<?xml version="1.0" encoding="utf-8"?>
<rss xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom" version="2.0"><channel><title>CapitolFax.com - Latest Comments in So, which way did you vote on the con-con?</title><link>http://capitolfaxcom.disqus.com/</link><description>None</description><atom:link href="https://capitolfaxcom.disqus.com/so_which_way_did_you_vote_on_the_con_con/latest.rss" rel="self"></atom:link><language>en</language><lastBuildDate>Wed, 05 Nov 2008 14:14:59 -0000</lastBuildDate><item><title>Re: So, which way did you vote on the con-con?</title><link>http://capitolfax.com/2008/11/04/closing-arguments-on-the-constitutional-convention/#comment-18186353</link><description>&lt;p&gt;I voted no.  It NEEDS to be done but not by the delegates these idiots would intern.&lt;/p&gt;</description><dc:creator xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/">charlestoncon</dc:creator><pubDate>Wed, 05 Nov 2008 14:14:59 -0000</pubDate></item><item><title>Re: So, which way did you vote on the con-con?</title><link>http://capitolfax.com/2008/11/04/closing-arguments-on-the-constitutional-convention/#comment-18186352</link><description>&lt;p&gt;thanks everyone for the no vote now i can retire in ten years&lt;/p&gt;</description><dc:creator xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/">foster brooks</dc:creator><pubDate>Wed, 05 Nov 2008 07:26:02 -0000</pubDate></item><item><title>Re: So, which way did you vote on the con-con?</title><link>http://capitolfax.com/2008/11/04/closing-arguments-on-the-constitutional-convention/#comment-18186351</link><description>&lt;p&gt;Can I second what you said, Rich?&lt;/p&gt;</description><dc:creator xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/">Lynn S</dc:creator><pubDate>Wed, 05 Nov 2008 01:13:08 -0000</pubDate></item><item><title>Re: So, which way did you vote on the con-con?</title><link>http://capitolfax.com/2008/11/04/closing-arguments-on-the-constitutional-convention/#comment-18186350</link><description>&lt;p&gt;Hey, Steve...&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;Bite US.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;lol&lt;/p&gt;</description><dc:creator xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/">Rich Miller</dc:creator><pubDate>Wed, 05 Nov 2008 01:03:41 -0000</pubDate></item><item><title>Re: So, which way did you vote on the con-con?</title><link>http://capitolfax.com/2008/11/04/closing-arguments-on-the-constitutional-convention/#comment-18186349</link><description>&lt;p&gt;Well, now that con-con has been defeated, I hope everyone that voted no (and, of course, those who, like me, voted yes) will work harder on getting better people elected and fixing all those problems con-con allegedly would not solve, like pensions, amendatory vetoes, etc.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;Maybe we should try for another "gateway" type amendment that would allow voter initiative amendments to articles other than Article IV (Legislature)?&lt;/p&gt;</description><dc:creator xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/">Bookworm</dc:creator><pubDate>Wed, 05 Nov 2008 00:46:10 -0000</pubDate></item><item><title>Re: So, which way did you vote on the con-con?</title><link>http://capitolfax.com/2008/11/04/closing-arguments-on-the-constitutional-convention/#comment-18186348</link><description>&lt;p&gt;This little exercise should have been very informative for us as posters here.  This site was about 3-1 "yes" and the people of the state are about 3-2 "no".  Might help to explain why many of the posts on here seem to lack grounding in reality.&lt;/p&gt;</description><dc:creator xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/">steve schnorf</dc:creator><pubDate>Wed, 05 Nov 2008 00:18:38 -0000</pubDate></item><item><title>Re: So, which way did you vote on the con-con?</title><link>http://capitolfax.com/2008/11/04/closing-arguments-on-the-constitutional-convention/#comment-18186347</link><description>&lt;p&gt;I voted "no" as did my wife and others that I know.  The unintended consequences of reopening the Illinois constitution was too great a risk.  A selling point was the fact that Pat Quinn was a strong supporter of the the "yes".  I consider Pat to be an opportunistic hypocrite.  Where was the "consumer advocate" when mortgage brokers ran some of the most outlandish ads on Chicago radio.  Why wasn't he pointing out from his bully pulpit the foolishness of "interest only loans" or "no down payment" deals.  He was nowhere to be seen or heard. Wasn't he instrumental in reducing the size of the Illinois legislature and open the door to the concentration of power in the hands of a few.  I don't trust a word that comes out of his hyptocritical mouth.&lt;/p&gt;</description><dc:creator xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/">Seeker of Truth</dc:creator><pubDate>Wed, 05 Nov 2008 00:18:25 -0000</pubDate></item><item><title>Re: So, which way did you vote on the con-con?