SUBSCRIBE to Capitol Fax      Advertise Here      Mobile Version     Exclusive Subscriber Content     Updated Posts    Contact
To subscribe to Capitol Fax, click here.
It’s not going to be the end of the world

Friday, Feb 22, 2013

* My Sun-Times column

For well over 30 years, whenever the subject of gay rights came up in the Illinois General Assembly, legislators ran away in droves.

The excuses were always the same.

Homosexuality is immoral, so religious businesses owners shouldn’t have to hire a gay person, or serve a lesbian in his restaurant, or sell one of “those people” a home. The state shouldn’t “condone” this immoral act by passing such a law.

Besides, they said, Illinois just wasn’t ready to provide the same protection for gays as everybody else.

It’s been a long road.

Way back in 1819, a year after Illinois became a state, a law was passed setting the criminal penalty for sodomy between two males at 1 to 5 years in prison, plus 100 to 500 lashes with a whip and a fine of up to $500.

In 1845, the state kind of evolved a little and removed the flogging and the fine. But the Legislature also increased the prison term to one year to life.

Yes, life.

That penalty was “softened” in 1874 to 10 years maximum behind bars, with no minimum imprisonment specified.

In 1919, a minimum of one year in prison was added to the penalty, where it remained in the statute books until 1961, when Illinois finally repealed its sodomy laws, the first state in the union to do so.

And the world did not end.

The issue of gay rights didn’t surface in the General Assembly until the late 1970s. But no gay-rights bill ever received more than 15 percent of the vote in the Illinois Legislature until 1991, when 40 House members and 21 senators voted for a bill. That was far short of the 60 and 30 needed to pass both chambers, but times were starting to change.

By 1998, things had progressed so far that Republican gubernatorial candidate George Ryan won some liberal Chicago wards because his Democratic opponent Glenn Poshard opposed gay rights.

Even so, no gay-rights bill ever made it to Ryan’s desk.

Conservative Republicans controlled the state Senate and the bill went nowhere. They did pass a bill protecting motorcyclists against discrimination, which Ryan used his amendatory veto powers to rewrite into a gay-rights bill. His proposal died.

When the Democrats won control of the Senate in the 2002 election, gay-rights proponents thought their path to victory looked clear. But it took more than two years before the Senate went along with the House and approved a gay-rights bill.

And the world did not end.

Not only that, but not a single legislator lost a re-election campaign based on a vote for that gay-rights bill.

Six years later came the civil unions bill.

Oh, how our world would surely crash if gays were allowed to legally consummate their relationships, we were told.

The bill passed in January of 2011 and was signed into law. No legislator who voted for civil unions lost in the next election.

The only serious consequence of the civil unions law was that the state stopped giving Catholic Charities’ adoption program any taxpayer funds after the group refused to place children in the homes of gay civil union couples. Otherwise, the world kept spinning.

Now, it’s gay marriage. And the gnashing of teeth and predictions of imminent demise are all around us.

The Senate passed the bill with one Republican vote. The House will likely pass it this spring sometime.

And the world will not end.


- Posted by Rich Miller        

  1. - Grandson of Man - Friday, Feb 22, 13 @ 10:08 am:

    Nice bit of Illinois legal history in this article.

    It’s great that Illinois is moving to legalize gay marriage. In the way that Indiana and other states tried to poach Illinois jobs, Illinois should promote itself as a socially tolerant state. Indiana just passed a bill out of committee to force women who want to take an abortion-inducing drug to get ultrasounds before and after taking the drug. To remove any doubt that they are the party of smaller government, Wisconsin Republicans are considering an abortion ultrasound bill called “Women’s Right to Know Her Unborn Child Act.”

  2. - wordslinger - Friday, Feb 22, 13 @ 10:11 am:

    Great review, Rich. I’d forgotten about Ryan’s move, too.

  3. - Backwards - Friday, Feb 22, 13 @ 10:17 am:

    So it’s all ok, as long as the State only assaults the Religious Freedom of those dreadful Catholics (and Lutherans and Orthodox and Jews and Evangelicals)?

