Here�s Sean Wilentz, in Monday�s New York Times:

The Republicans in the House of Representatives who declare that they may refuse to raise the debt limit threaten to do more than plunge the government into default. They are proposing a blatant violation of the 14th Amendment, which states that �the validity of the public debt of the United States, authorized by law� is sacrosanct and �shall not be questioned.�

Yet the Obama administration has repeatedly suppressed any talk of invoking the Constitution in this emergency. Last Thursday Jay Carney, the White House press secretary, said, �We do not believe that the 14th Amendment provides that authority to the president� to end the crisis. Treasury Secretary Jacob J. Lew reiterated the point on Sunday and added that the president would have �no option� to prevent a default on his own.

And here�s a comment from Marsha in Arizona:

Obama won�t uphold his Constitutional responsibilities BECAUSE he wants the same things as the Republicans...cuts to �entitlements�...and this way, he can blame the other �guys�.

House Republicans threatening to refuse to raise the debt ceiling � that is, force a repudiation of debts already accrued � would violate that �fundamental principle� of the Constitution.

Surely the lawyers advising and defending the White House, let alone the president, know as much. Refraining from stating this loudly and clearly, and allowing Congress to slip off the hook, has been a puzzling and self-defeating strategy, leading to the crippling sequester and the politics of chronic debt-ceiling crisis. More important, by failing to clarify the constitutional principles involved, the administration has neglected to do its utmost to defend the Constitution.

I hope Marsha is wrong. I hope, I hope. But why, then, did President Obama publicly throw away one of his aces before the betting began?

From the New York Times:

The company that operated a fertilizer plant in the city of West, where an April explosion killed 15 people, faces $118,300 in federal fines for two dozen serious safety violations, including a failure to have an emergency response plan, officials said Thursday. The Occupational Safety and Health Administration, which had not inspected the facility since 1982, said the West Fertilizer Company committed violations that included unsafe handling and storage of two fertilizers, anhydrous ammonia and ammonium nitrate, a chemical that investigators believe contributed to the huge blast�

The headline says it all:

Maureen Dowd�s column today deals with what is apparently a big story in the wonderful world of sports: whether a football team in Washington should stop calling itself the Redskins. As a fan of many years� standing � I attended a game once, and remember Vice President Nixon coming onto the field at half-time � I have strong feelings about the matter. This country was built by old white guys like me, and it�s time we caught a break. How about the Washington Ofays?

From Jennifer Senior�s interview of Justice Anthony Scalia in New York Magazine:

Flogging. And what I would say now is, yes, if a state enacted a law permitting flogging, it is immensely stupid, but it is not unconstitutional. A lot of stuff that�s stupid is not unconstitutional. I gave a talk once where I said they ought to pass out to all federal judges a stamp, and the stamp says � Whack! [Pounds his fist.] � STUPID BUT � CONSTITUTIONAL. Whack! [Pounds again.] STUPID BUT � CONSTITUTIONAL! Whack! � STUPID BUT CONSTITUTIONAL � [Laughs.] And then somebody sent me one.

From the Constitution of the United States, Article [IX]:

Excessive bail shall not be required, nor excessive fines imposed, nor cruel and unusual punishments inflicted.

From Wikipedia:

Flagellation or flogging is the act of methodically beating or whipping (Latin flagellum, �whip�) the human body. Specialised implements for it include rods, switches, the cat o� nine tails and the sjambok.

You knew they were out of touch. But did you know that the average American legislator believes his or her constituents are 15-20 percent more conservative than they really are?

A recent study asked almost 2,000 legislators what their constituents thought about gay marriage, universal healthcare, and abolishing federal welfare. Then it compared their answers to polling data from their districts to see how well the legislators understood the people they represent. Here are two of the resulting graphs (click the graphic for a full-size version):

Even liberal legislators tend to overestimate the conservative leanings in their districts by about 5 percentage points.

The typical conservative legislator overestimates his or her district�s conservatism by a whopping 20 percentage points. Indeed, he or she believes the district is even more conservative than the most right-leaning district in the entire country.

�is bigger than Barack�s wee wee any day.

See?

�This is not just about Obamacare anymore,� centrist Rep. Michael Grimm, R-N.Y., said.

�We�re not going to be disrespected,� conservative Rep. Marlin Stutzman, R-Ind., added. �We have to get something out of this. And I don�t know what that even is.�

Haven�t you ever seen a calcified flamingo before?

Uh-oh. It looks like the Tea Party is going to experience some unanticipated blowback from shutting down the government:

A Ku Klux Klan rally scheduled Saturday at the Gettysburg, Pa., National Military Park has been canceled due to the federal government shutdown.