</title><link>http://capitolfax.com/2008/11/04/closing-arguments-on-the-constitutional-convention/#comment-18186346</link><description>&lt;p&gt;I voted yes, and told all my friends to vote yes, too (especially the people who were new to this state and voting in Illinois for the 1st time).&lt;/p&gt;</description><dc:creator xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/">Lynn S</dc:creator><pubDate>Tue, 04 Nov 2008 22:31:06 -0000</pubDate></item><item><title>Re: So, which way did you vote on the con-con?</title><link>http://capitolfax.com/2008/11/04/closing-arguments-on-the-constitutional-convention/#comment-18186345</link><description>&lt;p&gt;I voted yes, precisely for reasons given by will county because I know these will never happen without some restructuring...&lt;/p&gt;</description><dc:creator xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/">Vote Quimby!</dc:creator><pubDate>Tue, 04 Nov 2008 22:09:37 -0000</pubDate></item><item><title>Re: So, which way did you vote on the con-con?</title><link>http://capitolfax.com/2008/11/04/closing-arguments-on-the-constitutional-convention/#comment-18186344</link><description>&lt;p&gt;I voted NO on Con-Con because we don't need to spend millions of dollars we don't have to engage in unnecessary and politically divisive debate about a document that doesn't need an overhaul.  What is needed is the political will to make a few changes (graduated income tax, school funding mandate, recall?) that we can consider on an issue by issue basis.&lt;/p&gt;</description><dc:creator xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/">will county wiseguy</dc:creator><pubDate>Tue, 04 Nov 2008 21:51:08 -0000</pubDate></item><item><title>Re: So, which way did you vote on the con-con?</title><link>http://capitolfax.com/2008/11/04/closing-arguments-on-the-constitutional-convention/#comment-18186343</link><description>&lt;p&gt;Yes and I told anyone else I know to vote Yes too!&lt;/p&gt;</description><dc:creator xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/">Levois</dc:creator><pubDate>Tue, 04 Nov 2008 21:34:53 -0000</pubDate></item><item><title>Re: So, which way did you vote on the con-con?</title><link>http://capitolfax.com/2008/11/04/closing-arguments-on-the-constitutional-convention/#comment-18186342</link><description>&lt;p&gt;I've been voting for 30 years.  It took me at least 7 minutes to find the place on the ballot where I could vote FOR con-con.  That fact alone justifies a con con.&lt;/p&gt;</description><dc:creator xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/">chicago publius</dc:creator><pubDate>Tue, 04 Nov 2008 20:39:23 -0000</pubDate></item><item><title>Re: So, which way did you vote on the con-con?</title><link>http://capitolfax.com/2008/11/04/closing-arguments-on-the-constitutional-convention/#comment-18186341</link><description>&lt;p&gt;As a staunch believer in the Right to Keep &amp;amp; Bear Arms&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;and&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;As a Future recipient of a State Pension.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;I must say that there are to many things wrong with this state and the only way to fix it is change the rules it is ran by.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;I voted YES as did my spouse who also fits the above descriptions.&lt;/p&gt;</description><dc:creator xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/">Kevin Highland</dc:creator><pubDate>Tue, 04 Nov 2008 18:53:42 -0000</pubDate></item><item><title>Re: So, which way did you vote on the con-con?</title><link>http://capitolfax.com/2008/11/04/closing-arguments-on-the-constitutional-convention/#comment-18186340</link><description>&lt;p&gt;I voted "YES" when voted two weeks ago.&lt;/p&gt;</description><dc:creator xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/">Randall Sherman</dc:creator><pubDate>Tue, 04 Nov 2008 18:14:22 -0000</pubDate></item><item><title>Re: So, which way did you vote on the con-con?</title><link>http://capitolfax.com/2008/11/04/closing-arguments-on-the-constitutional-convention/#comment-18186339</link><description>&lt;p&gt;I voted yes. It was probably the only vote I cast that will really make any difference, since everyone else I voted for was Republican!&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;I am a future state pension recipient also but that did not deter me. I had been leaning "yes" pretty much from the start, but Blago's dis-endorsement was what clinched it for me :)&lt;/p&gt;</description><dc:creator xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/">Bookworm</dc:creator><pubDate>Tue, 04 Nov 2008 17:51:55 -0000</pubDate></item><item><title>Re: So, which way did you vote on the con-con?</title><link>http://capitolfax.com/2008/11/04/closing-arguments-on-the-constitutional-convention/#comment-18186338</link><description>&lt;p&gt;Yes, The Capitol Fax will hold the delegate's feet to the fire.  Get them Rich.&lt;/p&gt;</description><dc:creator xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/">Hickory</dc:creator><pubDate>Tue, 04 Nov 2008 17:38:09 -0000</pubDate></item><item><title>Re: So, which way did you vote on the con-con?