  4. - Lil Squeezy - Friday, Feb 22, 13 @ 10:19 am:

    It’s sad that an article like this even needs to be written. It won’t be long before statements such as the ones expressed in this article are too obvious and widely accepted to be a story.

    I was surprised by how many people took a day off work this week to lobby against the bill. They could have used that day off work to take their kids sledding today, but whatevs.

  5. - Oswego Willy - Friday, Feb 22, 13 @ 10:21 am:


    What is great about this place, Rich included, is the institutional knowledge and the historic perspective to where we are, where we were, and what is next.

    Sometimes every arguement needs that history lesson to put in context what is really being discussed, and its historical impact while movi forward.

    Outstanding, Rich.

    I know I learn something every day.

  6. - Calhoun Native - Friday, Feb 22, 13 @ 10:26 am:

    I agree with Oswego. Great perspective Rich and long overdue legislation.

  7. - Oswego Willy - Friday, Feb 22, 13 @ 10:30 am:

    ===Indiana just passed a bill out of committee to force women who want to take an abortion-inducing drug to get ultrasounds before and after taking the drug. To remove any doubt that they are the party of smaller government, Wisconsin Republicans are considering an abortion ultrasound bill called “Women’s Right to Know Her Unborn Child Act.”===

    1) This isn’t WI or IN, and in so many ways, I am greatful for that.

    2) To even get bills to see the light of day here in IL, you need a GOP House, a GOP Senate, and a GOP Governor, (most likely). We in IL are no where close to having the GOP, let alone a social conservative agenda GOP taking the reins of Government any time soon.

    My point with #2?

    The Diverse Dem Caucuses, versuses the diverse-lacking GOP caucuses will prevent those bills from coming up more… than what makes IL not WI or IN …

  8. - Chevy owner/Ford County - Friday, Feb 22, 13 @ 11:07 am:


    Seems to me you are prone to hyperbole. How, exactly, is marriage equality infringing on the right of any religious group? Are you being forbidden from practicing your religion? Denied admission to your house of worship? Catholic priests (and any other religious leader for that matter) are still free to perform the marriages or refuse to perform the marriages of their choosing. While the state recognizes remarriages of divorced individuals the Catholic church has never been required to sanctify those marriages. The same will be true of marriages between individuals of the same gender.

  9. - Cheryl44 - Friday, Feb 22, 13 @ 11:13 am:

    Yeah the poor Xtians. They’re so oppressed.

  10. - B2Chicago - Friday, Feb 22, 13 @ 11:15 am:

    Fantastic perspective, Rich!

  11. - LisleMike - Friday, Feb 22, 13 @ 11:34 am:

    @ Cherty44 Close to a gratutious about just letting it be? No insult to you, just an unnecessary response…

  12. - Jeff Trigg - Friday, Feb 22, 13 @ 11:36 am:

    Makes me curious what the current penalty and jail time are for a consenting plural marriage. To my knowledge we aren’t threatening to lock gay people in cages if they say they are married like we do people who follow their religious beliefs about plural marriage. Will the world end if Muslims in America are finally allowed to fully practice their beliefs of plural marriage?

  13. - train111 - Friday, Feb 22, 13 @ 11:38 am:

    The more I’ve thought about it, the more I’ve come to realize that Conservative Christians are the group with the biggest victim mentality out there. They all circle their wagons because everybody, every group, and every new law is out to get them.
    How come you can’t come out of your shell and meet people where they are at for crying out loud???


  14. - Grandson of Man - Friday, Feb 22, 13 @ 11:45 am:

    “1) This isn’t WI or IN, and in so many ways, I am greatful for that.”

    I am also thankful for this. This is why taxes are not everything to people. I for one don’t care how low taxes are in Indiana, I would never want to live in a state that has the ability to pass draconian social legislation.

    As gay marriage legalization appears imminent here, I think it would make our state more attractive. Attitudes toward gay people are changing, and it’s good to capture that.

  15. - Rich Miller - Friday, Feb 22, 13 @ 11:46 am:

    So, Trigg, we can put you down as favoring legalized polygamy? Thanks. I’ll keep that in mind.

  16. - John A Logan - Friday, Feb 22, 13 @ 11:51 am:

    Good to know the new standard of success is the world not ending.

