21 AM PDT by Verginius Rufus
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: DeeOhGee

Lincoln did not suspend the Constition, just habeas corpus, which is perfectly constitutional.


14 posted on 09/10/2005 6:10:13 AM PDT by Grand Old Partisan
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: Colonel Kangaroo
ouch!!
15 posted on 09/10/2005 6:12:38 AM PDT by Loud Mime (War is Mankind's way of ridding the world of the tyranny caused by liberalism)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: Colonel Kangaroo

Although the most famous feud, Hatfield - McCoy, was over land, money and eventually murder, it was waged back and forth between KY and WV. There is still a lot of resentment, however, over the War within the state of WV. As someone who moved here recently, I've tried to acquaint myself with the history and culture of the Mountain State and am finding it most fascinating.


16 posted on 09/10/2005 6:13:59 AM PDT by Roccus (Able Danger? What's an Able Danger?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: Verginius Rufus

The U.S. Supreme Court upheld the creation of West Virginia, reasoning along these lines:

By voting to secede, the rebel delegates to the Virginia secession convention were triators to the United States Government and were therefore no longer legitimate delegates to the convention, leaving the few dozen loyal delegates (from West Virginia and the Easter Shore) as the legitimate government of the state. They elected their leader, Francis Pierpont, as governor. President Lincoln recognized Pierpont as governor and Congress recognized the two men his legislature elected to the U.S. Senate. It was the loyal government of Virginia which agreed to the formation of West Virginia. Pierpont, BTW, stayed as governor of Virginia until 1868.


17 posted on 09/10/2005 6:18:51 AM PDT by Grand Old Partisan
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: Verginius Rufus

But at the time, Virginia by its own choice, was not part of the United States. Once WV was formed, Lincoln and Congress granted it statehood. To argue the right or wrong of these actions is like a chicken or the egg controversy.


18 posted on 09/10/2005 6:19:59 AM PDT by Roccus (Able Danger? What's an Able Danger?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: Colonel Kangaroo

Yes, indeed, most mountain folk were Unionists, as far south as Alabama.


19 posted on 09/10/2005 6:20:06 AM PDT by Grand Old Partisan
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: Verginius Rufus; Roccus

An interesting aftershock of the Civil War was the 18924 Democratic Convention. One ofthe reasons the frontrunner, William G. McAdoo, did not get the nomination was that he had been born in Georgia in 1863, a time when neo-Confederates were still claiming that the state was not part of the United States. So, his opponents argued, if Georgia was not part of the United States in 1863, then McAdoo was not a natural born citizen of the United States and so ineligible for the presidency. They said that the neo-Confederates could not have it both ways. Rather than admit that Lincoln was right, southern Democrats were forced to give up on McAdoo.


20 posted on 09/10/2005 6:27:22 AM PDT by Grand Old Partisan
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: Verginius Rufus; Roccus; x; Ditto; Non-Sequitur; mac_truck; justshutupandtakeit; AnalogReigns; ...

An interesting aftershock of the Civil War was the 1924 Democratic Convention. One of the reasons the frontrunner, William G. McAdoo, did not get the nomination was that he had been born in Georgia in 1863, a time when neo-Confederates were still claiming that the state was not part of the United States. So, his opponents argued, if Georgia was not part of the United States in 1863, then McAdoo was not a natural born citizen of the United States and so ineligible for the presidency. They said that the neo-Confederates could not have it both ways. Rather than admit that Lincoln was right, southern Democrats were forced to give up on McAdoo.



21 posted on 09/10/2005 6:29:20 AM PDT by Grand Old Partisan
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: Grand Old Partisan
He jailed the Maryland legislature. THAT was unconstitutional.
22 posted on 09/10/2005 6:37:34 AM PDT by DeeOhGee (If you don't know where you're going, any road will get you there.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: DeeOhGee

Actually, Presdient Lincoln had troops surround the Maryand legislature, ready to arrest anyone who voted to secede. The Confederate sympathizers backed down, and no one was arrested. Lincoln did arrest, I think, several Maryland state legislators on other occasions, but for specific pro-rebels acts.

President George W. Bush would have done the same.


23 posted on 09/10/2005 6:41:36 AM PDT by Grand Old Partisan
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 22 | View Replies]

To: Grand Old Partisan

Thank you for the history lesson on my adopted state. I love this place. Unfortunately, I'll go to my grave as "...that feller from New York City" instead of as a Mountaineer.


24 posted on 09/10/2005 6:42:28 AM PDT by Roccus (Able Danger? What's an Able Danger?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 21 | View Replies]

To: Grand Old Partisan

A minor distinction, I think, and yes, President Bush would have done the same, and I would object to that as well. Maybe it's a Republican thing...