The park is closed, and all permits for special events in October have been rescinded, a park statement said.

Heads the tan man wins, tails we all win. An elegant solution from Professor Wolff:

By all reports, there are enough Republican members of the House of Representatives ready to vote for a clean Continuing Resolution so that with the support of the Democratic members, such a raise would have no trouble passing. But John Boehner is clearly fearful that if he allows such a bill to come to the floor of the House, he will lose his Speakership.

Now, the position of Speaker of the House is not a party office, like Senate Majority Leader. It is a Constitutional office, voted on by all members of the House. To be elected Speaker, one needs an absolute majority of all votes cast, not counting abstentions by those voting �present.� In return for bringing a clean CR to the floor, the Democrats could make a deal with Boehner to abstain, or alternatively throw enough votes his way, to guarantee his reelection as Speaker. Hell, they could even make a deal not to challenge him for reelection in his District. They could make the same deal for a raising of the debt limit.

Just a thought.

Heads they win, tails we lose. David Dayen at Naked Capitalism explains how the fix is in:

Consider also how the nature of the gridlock itself empowers elite goals in this case. Democratic pundits and allies have talked themselves blue about the doomed Speakership of John Boehner, the lunacy of Ted Cruz, and whether the Republican fever will break. Precious few words, by contrast, have been written about the fact that the SOLUTION here, the position that Democrats have been pushing, is a �clean� continuing resolution, which will enforce sequestration limits, a spending cap below societal need and economic demand, into Fiscal Year 2014.

And while that would only hold for a couple months, anyone who thinks sequestration will somehow be cancelled (or even �replaced,� which does the economy next to no good from a macro standpoint) by the same people who just shut down the government over �defunding� Obamacare, which is by its nature mandatory spending and not defunded today, is nuts. But Democratic politicians benefit from the virtual silence about how the country is doomed to austerity spending caps for what could be an entire decade. And elites enjoy advantages from such a state of affairs as well.

I can sometimes find a little sympathy for John Boehner. Having reached the Speakership, traditionally a position of significance and power, he finds himself leading, or at least in front of, an unruly caucus that cannot agree among themselves on anything but a huge laundry list of obviously unreachable goals. Boehner probably expected that strategic skills would be called into play as he maneuvered with and against the Senate and the President. Instead he leads a group that fits the description someone applied to Ted Cruz, that it’s not clear how they get down a flight of stairs given their manifest inability to think one step ahead. With Cruz I don’t think that’s the case; he’s got a long-term strategy that involves destroying the existing Republican power structures and replacing them with a more directly Tea Party-oriented platform and political operation. With the House Republicans, on the other hand, it looks like the description fits.

…as Republicans prepared to vote late Saturday, some lawmakers acknowledged that they had no idea what would happen if the Senate follows through on its threat to reject their latest offering.

�It comes back to us, I guess,� said Rep. Phil Gingrey (Ga.), one of the more conservative Republicans and a candidate for Senate in 2014. �We really didn�t talk about exactly what the plan would be then.�

Yes, there’s no telling what can happen in this magical world we live in. Maybe the Senate will reverse course and give up despite having all the leverage. Perhaps the President will decide his signature legislative achievement should be shelved in another attempt to placate the hard right. Maybe the Rapture will happen before the debt limit is breached.

Syrbal says:

If it is wrong when a MALE doesn�t listen to what a female is saying; why is it ok when women also refuse to listen?

How do I know this? Because in 1971, still a virgin at age 20 (unlike Samantha who had already had consensual sex with a boyfriend before the night with Polanski when she was drugged and raped), I was raped. I was not drugged. I had some wine, but I was not drunk or impaired. I said �No� and was ignored�

Nobody who insists ALL rapes are equal and all rapists equally monstrous actually serves society by that claim. Because if men who have been taught, as my rapist was and doubtless as Polanski was, that seduction involves women who lie with their �no� for society�s eye, will ever ASK �Did I do wrong?� Because no man, even wanting to confront a situation setting off some belated inner alarm bell, wants to be THAT monster. So, rape of the non-horrific, non-vicious variety remains the unspeakable topic. As long as EVERY man is branded as a rapist by dint of possessing the �weapon� of rape � well, that is much like branding every gun-owner a serial killer. It accomplishes nothing good at all.

Before you rise up in outrage or nod in agreement, go here and read the whole thing. There may be more things in heaven and earth than are dreamt of in your philosophy.

� in just six words the GOP�s threats to shut down their own country�s government and destroy its credit rating:

This is how white people riot.