  17. - LisleMike - Friday, Feb 22, 13 @ 11:53 am:

    @ train111 If you are referring to me, I am not in a shell. If anything, I am reaching out. I disagree with some of what is said and agree with much more. I am truly about working with not overpowering with rhetoric. Rich’s article is spot on and I agree with it. I have been called a RINO for some of my views and facist by others who do not share my views. What I have/am trying to do myself is avoid stereotypes and labels. Both are meant to divide. I cannot and do not speak for other conservatives, but I do try to keep lines of communications open. I am open to common ground to open discussions and find solutions. I try hard not to categorize or lump any with whom I disagree into “those”. There are many like me, BTW.

  18. - Rich Miller - Friday, Feb 22, 13 @ 11:53 am:

    === the new standard of success===

    Who said that? Other than you, of course.

    Since you enjoy putting words in others’ mouths, should I just assume that you want to go back to putting people in prison for life for being gay?

    Get a clue, man.

  19. - NCarraway - Friday, Feb 22, 13 @ 11:54 am:

    The problem with superficial thinking with an issue like this is that it ignores the nature of homosexuality–which is behavior, plain and simple. It is unlike race (and yes, gender)…it is NOT immutable. What this means is that you are now violating the God given religious liberties of those who see this behavior as immoral. The First Amendment hasn’t been repealed yet, in case you didn’t know. I’d encourage all of you “deep thinkers” to do some research on the web. If you want to learn, avoid the left wing silly websites that ignore facts. Btw, I rarely visit this website so it’s doubtful I’ll read all of your hate-filled responses so save your energy and don’t be so intolerant.

  20. - wordslinger - Friday, Feb 22, 13 @ 11:57 am:

    NC, thanks for the lesson in tolerance.

  21. - LisleMike - Friday, Feb 22, 13 @ 11:58 am:

    I agree

  22. - ChicagoR - Friday, Feb 22, 13 @ 11:59 am:

    “the nature of homosexuality–which is behavior, plain and simple.”

    That’s a complete falsehood. I’m gay. I’ve been with my partner for over twenty years. Even if I never have sex again (the “behavior” you’re talking about), I’ll still be gay. I’ll still be in a relationship, and that relationship is every bit as valid as those of my straight friends and colleagues. And it won’t be violating anyone else’s religious freedom if that relationship is treated equally by the government to which I pay taxes.

  23. - Rich Miller - Friday, Feb 22, 13 @ 12:00 pm:

    ===you are now violating the God given religious liberties of those who see this behavior as immoral===

    How? Because you don’t want to ride with the gays on the marriage bus?

  24. - Jeff Trigg - Friday, Feb 22, 13 @ 12:02 pm:

    Yes, I would favor it if we removed all laws that puts people in jail for consenting plural marriages. Equal protection for all, including Muslims, old-school Mormons, and whoever else wants more than one spouse seems fair to me. As you point out, mainstream Americans have been horribly wrong in the past, just like they are now.

    I’m also not a fan of having to get a license from the government in order to get married. Civil unions for all, and let people define marriage however they want to without fear of government reprisals.

  25. - Oswego Willy - Friday, Feb 22, 13 @ 12:03 pm:

    - NCarraway -

    “It’s Science …”

    ===Btw, I rarely visit this website so it’s doubtful I’ll read all of your hate-filled responses so save your energy and don’t be so intolerant.===

    Is that a passive-aggresive statement?

    “I think William Jennings Bryant said it best, …”

  26. - TooManyJens - Friday, Feb 22, 13 @ 12:09 pm:

    “Religious liberty” does not mean “the power to make civil law reflect my religion’s beliefs.”

  27. - Backwards - Friday, Feb 22, 13 @ 12:11 pm:

    ===you are now violating the God given religious liberties of those who see this behavior as immoral===

    How? Because you don’t want to ride with the gays on the marriage bus?

    Well, no, it matters very little what the State of Illinois wants to call one thing or another, You can call a dog’s tail a fifth leg, if you like etc

    It matters quite a bit, when they get around to enforcing things like State adoption regulation and the HHS Mandate Federally. The State has a track record here.