25 posted on 09/10/2005 6:45:34 AM PDT by DeeOhGee (If you don't know where you're going, any road will get you there.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 23 | View Replies]

To: Colonel Kangaroo
Robert Byrd (KKK-WV) is the senior Senator from West Virginia.
The KKK has always hated Lincoln.
West Virginia is loves Robert Byrd (KKK-WV)
Therefore Lincoln holiday must go.
EASY!
26 posted on 09/10/2005 6:46:10 AM PDT by Bar-Face (The Embassy helicopter is warming up.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Colonel Kangaroo
save $4.6 million a year — the cost of one day’s pay to state workers.

West Virginia only pays for holidays and not work days?

How does eliminating a paid holiday and making it a paid work day save money?

27 posted on 09/10/2005 6:53:36 AM PDT by N. Theknow (Be a glowworm. A glowworm's never glum. How can you be grumpy when the sun shines out your bum?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Roccus
Lincoln's whole argument was that a state could not leave the Union, so by his lights Virginia was still part of the United States. What he did was have a make-believe Virginia legislature, on a portion of Virginia under federal control, give its consent to West Virginia breaking away.

A lot of people in WV remained loyal to Virginia and fought on the Confederate side...One of them was Stonewall Jackson, who was a native of what became WV although a resident of Lexington, VA (he died before WV was officially admitted as a state).

28 posted on 09/10/2005 6:56:18 AM PDT by Verginius Rufus
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies]

To: Verginius Rufus

This is anecdotal history but my grandfather who in 1999 died at age 100, always said that armed Federal troops stood outside the polling places and asked how someone planned to vote on the statehood issue. If they were against it they were turned away.
I always discounted it until I read Caperton's book on the history of WV. He says basically the same thing. The election for statehood of WV was held at gunpoint.


29 posted on 09/10/2005 6:57:06 AM PDT by kalee
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: Verginius Rufus

You may call it make-believe, but the formation of the state of West Virginia was accepted by the President, Congress, and the Supreme Court.


30 posted on 09/10/2005 7:01:09 AM PDT by Grand Old Partisan
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 28 | View Replies]

To: Roccus
This is a state where brother truely fought against brother.

My g-grandfather fought with the 36th Virginia, a Confederste outfit and his brother fought for the Union with the 7th West Virginia, Both were from Harrison County where their great-grandfather pioneered in the 1780s. Their civilian father was killed, and their uncle's business was burned to the ground by Union troops.

31 posted on 09/10/2005 7:02:26 AM PDT by Inyo-Mono (Life is like a cow pasture, it's hard to get through without stepping in some mess.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: Verginius Rufus

What happened, happened. Parsing of words did not start with Clintoon. It's what politicians do. They are for the most part afterall, lawyers. Besides, with the exception of the Eastern Panhandle, I sincerely doubt that the state of Virginia would want West Virginia back! };^)


32 posted on 09/10/2005 7:02:52 AM PDT by Roccus (Able Danger? What's an Able Danger?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 28 | View Replies]

To: Inyo-Mono
I live in Upshur Co, at one time part of Harrison. I'm finding a lot of such stories when talking to folks. It seems that the greatest divide, 'though not the only one, was between those living back in the hollows and those who lived in towns.
33 posted on 09/10/2005 7:09:07 AM PDT by Roccus (Able Danger? What's an Able Danger?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 31 | View Replies]

To: DeeOhGee
Washington would not have suspended the Constitution.

Washington did not ignore the Constitution the way that Davis and his pet congress ignored their's.

34 posted on 09/10/2005 7:17:12 AM PDT by Non-Sequitur
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: Verginius Rufus
Lincoln's whole argument was that a state could not leave the Union, so by his lights Virginia was still part of the United States. What he did was have a make-believe Virginia legislature, on a portion of Virginia under federal control, give its consent to West Virginia breaking away.

Well let's turn that around for a moment. The rebel leadership in Virginia believed that a state could secede from the Union because nothing in the Constitution specifically prevented it. What in the confederate constitution or the Virginia Constitution prevented part of the state from seceding and joining another country?

35 posted on 09/10/2005 7:19:52 AM PDT by Non-Sequitur
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 28 | View Replies]

To: DeeOhGee
"Washington would not have suspended the constitution."
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

I think that there are some who consider the use of federal troops during the Whiskey Rebellion as such. More troops were sent to PA, VA, NC, SC and GA than fought the British in the Revolution.
36 posted on 09/10/2005 7:24:38 AM PDT by Roccus (Able Danger? What's an Able Danger?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: Grand Old Partisan; DeeOhGee
Actually, you're both off a little. There were no troops and no arrests in April 1861 when the Maryland legislature first met to consider secession. These were the instructions that Lincoln gave General Scott:

Lieutenant General Scott Washington, April 25--- 1861.

My dear Sir: The Maryland Legislature assembles to-morrow at Anapolis; and, not improbably, will take action to arm the people of that State against the United States. The question has been submitted to, and considered by me, whether it would not be justifiable, upon the ground of necessary defence, for you, as commander in Chief of the United States Army, to arrest, or disperse the members of that body. I think it would not be justifiable; nor, efficient for the desired object.