Alice Rivlin ran the Office of Management and Budget in 1995 when the Republicans forced one of their earlier government shutdowns. Here is a memory from that childish GOP tantrum of yesteryear:

AR: The questions you get are �Let me tell you about this activity; is it essential.� So you have to make a call on that.

My two favorite stories of that period are these. One was [the National Institutes of Health]. The clinical facilities where they had patients, that was clearly essential. But most of NIH is research and research management. We decided that was not essential. And so we sent the researchers home. But then you have laboratory animals. You can�t leave the laboratory animals to starve. So the technicians that take care of the laboratory animals are essential and the researchers are not.

�on Twitter:

In a message to the 26-year-old stripper from Oregon, named Lynsie Lee, Mr. Booker wrote that �the East Coast loves you, and by the East Coast, I mean me.�

Ms. Lee, whose photograph on Twitter features her splayed topless across a yellow couch, replied, �Well, now I�m blushing :)�

�Ms. Lee, who works at Casa Diablo, which bills itself as the world�s first vegan strip club, said she became acquainted with Mr. Booker when both were included in a film about social media. In an interview over Twitter on Wednesday night, Ms. Lee said she developed a �slight crush on the mayor.�

From the New York Times:

But the postponement also allows more time for negotiations between the defense team and military prosecutors, who must convince a jury that General Sinclair bullied and threatened the captain and forced her into oral sex�

From the beginning, the case has been transfixing in its soap-opera details that have been deeply embarrassing for the Army. In texts exchanged by the general and the captain, for instance, he called her �my panda�; she called him �pappa panda sexy pants.�

Presented as a service to the Kenyan police, who may not have been reading The New York Times three years ago:

ALEXANDRIA, Va. (AP) � This much is known about Anthony J. Tracy: He told government agents that he helped 270 Somalis illegally enter the United States through Cuba. He failed a lie detector test when he denied helping members of the Somali terrorist group Al Shabaab. He was some sort of informant for the federal government going back at least as far as 2002.

And on Friday, Mr. Tracy, of Winchester, Va., was sentenced to roughly four months in jail, equal to time served, and walked out a free man.

The case against Mr. Tracy, who spent significant time in Kenya running an illicit travel agency, is shrouded in secrecy. His hearing on Friday was held in open court, but lawyers and the judge talked around the specifics of what he actually did. In fact, his guilty plea, apparently entered earlier this year, remains under seal. So the exact nature of his misconduct is unclear�

The unredacted portions of the transcript indicate that Mr. Tracy, while living in Kenya, served as an informant for ICE and at least one other government agency as far back as 2002. In an e-mail message sent this year to an associate, he wrote, �I helped a lot of Somalis and most are good, but there are some who are bad and I leave them to Allah.�

What’s remarkable is that he probably actually believes what he tells the UN.

In an implicit rebuke to Putin, who earlier this month in an article in the New York Times, criticised Obama’s belief in US exceptionalism, Obama said: “Some may disagree, but I believe that America is exceptional — in part because we have shown a willingness, through the sacrifice of blood and treasure, to stand up not only for our own narrow self-interest, but for the interests of all.”

This blindness that varies from obstinate to willful is baffling to those who are not true believers in the American religion. To explain it requires another resurrection of the Chomsky chestnut that you can’t rise to a position of power in the US government unless you believe that the United States is unique in history in acting purely from altruistic motives. What we do, though it require “the sacrifice of blood and treasure”, we do for ourselves but also “for the interests of all”. As Madeleine Albright put it in another context, if we have to sacrifice Syrian lives, we believe that's a price worth paying. After all, it's for everyone's good, whatever they themselves might happen to believe.

�a billboard lovely as a tree.
Perhaps, unless the billboards fall
I�ll never see a tree at all.

� Ogden Nash

From Jay Bookman:

�The General Assembly finds and declares that outdoor advertising provides a substantial service and benefit to Georgia and Georgia�s citizens as well as the traveling public. Therefore, the General Assembly declares it to be in the public interest that provisions be made for the visibility of outdoor advertising signs��

Well, if a publicly owned tree, growing on public property, might possibly interfere with the visibility of a privately owned billboard, state law gives the billboard owner the right to come onto public property and chop that tree down. Previous law exempted hardwoods with a diameter of more than eight inches and pines with a diameter of more than a foot, but under HB 179 those protections, like the trees, are gone.

Syrbal/Labrys, herself a veteran, reminds us that in all bureaucracies scum may often rise to the top, but bad news? Never.

And it isn�t macho or �soldierly� to have mental health issues, so everyone learns the safe buzzwords and it all gets largely ignored. Until the fun and games end when someone dies. Like at Ft. Hood, like in the war zones when trooper A shoots trooper B, or at the Washington Naval Yard. When the shooter-to-be can�t see any solution except blood � theirs, his � pretty much all the same at that last bit, I suspect.