  28. - Rich Miller - Friday, Feb 22, 13 @ 12:14 pm:

    ===when they get around to enforcing things like State adoption regulation ===

    Um, nobody has the right to a state grant.

  29. - Backwards - Friday, Feb 22, 13 @ 12:15 pm:

    So TooManyJens,

    “Religious liberty” does not mean “the power to make civil law reflect my religion’s beliefs.”

    So, just because Quinn and the Madigans religious belief tells them to deny religious charities the ability to participate in adoption, they should not be able to make civil law forcing that denial?

  30. - Backwards - Friday, Feb 22, 13 @ 12:18 pm:

    ===when they get around to enforcing things like State adoption regulation ===

    Um, nobody has the right to a state grant.


    But the State gets to deny a grant based on Religious practice? What if the State gets it in their head that full-immersion baptism is no-good. Can they suspend all tax benefits to churches who like their baptism that way?

  31. - Rich Miller - Friday, Feb 22, 13 @ 12:20 pm:

    Backwards, you’re just chock full of red herrings today. Stick to the topic at hand.

    And we’re not talking about a “religious practice” here. We’re talking about a non-profit organization that refuses to abide by state law. So, no taxpayer subsidy for them. Seems reasonable.

  32. - TooManyJens - Friday, Feb 22, 13 @ 12:32 pm:

    == What if the State gets it in their head that full-immersion baptism is no-good. Can they suspend all tax benefits to churches who like their baptism that way? ==

    You might want to look up the “Lemon test.”

  33. - Rich Miller - Friday, Feb 22, 13 @ 12:45 pm:

    ===You might want to look up the “Lemon test.” ===

  34. - qcexaminer - Friday, Feb 22, 13 @ 12:48 pm:

    No, it won’t be the end of the world when Illinois approves gay marriage any more than it will be the end of the world when concealed carry is approved.

    Civil rights affirmed for both sides this time—a win-win for both left and right; something that doesn’t happen every day.

  35. - Capitol View - Friday, Feb 22, 13 @ 12:53 pm:

    This really is a Libertarian perspective — let persons do what they choose, as long as it does not directly affect other persons. Some issues are so liberal they swing around the corner and become super conservative.

  36. - 2nd Generation Wannabe - Friday, Feb 22, 13 @ 1:28 pm:

    I wonder if Mark Q. Rhoads, former state senator and contributor at the Illinois Review blog, included any of these events in the book he just published about Illinois history?

  37. - Midwest Mom - Friday, Feb 22, 13 @ 1:58 pm:

    Rich–love ya, man!

    I can’t wait for next week’s legislative activity on this topic. I wish I were where I could help with the equality phone banks but I’m too far out of the metropolitan area. I sent several messages to my district representatives and I can only hope they rise above party rhetoric (and closeted homophobia, bigotry, and fear of unknown) and join Senator Barickman in supporting and embracing same-sex marriage equality. Illinois will be a better place for it!

  38. - Cheryl44 - Friday, Feb 22, 13 @ 2:00 pm:

    The church based organizations can run adoption agencies. They just don’t get to use state money to discriminate.

  39. - Liberty_First - Friday, Feb 22, 13 @ 2:21 pm:

    Exactly what is the government’s interest in marriage?

  40. - ChicagoR - Friday, Feb 22, 13 @ 2:28 pm:

    “Exactly what is the government’s interest in marriage?”

    Encouraging mutually supportive relationships that lessen the necessity for government help, and supporting good homes for children. Both of these apply to gay couples. Why do you ask?

  41. - Grandson of Man - Friday, Feb 22, 13 @ 2:39 pm:

    “The problem with superficial thinking with an issue like this is that it ignores the nature of homosexuality–which is behavior, plain and simple.”

    If you get out more and open your mind you will find that this is absolutely not true for many people. Many gay people are born that way or have a strong natural inclination that is not learned. I have gay friends who told me they struggled with their homosexuality because it was not acceptable. They said they wished to be straight but couldn’t, so they had to hide, and it was painful.