First, they have a clearly legal right to assemble; and, we can not know in advance, that their action will not be lawful, and peaceful. And if we wait until they shall have acted, their arrest, or dispersion, will not lessen the effect of their action.

Secondly, we can not permanently prevent their action. If we arrest them, we can not long hold them as prisoners; and when liberated, they will immediately re-assemble, and take their action. And, precisely the same if we simply disperse them. They will immediately re-assemble in some other place.

I therefore conclude that it is only left to the commanding General to watch, and await their action, which, if it shall be to arm their people against the United States, he is to adopt the most prompt, and efficient means to counteract, even, if necessary, to the bombardment of their cities---and in the extremest necessity, the suspension of the writ of habeas corpus. Your Obedient Servant

ABRAHAM LINCOLN.

As it turned out, the legislature voted against secession. When the legislature met again in September 1861 a number of legislators were arrested since they were plotting to take Maryland out of the Union and join an armed rebellion that was already underway. Under those circumstances there should be no controversy on their arrests.

37 posted on 09/10/2005 7:27:17 AM PDT by Non-Sequitur
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 23 | View Replies]

To: Roccus; DeeOhGee

President Eisenhower cited President Washington sending in the troops to quash the Whiskey Rebellion as a precedent for sending in federal troops to Little Rock in part as a reaction to the Arkansas Governor using his National Guard to defy the federal government.


38 posted on 09/10/2005 7:30:05 AM PDT by Grand Old Partisan
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 36 | View Replies]

To: Inyo-Mono

I had a first cousin, five times removed, living in Raleigh Co., WV, who served in Co. A, 30th Virginia Sharpshooters until he was captured by Union forces in 1864.


39 posted on 09/10/2005 7:31:14 AM PDT by Verginius Rufus
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 31 | View Replies]

To: Inyo-Mono

I had a first cousin, five times removed, living in Raleigh Co., WV, who served in Co. A, 30th Virginia Sharpshooters until he was captured by Union forces in 1864.


40 posted on 09/10/2005 7:31:44 AM PDT by Verginius Rufus
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 31 | View Replies]

To: Non-Sequitur

Thanks. I have been to where the legislature met in April 1861, a tavern in Frederick, Maryland. It was my understanding then that there were troops on hand.


41 posted on 09/10/2005 7:31:57 AM PDT by Grand Old Partisan
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 37 | View Replies]

To: Grand Old Partisan

Lived through that and totally forgot about it!
SHEEESH!!!


42 posted on 09/10/2005 7:38:03 AM PDT by Roccus (Able Danger? What's an Able Danger?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 38 | View Replies]

To: Non-Sequitur

You are right, that the September 1861 meeting was the one in Frederick.


43 posted on 09/10/2005 7:38:22 AM PDT by Grand Old Partisan
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 37 | View Replies]

To: Roccus

Forgot about what?


44 posted on 09/10/2005 7:39:04 AM PDT by Grand Old Partisan
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 42 | View Replies]

To: Roccus

Forgot about what?


45 posted on 09/10/2005 7:39:24 AM PDT by Grand Old Partisan
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 42 | View Replies]

To: Grand Old Partisan

Ike citing GW to send troops to AK.


46 posted on 09/10/2005 7:42:26 AM PDT by Roccus (Able Danger? What's an Able Danger?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 45 | View Replies]

To: Roccus

Yes, the civil rights angle aside, Ike was furious that the Arkansas Governor was using state troops to defy the federal government.


47 posted on 09/10/2005 7:50:40 AM PDT by Grand Old Partisan
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 46 | View Replies]

To: Grand Old Partisan

Orvill Faubus (sp?) standing in the schoolhouse door with helmeted guard on either side. I still can't believe I forgot about that. }:^P


48 posted on 09/10/2005 7:58:00 AM PDT by Roccus (Able Danger? What's an Able Danger?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 47 | View Replies]

To: Colonel Kangaroo; PeaRidge; TexConfederate1861; 4ConservativeJustices; Aurelius; Arkinsaw; ...
If Washington had been alive in 1861, he'd have been standing beside Lincoln to preserve the Union. Both were Federalists who believed in a strong Union to preserve American peace and freedom.
On the other hand, Jefferson Davis pursued a despicable line .....

Pinging the First Corps. They're at it again.

Ping.........

49 posted on 09/10/2005 8:18:05 AM PDT by lentulusgracchus ("Whatever." -- sinkspur)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: Grand Old Partisan
You may call it make-believe, but the formation of the state of West Virginia was accepted by the President, Congress, and the Supreme Court.

Which doesn't cancel the Constitution, but instead calls for corrective action by a later Congress, which should deprive West Virginia of its seat in the Union and reunite it with the Richmond government.

Break out those old 49-star flags, and put away the 50-star flags until Puerto Rico changes its mind.

50 posted on 09/10/2005 8:21:20 AM PDT by lentulusgracchus ("Whatever." -- sinkspur)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 30 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-5051-100101-150151-200 ... 1,401-1,437 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