Search Box

Friday, June 27, 2014

"Hillary told friends Obama is 'incompetent and feckless': book"

The NY Post has a revealing article this morning detailing Hillary's honest opinion of Obama, as excerpted from Blood Feud, a new book by Edward Klein. The first paragraph of the article:

Hillary Rodham Clinton called President Obama “incompetent and feckless” and charged that he had “no hand on the tiller half the time,” during a boozy reunion with college pals, a new book claims.

"The thing with Obama is he can't be bothered," Clinton continued. (In other words, he's lazy.)

Google offers the following definition of "feckless": lacking initiative or strength of character; irresponsible. offers this definition of "shiftless": lacking in resourcefulness; inefficient; lazy.

So "shiftless" and "feckless" mean pretty much the same thing. 

Interesting that Hillary, the Democrats' great hope for 2016, would effectively call our nation's first black President shiftless and lazy.

(The private Hillary certainly seems far more interesting than the public one, who sidesteps every question she is asked.)

In vino veritas. 


jova said...

thanks for the link. One of the few times I agree with Hillary. I do believe the biggest flaw of Obama is his laziness.
He does not appear to have ever engaged in any deep intellectual probe of any of the modern day issues. His ideology is just a rehash of the type of thought held by most university professors since 1975. he seems never questioned any of the leftist beliefs dictated to him. His laziness was evident in how he runs the government, allowing congress to create Obamacare without any input from his administration. His knee-jerk reactions to cultural issues, like the shooting of Trayvon Martin is one example.

The situation in Iraq now is another example, he is unable to see the potential consequences of his actions. He keeps making the same mistakes in logic, because he is intellectually feckless

John Craig said...

Jova --
Yes, Hillary is obviously being honest here, a big departure from her public persona. couldn't agree with you more about Obama's reflexive leftism. I've found that with a lot o leftists it's almost sort of a religious belief, they are True Believers and that's that. They are about as willing to calmly and logically debate their philosophy as a Muslim is to calmly discuss whether or not Muhammad was in the right.

You're also right about Obama's laziness; he was a slacker in high school, in college (note the closed records and his own admission that he was a beneficiary of affirmative action), as a state senator (note all those "present" votes), and now, finally, as President. The media, of course, turns a blind eye to this as to accuse him of laziness would be "racist." But no President since Eisenhower has played as much golf as he has, and I don't think there's ever been another President who's taken as many and as lavish vacations while in office.

jova said...

I suppose we should be grateful that he is so lazy.
With his strong leftists ideology and a congress controlled by democrats in his first 2 years , he could have done even more damage to our nation if he was more involved.

John Craig said...

Jova --

bluffcreek1967 said...

Having studied Obama for a few years now, I've never once got the impression that he's a true intellectual, a serious and deep thinker. In fact, I see laziness as a profound problem in all that he does. He seems to know the buzz-words and is able to scratch the surface on politically hot-button matters, but isn't able to delve much farther.

I'm not saying he isn't a bright man, but he's not nearly as intelligent and smart as people have made him out to be. When questioned about ideology and certain policies, he seems to always be apprehensive and stumbling in his speech.

He often has difficulty expressing what he wants to say. I think this is because the man has not carefully developed his own thinking in these areas, and just parrots what others have said.

I don't think the man is well-read, and he so often stumbles over his words because his Leftist ideology has not been crystallized in his own thinking as much as people might think.

He gives me the impression of a college student who has to attend class in order to pass the course. His real interests, however, are not intellectual in nature, but in sports and in 'partying.'

Anyways, that's just my two cents.

John Craig said...

Ambrose --
That's a perfect analysis of Obama, I agree with you on all counts. I would also add that he's by nature dishonest, and that constantly lying is just second nature to him.

I actually think that the hesitancy when he talks sometimes is in itself any sort of intellectual flaw, I think that he's constantly being warned about gaffes (he's committed plenty) and he knows his every word is being recorded by someone, so he's just being careful about choosing the right words. I often think that if I were in that position I would speak much more slowly as well.

And I agree with you completely about his real interests.

Anonymous said...

Bluffcreek 1967 gave a perfect description of Obama. I can't spend too much time thinking about certain politicians or the state of our country without my BP rising (or feeling agitated). In a perfect, completely sane world, we wouldn't have many of the leaders that we currently have at the top of the heap.


John Craig said...

Birdie --
Yes, Bluffcreek is right ton target. Obama doesn't seem to have any original thoughts, he was just programmed with Leftist ideology early in life and that stuck. He was also programmed with enough duplicity that he was able to fool the electorate into thinking that he was a standard liberal rather than the hard Left person he actually is.