  42. - Juvenal - Friday, Feb 22, 13 @ 3:10 pm:

    Rich, Cheryl44 & Backwards -

    Technically, the provision of foster care services is a state contract, not a state grant. It is a fee paid by taxpayers for a service. A service that, as Rich and Cheryl point out, some agencies were unwilling to provide.

  43. - I don't want to live in Teabagistan - Friday, Feb 22, 13 @ 3:11 pm:

    “Exactly what is the government’s interest in marriage?”

    I don’t know. But I know it is very interested. According to a GAO report, as of 12/2003, “1,138 federal statutory provisions classified to the United States Code in which
    marital status is a factor in determining or receiving benefits, rights, and privileges”

    Therefore, we shouldn’t discriminate based on the sex of people getting married and prevent them from getting in on the privleges (e.g., married filing jointly tax filings)

  44. - Just askin - Friday, Feb 22, 13 @ 4:20 pm:

    Liberty 2:21
    =Exactly what is the government’s interest in marriage?=

    Taxes, survivors benefits, medical decisions, buying a home, all of these differentiate between married and not. They don’t all recognize civil unions.

  45. - Steve Downstate - Friday, Feb 22, 13 @ 4:47 pm:

    There’s a blog out there (Southern Illinois Catholic, at that takes Rich to task for documenting that equal rights legislation does not result in awful, terrible things. The author claims that society will unravel within two generations — it will “come crashing down,” to use that blogger’s phrase. Since just about everything on that blog smells of reactionary, innuendo-riddled, conspiracy-theory-based reasoning, I’m glad to assert that we are likely to see just about the opposite of what that blogger predicts.

    Yes, there is fear and bigotry that runs rampant when progress occurs. You have to wonder why some are eager to claim that society will come crashing down. Chicken Little is alive and well!

  46. - Bryan Kirchoff - Friday, Feb 22, 13 @ 5:54 pm:

    Gay marriage proponents raise a number of good objections when faced with opposition, but such objections are not unanswerable. Some include:

    - “Opposing gay marriage is an example of religion in politics.” Just because churches have a position does not automatically render it a “religious issue” – the Civil Rights Movement was led by a preacher and organized out of churches, for example. (In fact, it makes much sense that God gave us morality to help maintain society, a “crib sheet” so that we do not have to derive the long-term, wider consequences of our personal decisions replicated by thousands of others over years.) Church teachings intersect with politics on many subjects, such as environment, fair wages, labor rights, immigration, and the death penalty, to name a few, because both religion and politics have to do with how we live life as individuals and as a society.

    True religious interference in politics would be legislating something having only to do with salvation (such as belief in the Assumption, or adherence to a kosher diet, or prayer toward Mecca); few political figures argue against gay marriage for the good of their constituents’ souls, but rather on the social implications of redefining marriage.

    - “Opposition to gay marriage is discriminatory.” The state adopted the originally religious institution of marriage because society has an interest in assuring any children resulting from the relationship of a man and woman have at least the strong possibility of a stable household for their upbringing. If marriage is not about procreative potential, then the state gets into the awkward business of licensing peoples’ feelings for each other.

    Not being eligible for an institution/role in society because one cannot fulfill the purpose of that institution/role does not make one a “second-class citizen”. Just because a color-blind person cannot be a fashion designer or a film color technician does not mean he/she is less of a person, even though he/she, through no fault of his/her own, cannot take those particular opportunities open to others. He/she is simply missing something essential to the role.

    - “What about heterosexual couples that decide they don’t want children, the infertile, and post-menopausal women? Should their marriages not be recognized?” A very reasonable counter-argument, but the difference in these cases is that the complementary biology is in place such that, whether through change of heart, “accident”, surgical remedy, or plain biological quirk, there is still a small chance of a child resulting from the union.

    - “What about women who have had a hysterectomy or the removal of their ovaries due to cysts? Should their marriages be dissolved?” Also fair, but opposite-gender couples still have something to offer the wider world of children, including any children they adopt – an example of the heterosexual relationship that 95% of children are born to eventually have.

