"Obama could have no honorable choice but to invoke the Fourteenth" (Hendrik Hertzberg, New Yorker)

[swag]

http://www.newyorker.com/talk/comment/2013/10/21/131021taco_talk_hertzberg

The validity of the public debt of the United States, authorized by law, including debts incurred for payment of pensions and bounties for services in suppressing insurrection or rebellion, shall not be questioned.
—Amendment XIV, Section 4.

By the time that long-obscure, lately apposite sentence became part of the Constitution, on July 9, 1868, the insurrection that occasioned it had been thoroughly, and bloodily, suppressed. Throughout the Civil War and afterward, Republicans in Congress had enacted some of the most forward-looking legislation in American history: a national currency, the Homestead Act, a transcontinental railroad, support for higher education, the definitive abolition of slavery—all thanks to the extended absence of delegations from the self-styled Confederate states. Now that era was about to end.

The party of Lincoln, grand but not yet old, feared the mischief that Southern senators and representatives might get up to when their states were readmitted to the Union. The Republicans’ foremost worry was that Congress might somehow be induced to cut funds for Union pensioners or pay off lenders who had gambled on a Confederate victory. But the language of the Fourteenth Amendment’s framers went further. Benjamin Wade, the president pro tem of the Senate, explained that the national debt would be safer once it was “withdrawn from the power of Congress to repudiate it.” He and his colleagues didn’t say just that the debt could not be put off, or left unpaid. They said that it couldn’t even be questioned.

The new insurrection is different from the old one, and not only because this time it’s the Republicans who are the insurrectionaries. The old insurrectionaries wanted to destroy the government; the new ones wish merely to decimate it. The old ones’ weapons of choice were muskets and bayonets; the new ones confine themselves to mendacity, demagoguery, and obstructionism. The old ones were exclusively white and Southern; the new ones, while overwhelmingly white, are more widely distributed. The old ones no longer wished to be citizens of the United States; the new ones, some of them, profess to wonder if the President is a citizen at all.

. . .

In the end, Obama could have no honorable choice but to invoke the Fourteenth. There is little doubt that he would prevail. The Supreme Court would be unlikely even to consider the matter, since no one would have standing to bring a successful suit: when the government pays its bills, who is damaged? The House Republicans might draw up articles of impeachment, adopt them, and send them to the Senate, where the probability of a conviction would be zero. This would not be a replay of Bill Clinton and the intern. President Clinton was not remotely guilty of high crimes and misdemeanors, but he was guilty of something, and that something was sordid. Yet impeachment was what put Clinton on a glide path to his present pinnacle as a wildly popular statesman. President Obama would be guilty only of saving the nation’s economy, and the world’s. It would be all he could do to head off a post-Bloombergian boomlet to somehow get around another amendment, the Twenty-second, and usher him to a third term.

[lostincalifornia]

1. I agree

[Benton D Struckcheon]

2. If it comes to that, he will have to.

I'm on record as thinking the SC won't even take the case, as it's a dispute between the other two branches. That would render the debt ceiling de facto unconstitutional, since it would be from that point forward unenforceable. The impeachment proceedings, as noted, would go nowhere since the Senate won't convict.
The real problem, though, will be the shutdown. How do you get them to reopen the government if they're furious from not getting what they wanted out of the debt ceiling? That's a tougher one. A long shutdown would have dire consequences. It would take longer for those consequences to hit, but it might wind up being just as bad as the sudden shock from the debt limit not being raised.
Lots of possibilities, lots of choices, all of them bad, far as I can tell.

[Z_California]

3. Impeachment would be awesome!

Like an ongoing infomercial about why not to vote for Republicans in 2016. Bring it on.

[polichick]

4. Don't get why the President's lawyers advise against it.

[Agnosticsherbet]

5. The question isn't honorable but Constitutional. If he President usurps the House's

powers to raise funds, then the House is the injured party. SCOTUS will not just say, no hurt no foul. I suspect out of self-interest SCOTUS would rule the budget ceiling law is unconstitutional. Most of the Conservatives on the Court are big corporation friendly and big business is now scared shitless at what is happening.

[Cartoonist]

6. The right will claim

that Obama is a dictator if he usurps the House of Repubs. That will get plenty of traction in the right wing media.

[blkmusclmachine]

7. Obama WON'T do the 14th, unless the Tea Party House gives Obama their OK. He went on TV and said so.

Obama's appears to have let the extremists call the shots. It's the "adult" thing to do, apparently.