</title><link>http://capitolfax.com/2008/11/04/closing-arguments-on-the-constitutional-convention/#comment-18186337</link><description>&lt;p&gt;I voted YES, Rich.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;The fact that Labor AND Business groups opposed it(I called this the "unholy alliance") combined with the fact that they said that the "politicians in Springfield" would run the convention showed me they were just trying every fear tactic in the book.  These are the same groups that support the very same polticians in Springfield that apparently will "run" the convention.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;That being said, I worry about the negative impact on public policy that could result if enough crazy populist ideas are adopted (like term limits or recall).  Direct Democracy is dangerous.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;Specifically, I want to see the Amendatory Veto repealed and something done about the reliance on property taxes; i.e. education funding.  A graduated income tax would be good as well.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;That is all I am really looking for.&lt;/p&gt;</description><dc:creator xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/">some former legislative intern</dc:creator><pubDate>Tue, 04 Nov 2008 17:27:19 -0000</pubDate></item><item><title>Re: So, which way did you vote on the con-con?</title><link>http://capitolfax.com/2008/11/04/closing-arguments-on-the-constitutional-convention/#comment-18186336</link><description>&lt;p&gt;Voted yes! We need to revamp the income tax, the property tax, township government and not to mention, state mandates. The sad thing, is that, this is the only way to correct these problems, since the legislature will not address these issues. They need the protection of the convention to correct these and other problems, because if they were to, they would not be reelected.&lt;/p&gt;</description><dc:creator xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/">South of I-80</dc:creator><pubDate>Tue, 04 Nov 2008 17:14:18 -0000</pubDate></item><item><title>Re: So, which way did you vote on the con-con?</title><link>http://capitolfax.com/2008/11/04/closing-arguments-on-the-constitutional-convention/#comment-18186335</link><description>&lt;p&gt;I voted Yes for a Con-Con.&lt;/p&gt;</description><dc:creator xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/">Anon</dc:creator><pubDate>Tue, 04 Nov 2008 16:51:05 -0000</pubDate></item><item><title>Re: So, which way did you vote on the con-con?</title><link>http://capitolfax.com/2008/11/04/closing-arguments-on-the-constitutional-convention/#comment-18186334</link><description>&lt;p&gt;I voted Yes. We need a change.&lt;/p&gt;</description><dc:creator xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/">kport</dc:creator><pubDate>Tue, 04 Nov 2008 16:42:58 -0000</pubDate></item><item><title>Re: So, which way did you vote on the con-con?</title><link>http://capitolfax.com/2008/11/04/closing-arguments-on-the-constitutional-convention/#comment-18186333</link><description>&lt;p&gt;I voted yes as well as three other members of my family.  Trying to get to the others before it's too late.&lt;/p&gt;</description><dc:creator xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/">Cassandra II</dc:creator><pubDate>Tue, 04 Nov 2008 16:41:38 -0000</pubDate></item><item><title>Re: So, which way did you vote on the con-con?</title><link>http://capitolfax.com/2008/11/04/closing-arguments-on-the-constitutional-convention/#comment-18186332</link><description>&lt;p&gt;Heck NO.&lt;/p&gt;</description><dc:creator xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/">Boscobud</dc:creator><pubDate>Tue, 04 Nov 2008 16:40:42 -0000</pubDate></item><item><title>Re: So, which way did you vote on the con-con?</title><link>http://capitolfax.com/2008/11/04/closing-arguments-on-the-constitutional-convention/#comment-18186331</link><description>&lt;p&gt;Present.&lt;/p&gt;</description><dc:creator xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/">barack obama</dc:creator><pubDate>Tue, 04 Nov 2008 16:15:38 -0000</pubDate></item><item><title>Re: So, which way did you vote on the con-con?</title><link>http://capitolfax.com/2008/11/04/closing-arguments-on-the-constitutional-convention/#comment-18186330</link><description>&lt;p&gt;Yes. A broken train won't run with a new conductor. Time to fix the train.&lt;/p&gt;</description><dc:creator xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/">doubtful</dc:creator><pubDate>Tue, 04 Nov 2008 15:52:36 -0000</pubDate></item><item><title>Re: So, which way did you vote on the con-con?</title><link>http://capitolfax.com/2008/11/04/closing-arguments-on-the-constitutional-convention/#comment-18186329</link><description>&lt;p&gt;No. NO. NO!&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;Yes, I voted 3 times.&lt;/p&gt;</description><dc:creator xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/">aNOnymous</dc:creator><pubDate>Tue, 04 Nov 2008 15:48:23 -0000</pubDate></item></channel></rss>