    - “Well, what about gay couples with children?” This counter-argument assumes that gay adoption should be accepted without reservation, which is not the case. There are studies that say the parent gender does not matter, and studies that say children need a mother and father. It seems reasonable to ask if a child 95+% likely born heterosexual is best served by having an adult heterosexual relationship modeled for him/her while growing up. This question does not imply gay men and women are not caring individuals, it simply points out something beneficial for the child that their relationship cannot do. (Some will claim “They must be okay with children being abandoned or neglected, then”. Not at all. Actually, many abandoned and neglected children are the result of our modern ethic that says intimacy is whatever we want it to be, whenever we want it to be. Some may also cite children they know raised by gay couples – certainly any individual child might do well, but anecdotal evidence does not constitute a general trend.)

    - “Numerous problems in heterosexual marriage are a a far worse threat to marriage than gay marriage.” Yes there are many problems in modern heterosexual marriage (many of them spurred by our commitment-averse modern sexual ethic), but that is an argument for addressing those problems, not for gay marriage.

    - “How could gay marriage possibly damage the institution of marriage?” It would redefine the institution away from a relationship that has procreative potential (and yes, it’s been trending that way informally for decades, but gay marriage would be a clear and formal ratification of that idea) to a relationship based only on consent. So first, it puts the state in the strange, undesirable position of certifying peoples’ emotional attachments. (Many alternative couples used to claim they did not need a “piece of paper” to prove affection, a stand that has gone out the window now that gay marriage is a possibility.) Second, if state recognition of marriage is based solely on recognizing consensual feelings, then the state is all the more obligated to facilitate the dissolution of that marriage when fickle human emotions change.

    Second, with consent the sole criterion, legal objections to other consensual arrangements fall apart. Today is gay marriage. Tomorrow are polygamy, incestuous marriage, temporary marriages, and even unmarried couples demanding some of the privileges of marriage. (Sound fanciful? Unmarried couples have already demonstrated in Italy demanding certain governmental recognitions and benefits.) Prostitution, too, is a consensual relationship. When one takes away the most lasting aspect of marriage – parenthood – then it has lost a very important bulwark against the ebb and flow of enthusiasm that almost any marriage has. It literally takes away the physical incarnation of a couple’s love.

    - “Why should heterosexual couples only receive the legal benefits of marriage?” Because many of those benefits were instituted to help families care for their babies (i.e. society’s future). Other benefits can be legislated separately or addressed by power of attorney.

    - “Prohibition of gay marriage denies a right to marry.” Is there a “right” to marry? The argument seems dubious at best. Some cite the decades-old Loving vs. Virginia interracial marriage case as establishing such a right, but keep in mind the judges probably never pictured marriage being anything but between a man and a woman. Note that nothing about interracial couples hinders the possibility of parenthood forseen in the traditional understanding of marriage.

    I realize this is a subject that strikes deep for many people – we are, after all, talking about peoples’ lives and dreams here - and that homosexuals have been on the receiving end of disrespect and even violent abuse in history. Certainly many gay men and women make truly remarkable contributions in the community, worthy of great admiration, every day. Unfortunately, though, such contributions do not constitute an argument for legalized gay marriage. Indeed, there is nothing in law right now that prevents any two (or more) people from holding a ceremony where they publicly promise lifelong commitment, so the focus on a state marriage license seems to have another goal in mind – establishing legality to take advantage of people’s tendency to believe if something is legal, it must be right. Here’s hoping that civility holds out as we work our way through this question as a nation.

Sorry, comments for this post are now closed.

* Happy Thanksgiving!
* *** UPDATED x1 *** Five unanswered questions
* *** UPDATED x1 *** Question of the day
* Caption contest!
* Crossing the line
* Moody's warns Illinois
* The Credit Union Difference
* *** UPDATED x1 - Franks responds *** Uh-oh
* Then and now
* SUBSCRIBERS ONLY - Today's edition of Capitol Fax (use all CAPS in password)
* Yesterday's blog posts

Visit our advertisers...







Search This Blog...

