Chicago Boyz

What Are Chicago Boyz Readers Reading?

Recommended Photo Store
Buy Through Our Amazon Link or Banner to Support This Blog
  •   Enter your email to be notified of new posts:
  •   Problem? Question?
  •   Contact Authors:

  • CB Twitter Feed
  • Lex's Tweets
  • Jonathan's Tweets
  • Blog Posts (RSS 2.0)
  • Blog Posts (Atom 0.3)
  • Incoming Links
  • Recent Comments

    • Loading...
  • Authors

  • Notable Discussions

  • Recent Posts

  • Blogroll

  • Categories

  • Archives

  • One of my Least-Favorite Politicians

    Posted by David Foster on January 27th, 2012 (All posts by )

    …out of a wide range of potential choices, is Rep Jan Schakowsky (D-IL). I first became aware of this reprehensible individual after seeing the incredibly arrogant letter that she wrote to Kathleen Fasanella (of the blog Fashion Incubator) in response to Kathleen’s attempts to call attention to the harm being done to many small manufacturers by the ill-thought-out CPSIA legislation.

    There are lots of reasons to dislike Schakowsky (see this, for example)—another such reason made its appearance Wednesday with her assertion, in an attempt to defend Obama’s suppression of the Keystone Pipeline project, that “Twenty thousand jobs is really not that many jobs, and investing in green technologies will produce that and more.”

    Twenty thousand jobs is really not that many jobs?

    There is of course a huge difference between a project funded with private money that will act to reduce America’s energy costs and increase its industrial competitiveness, and one funded with taxpayer money (much of it undoubtedly going to politically-well-connected corporations) which would quite likely act to increase America’s energy costs and thereby reduce its industrial competitivness. Perusal of Schakowsky’s bio reveals no experience at all working in the private sector, of course.

    Whatever one thinks of the Pipeline and of various “alternative energy” options, surely it should be obvious to all that this CongressCreature’s cavalier dismissal of twenty thousand jobs should be considered unacceptable arrogance on the part of any American officeholder. It is a level of arrogance that, unfortunately, has become far too common among the government classes.


    8 Responses to “One of my Least-Favorite Politicians”

    1. Michael Kennedy Says:

      At least she represents Illinois where incompetent officials are no rarity. California is blessed with Henry Waxman. At least she is powerless. Waxman did a lot of harm when his party was in the majority.

    2. John Foster Says:

      Reminds me of the comment by Jane Lubchenco, the head of NOAA (and formerly at the Environment Defense Fund), when asked about Gloucester fishermen going out of business because of her agency’s new catch-share regulations, who said that they were “marginal jobs where people are squeaking by.”

    3. Anonymous Says:

      “Twenty thousand jobs is really not that many jobs, and investing in green technologies will produce that and more.”

      If the current trend of government “investing in green technologies” continues, she is right – the jobs produced, however, will be limited to those directly and indirectly supporting the burgeoning bankruptcy industry…just think of the number of paper-clerks, admins, and janitors that will be needed to support the endless loop of theft, investment and liquidation in the tax-payer funded, and government administered “green” future.

    4. Jeff the Bobcat Says:

      Wow…what a knucklehead. The ability to say the most ridiculous things with a straight face is a must for a public office holder.

    5. Jonathan Says:

      As a former constituent I agree with David.

    6. Bill Brandt Says:

      Can anyone point to a government effort that created jobs in a new industry? Other than the space race of almost 50 years ago – and that was simply pouring money into aerospace companies.

      I guess it is arrogance to think you can do it when it has never been done.

    7. Jim Miller Says:

      Maybe she is feeling feisty, now that her husband, lobbyist Robert Creamer, is out of prison. As David Foster probably knows, but the rest of you may not, Creamer served time for bank fraud. (He was trying to redistribute money a little too directly. See the Wikipedia article on Schakowsky for some of the details.)

      According to news accounts — which may even be true — she didn’t know about his criminal activities. Which might lead some to question her attention to detail.

    8. Cris Says:

      Story has it that Jan’s husband, Robert Creamer, was diverting funds from a not-for-profit he ran. This included paying the mortgage on their Evanston home. So, the question as to whether or not she knew what he was doing might be addressed by this hypothetical conversation.
      JAN; Honey? I’m looking over the check book for this month and I see we didn’t send a check to the bank for the mortgage.
      BOB: Oh, don’t worry about that. I took care of it.
      JAN: Oh, you did? That’s great. I won’t worry about it, then. Back to the business of the American people!
      BOB: You go, girl! there’s no justice like social justice!

    Leave a Reply

    Comments Policy:  By commenting here you acknowledge that you have read the Chicago Boyz blog Comments Policy, which is posted under the comment entry box below, and agree to its terms.

    A real-time preview of your comment will appear under the comment entry box below.

    Comments Policy

    Chicago Boyz values reader contributions and invites you to comment as long as you accept a few stipulations:

    1) Chicago Boyz authors tend to share a broad outlook on issues but there is no party or company line. Each of us decides what to write and how to respond to comments on his own posts. Occasionally one or another of us will delete a comment as off-topic, excessively rude or otherwise unproductive. You may think that we deleted your comment unjustly, and you may be right, but it is usually best if you can accept it and move on.

    2) If you post a comment and it doesn't show up it was probably blocked by our spam filter. We batch-delete spam comments, typically in the morning. If you email us promptly at we may be able to retrieve and publish your comment.

    3) You may use common HTML tags (italic, bold, etc.). Please use the "href" tag to post long URLs. The spam filter tends to block comments that contain multiple URLs. If you want to post multiple URLs you should either spread them across multiple comments or email us so that we can make sure that your comment gets posted.

    4) This blog is private property. The First Amendment does not apply. We have no obligation to publish your comments, follow your instructions or indulge your arguments. If you are unwilling to operate within these loose constraints you should probably start your own blog and leave us alone.

    5) Comments made on the Chicago Boyz blog are solely the responsibility of the commenter. No comment on any post on Chicago Boyz is to be taken as a statement from or by any contributor to Chicago Boyz, the Chicago Boyz blog, its administrators or owners. Chicago Boyz and its contributors, administrators and owners, by permitting comments, do not thereby endorse any claim or opinion or statement made by any commenter, nor do they represent that any claim or statement made in any comment is true. Further, Chicago Boyz and its contributors, administrators and owners expressly reject and disclaim any association with any comment which suggests any threat of bodily harm to any person, including without limitation any elected official.

    6) Commenters may not post content that infringes intellectual property rights. Comments that violate this rule are subject to deletion or editing to remove the infringing content. Commenters who repeatedly violate this rule may be banned from further commenting on Chicago Boyz. See our DMCA policy for more information.