By Any Means Necessary - BAMN. That has become the fundamental strategy of the Clintons and has become the strategy of all D's since their ascension to national prominence.

Selfies and watching reality TV.

Seems he was too busy preparing for a debate. You know, winning the election was more important than the lives of Americans or an attack on a US facility.

They really don't care about anything so long as they get their gov't cheese. Lie, steal, violate their oath of office, none of it matters - just don't delay that cheese delivery.

If memory serves, they called his assessment naïve and ill informed.

Those that have little, who live off others, when the system collapses don't have far to fall, so for them it's really not a big deal.

For the wealthy, most will have ways of protecting themselves from the fall - gold, real estate, foreign currencies, etc.

For the vast portion of us in the middle, the fall will be devastating. Having a mortgage when there is no way to garner an income will take away the major store of "wealth" - I put that in quotes because when everyone is either getting foreclosed on or trying to get some equity out of their home it will drive the prices down significantly, eliminating the equity that folks think they have been building up (I keep trying to get my in-laws to extract their equity now via a reverse mortgage and they are just too stubborn to do so). When the gov't cannot borrow anymore, they will look around for the biggest source of wealth to steel, which will be IRA's and 401k's. They will nationalize these accounts under the premise that it "wasn't fair" for those who were able to put that money away tax free because it took away tax revenue that could have been used to "pay off the debt" (that's what they will claim, but it will not be true, if anything it would have been used for greater gov't largess, but it will be an effective argument to use to garner support from those without such savings). So, another source of wealth for those of us in the middle will be crushed.

Duct tape won't prevent the explosion, merely contain the mess ;-)

She wasn't unfairly slammed - it was insight into how these two in particular, and the "entitlement crowd" in general view the US. They only respect or are proud of something when they are the benefactors - and often as a result of affirmative action or other measures that are imposed to defeat meritorious achievement. And this isn't just a skin color thing either - does anyone think that she expressed (or even had) a similar sentiment when Clarence Thomas, Colon Powell, or Condi Rice were named to their prestigious positions? If anything, my guess would be that they sneered at those accomplishments as just "Uncle Tom's".