Search the 98th General Assembly By Bill Number
(example: HB0001)

Search the 98th General Assembly By Keyword

* Microsoft Lumia 950 and 950 XL now shipping in parts of Europe
* Nvidia’s Shield Tablet X1 is spotted on benchmarking site
* Team up with your favorite Star Wars characters in Galaxy of Heroes
* Google has so far removed 440K+ search results on ‘right to be forgotten’ grounds
* Huawei unveils the Mate 8 with Kirin 950 processor, 6-Inch Full HD display and Marshmallow
* Meet the winner of the latest Lumia Challenge: A day in the life
* The LG Ray midrange smartphone to be launched in 3G markets

* Alex Avila will try to shed limitations with White Sox
* White Sox program provides kids real chance
* Johnson solid candidate for White Sox rotation
* White Sox sign catcher Avila to one-year deal
* White Sox sign catcher Avila to one-year deal
* White Sox sign catcher Avila to one-year deal
* White Sox sign C Alex Avila for 1 year, $2.5 million


Main Menu
Pundit rankings
Subscriber Content
Blagojevich Trial
Updated Posts

November 2015
October 2015
September 2015
August 2015
July 2015
June 2015
May 2015
April 2015
March 2015
February 2015
January 2015
December 2014
November 2014
October 2014
September 2014
August 2014
July 2014
June 2014
May 2014
April 2014
March 2014
February 2014
January 2014
December 2013
November 2013
October 2013
September 2013
August 2013
July 2013
June 2013
May 2013
April 2013
March 2013
February 2013
January 2013
December 2012
November 2012
October 2012
September 2012
August 2012
July 2012
June 2012
May 2012
April 2012
March 2012
February 2012
January 2012
December 2011
November 2011
October 2011
September 2011
August 2011
July 2011
June 2011
May 2011
April 2011
March 2011
February 2011
January 2011
December 2010
November 2010
October 2010
September 2010
August 2010
July 2010
June 2010
May 2010
April 2010
March 2010
February 2010
January 2010
December 2009
November 2009
October 2009
September 2009
August 2009
July 2009
June 2009
May 2009
April 2009
March 2009
February 2009
January 2009
December 2008
November 2008
October 2008
September 2008
August 2008
July 2008
June 2008
May 2008
April 2008
March 2008
February 2008
January 2008
December 2007
November 2007
October 2007
September 2007
August 2007
July 2007
June 2007
May 2007
April 2007
March 2007
February 2007
January 2007
December 2006
November 2006
October 2006
September 2006
August 2006
July 2006
June 2006
May 2006
April 2006
March 2006
February 2006
January 2006
December 2005
April 2005
March 2005
February 2005
January 2005
December 2004
November 2004
October 2004

Blog*Spot Archives
November 2005
October 2005
September 2005
August 2005
July 2005
June 2005
May 2005


RSS Feed 2.0
Comments RSS 2.0


* Cross Supports New Appointee - Alton Daily News..
* Rauner on Refugees - Alton Daily News..

* Chicago schools prepare lesson plan on teen's shooting
* EXCHANGE: Augustana digitizing Hauberg glass plate images
* Chicago Public Schools reverses special education cuts
* Former Chicago Transit workers sentenced in fraud scheme
* Rauner pardons man found innocent of 1999 attack
* Springfield police chief bemoans body-cam 'burden'
* Illinois makes tax break deals with 3 companies
* Most Illinois metro jobless rates fall but many lose jobs
* EXCHANGE: Fire training buildings adapt to versatile needs
* Amtrak ramps up service, offers tips for holiday travel

* Rauner pardons man found innocent of 1999 attack
* Springfield jobless rate falls again, to 5.1 percent
* Springfield police chief sees problems with body cam law
* Lawsuit challenges Illinois ban on marijuana campaign money
* Number of Illinois inmates released on parole climbing
* Bryce Benton circulating petitions to challenge Sen. Sam McCann in GOP primary
* Executive Mansion roof repairs nearing completion
* Candidates begin filing petitions for March primary election
* Benton circulating petitions to challenge McCann in GOP primary
* Rauner administration says House Democrats holding local aid hostage

* Review: Sociale in the South Loop
* Her Barbie was a lawyer. Now she defends victims' rights
* Meet the guy making money off your food scraps
* Anger, pain and calls for change in response to police video
* United, Delta bet on long oil slump

