The guy just can't get a break. First, he gets slammed because his 2010 Confederate History Month proclamation excluded any mention of slavery (though he'd already addressed that tragic part of Virginia's history in his 2010 Black History Month proclamation and though some historians reluctantly admitted its not necessary to mention slavery at every mention of the Confederacy). Then he gets slammed when he later apologizes and issues another "revised" proclamation. Personally, I really didn't have a major problem with either proclamation - though I would have done it a bit differently.
So, this year, it should really come as no surprise that he's not issued anything on the subject - at least not as of the time of this post. But some sociologists playing historians are slamming him for that - which goes to prove that it is only their preferred PC version of history which they believe should be proclaimed.