* 16 reasons every Blackhawks fan should be thankful on Thanksgiving
* Blackhawks cool off Sharks; Kane extends point streak to 17
* Four more Laquan McDonald police dashcam videos released
* President Obama: ‘Disturbed’ by Laquan video, grateful for ‘peaceful’ protests
* Black leaders call for Supt. McCarthy to resign
* Viktor Tikhonov embraces off-ice role as Artemi Panarin’s guide
* Ex-Hawks winger Ben Smith working his way back from a concussion
* FOP posts notice on raising bail for officer charged with murder
* Brian Bliss remains employed by Fire
* Black Caucus renews calls for McCarthy’s ouster

* Four new Laquan McDonald shooting videos raise more questions
* Calls for reform after McDonald video release; protesters march in Loop
* Teen dead, 3 other people wounded in city shootings
* Live blog: Laquan McDonald protests in Chicago
* Man charged with home invasion after woman reported taken from Oak Park house
* Questions remain on long inquiry before Laquan McDonald shooting charges
* Police: Two girls struck by SUV while walking on sidewalk
* Indiana's proposed new religious freedom plan draws ire
* Charges dropped against protest leader accused of striking cop during Loop march

* Eugene Robinson: The GOP's political correctness dodge
* Douglas Holt: Woman's protest of Trump was misguided, inappropriate
* George Will: Muzzling pet advice another case of free speech erosion
* Bernard Schoenburg: Josh Langfelder took father's advice on election petition signatures
* Rauner pardons man found innocent of 1999 attack
* Springfield jobless rate falls again, to 5.1 percent
* Michael Gerson: The Trump effect, still 'understated'
* Catherine Rampell: For millennials, first comes love — then what?
* Springfield police chief sees problems with body cam law
* Lawsuit challenges Illinois ban on marijuana campaign money

* Clubs listings, Nov. 26-Dec. 3, 2015
* Area update: Soup kitchen needs help with backpack giveaway
* Frank's Faves: Giving thanks
* Golf links swap hits roadblock
* Chuck Koplinski: Beautiful 'Brooklyn' a love story for the ages
* Update on candidate filings in Vermilion County for 2016
* 80th N-G All-State Football: POY Josh King
* Notes-Worthy: Kvn Tajzea
* Illini marching in the big time
* 80th N-G All-State Football: First team and special mention

* How Periscope, other social media apps can help you shop
* Tree lightings and holiday celebrations, listed by suburb
* How to buy gift certificates from small suburban stores
* South Korea: VW rigged emissions in 125,000 diesel vehicles
* How to shop for suburban charities to donate money to

* House lawmakers overcome hurdle on key tra...
* Rodney Davis talks funding with Bloomingto...
* The agency that fought Illiana gets a new ...
* Rep. Dold takes educational cruise down Ch...
* Lawmakers decry high turnover rate of VA h...
* CBD Oil, and politics
* Simon considering state Senate bid
* Killer Congressman Tom MacArthur trying to...
* Shutdown? State may not notice
* Rep. Bob Dold

* Nebraska ethanol producers name former Dur......

* Opinion: Sen. Kirk must stand with crimina......

* Don't Let The Turkeys Get You Down
* “The Driver’s Side” – News From The Motorist’s Perspective
* IDOT Debuts Winter Weather Driving Tips Video
* Pot Dangerous? Mother's Testimony Says Yes [video]
* Happy Thanksgiving
* It seems like it’s everywhere, that video of the final moments of Laquan’s life
* Laquan McDonald.
* Sixteen shots. The story that broke the silence.
* Thomas Francis McGuire interviewed on NTNM
* Random thoughts.

* Emergency Management Officials, National Weather Service Encourage Winter Preparedness - November is Winter Weather Preparedness Month in Illinois
* Keep Your Family Safe This Winter - November through February are leading months for carbon monoxide related incidents
* Governor Takes Bill Action
* Illinois Department of Labor Director Hugo Chaviano Awards Governor’s Award for Contributions in Health and Safety to the Illinois Refining Division of Marathon Petroleum Company LP
* State Regulator Elected Treasurer of Interstate Medical Licensure Compact

    Hosted by MCS SUBSCRIBE to Capitol Fax Advertise Here Mobile Version Contact Rich Miller