The military sometimes doesn�t listen so well. When you get out, they have about four pages of questions to determine your physical and mental well being. I answered, the medical aide checked boxes. Imagine my surprise when I later laid hands on my med records � all the things I answered �yes� to were marked �no�!

Stuff like �Do you have headaches?� �Do you have nightmares?� All the stuff they don�t want to really see, they simply don�t. Anything they can�t fix by handing you a pill, they don�t want to know about � and boy, DO they ever pass out the pills! Even if it kills the vet, they get plenty of pills.

Click image to enlarge

The Guardian brings us more news from the pews:

Of the 1,001 people surveyed, 35% of Americans said they believe in the statement: �With just Bible study and prayer, ALONE, people with serious mental illness like depression, bipolar disorder, and schizophrenia could overcome mental illness.�

Of the respondents who self-identified as either born-again, evangelical or fundamentalist Christian � 48% agreed.

Here�s an excerpt by Andrew J. Bacevich from one of the most devastating and satisfying smackdowns I�ve ever read. The victim, left dead and bleeding from multiple wounds, is David Brooks of The New York Times.

On April 28, 2003, beating President Bush�s �Mission Accomplished� speech by three days, Brooks declared that �the war in Iraq is over.� The political and cultural implications of victory promised to be profound. A collaboration between policy makers in Washington and troops on the battlefield had removed any last doubts as to American global dominion. Brooks sang the praises of �a ruling establishment that can conduct wars with incredible competence and skill.� The United States, he enthused, was an �incredibly effective colossus that can drop bombs onto pinpoints, [and] destroy enemies that aren�t even aware they are under attack��

Implicitly acknowledging the distance separating young Americans who chose to serve in uniform from the young Americans choosing otherwise, Brooks made clear which group deserved his admiration. �Can anybody think of another time in history when a comparable group of young people was asked to be at once so brave, fierce and relentless, while also being so sympathetic, creative and forbearing?� Brooks couldn�t, so he bestowed on the troops the secular equivalent of collective canonization. �They are John Wayne,� he rhapsodized, �but also Jane Addams.� Soldiers were paragons of virtue, their courage and altruism standing in stark contrast to the shallow, self-absorbed liberal culture that Brooks despised. �If anybody is wondering: Where are the young idealists? Where are the people willing to devote themselves to causes larger than themselves? They are in uniform in Iraq.� The gap between the military and society, in other words, was a good thing. It provided America with a great war-winning army and Americans with desperately needed exemplars of virtue.

Soon after Brooks published this paean to the American soldier, word of depraved and despicable acts at Abu Ghraib prison began to surface. Apparently, John Wayne and Jane Addams did not exhaust the range of possible role models to whom at least some American soldiers looked for inspiration.

�The Guardian�s got you covered:

While it is true that if e-coli bacteria from fecal matter is ingested, that it can can cause ailments such as cramps, fever, diarrhea, stomach pain, and other illnesses, the likelihood of anyone contracting these ailments from holy water under most circumstances is small�

From Tim Weiner�s history of the CIA, Legacy of Ashes:

The ambassador [Henry Cabot Lodge] resented the agency�s exalted status in Saigon. �CIA has more money; bigger houses than diplomats; bigger salaries; more weapons; more modern equipment.� He was jealous of the powers held by [CIA station chief] John Richardson, and he scoffed at the caution the station chief displayed about Conein�s central role in the coup plotting. Lodge decided he wanted a new station chief.

So he burned Richardson � �exposed him and gave his name publicly to the newspapers,� as Bobby Kennedy said in a classified oral history eight months later � by feeding a coldly calculated leak to a journeyman reporter passing through Saigon. The story was a hot scoop. Identifying Richardson by name � an unprecedented breach of security � it said he had �frustrated a plan of action Mr. Lodge had brought with him from Washington, because the agency disagreed with it�one high official here, a man who has devoted most of his life in the service of democracy, likened the CIA�s growth to a malignancy, and added he was not sure that even the White House could control it.� The New York Times and the Washington Post picked up the story. Richardson, his career ruined, left Saigon four days later; after a decent interval, Ambassador Lodge moved into his house.

�David Vitter and Bobby Jindal.

Vladimir Putin�s op-ed in the NY Times has really gotten under the skin of our lawgivers. They are outraged � outraged, I tell you � that Putin has the temerity to lecture us about our foreign policy. He also criticized American exceptionalism, which is verboten here in the land of the free. �It is extremely dangerous, � he wrote, �to encourage people to see themselves as exceptional, whatever the motivation.�

Well, our politicians were having none of that. �I almost wanted to vomit,� said Senator Bob Menendez. Many of his colleagues also chimed in to register their indignation. It was a bipartisan affair:

During a news conference Thursday, House Speaker John Boehner said, �I was insulted,� when he read Putin�s editorial.

Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid said he didn�t think Putin was trying to undermine the president on Syria with his op-ed but was instead �looking for an excuse to show off his Super Bowl ring.�

Sen. John McCain, R-Ariz., in a tweet, called Putin�s words �an insult�: �Putin�s NYT op-ed is an insult to the intelligence of every American.�

Sen. James M. Inhofe, R-Okla.,  said in an interview with CNN on Thursday that he too was not a fan of Putin�s piece: �I could hear Reagan turning over in his grave.�

First, a little historical perspective. As P.M Carpenter points out, twenty million Russians were killed in World War II by a country that encouraged its people to view themselves as exceptional, so the wicked Putin is making a serious point. Of course, I wouldn�t expect people like James Inhofe to stretch their minds that far. He is Rush Limbaugh and Sean Hannity�s intellectual equal (he thinks global warming is a socialist conspiracy).

 Frankly, the fact that John McCain is regarded as a foreign policy expert is an insult to the intelligence of every American. If we followed his advice we would have put ground troops into Serbia during Clinton�s splendid little war there, and we�d probably be at war with Iran right now. Metternich he ain�t. I�m a little surprised Joseph Lieberman hasn�t popped out of retirement to give us his two cents. This situation is tailor-made for his uniquely nauseating brand of unctuous moralizing.

(Oops. I said �ground troops.� How retro of me. Apparently, the preferred term these days is �boots on the ground.� Question: When you put the boots on the ground, what side of the red line do you put them on?)

 Putin also says something that I think most readers of this blog would probably agree with:

It is alarming that military intervention in internal conflicts in foreign countries has become commonplace for the United States. Is it in America�s long-term interest? I doubt it. Millions around the world increasingly see America not as a model of democracy but as relying solely on brute force, cobbling coalitions together under the slogan �you�re either with us or against us.�

Is that untrue? The fact that Putin is an authoritarian gay-basher is irrelevant here. There is not a single word in that paragraph that is false. The United States does rely too heavily on brute force. We do have a �you�re either with us or against us� mentality. It�s perhaps not quite as bad as it was during  the Bush-Cheney Dark Ages, but it�s still there. We do involve ourselves in foreign civil wars, and we have nothing to show for it but a growing list of spectacular failures. Our foreign policy thinkers are forever bleating about credibility and sending messages, as if every one else in the world is a little child who looks exclusively to the US for all of their cues on how to think and behave. Well, nothing ruins your credibility more quickly and completely than military defeat.

Putin has taken our measure and concluded, correctly, that we are bunch of self-important dullards and phonies. He�s laughing at us and we deserve it. It’s odd that our politicians should be so offended by him. Their hero is Henry Kissinger, who is every bit as hypocritical and callous as Putin.

Isn�t it rich seeing our pompous leaders wax indignant? These are the same morally upstanding optimates who brought us the USA Patriot Act, the invasion of Iraq, and Wall Street bailouts. They are presiding over a country that is experiencing third world levels of inequality and show very little inclination to change it. They countenance waterboarding, extraordinary rendition, Guantanamo Bay, drone strikes, targeted assassinations, and NSA spying. Their entire careers are built on a system of legalized bribery that makes a used condom seem clean by comparison. What moral exemplars they are!

James Pringle, a Reuters war correspondent during the Southeast Asian unpleasantness, put this up the other day on a forum called Vietnam Old Hacks. Pringle is right. President Obama, of all people, ought to know better. And, sadly enough, probably does. But like all of us, he is subject to the old rule that where you stand depends on where you sit.

�It�s what makes America different. It�s what makes us exceptional,� Barack Obama said the other day when he addressed the US nation. Vladimir Putin picked up on this in his piece in the New York Times yesterday, saying it was �extremely dangerous to encourage people to see themselves as exceptional.� OK, Putin is a former KGB man, and was not elected in a strictly democratic way, and has no entitlement to lecture other countries on such matters.

But this �exception� business pegged to the US has been around for a while. I think I first heard it about three years ago from former US Secretary of State Madeleine Albright. She was complaining that people had verbally attacked her for talking about �American exceptionalism.� I thought these were isolated moments, and that Barack Obama would encourage Americans to have the sense to turn away from such descriptions of themselves. That he should now use it himself the other day boggles the mind, at least my mind, and I wonder how Old Hacks see the issue. He should realise it runs the risk of the US becoming a yes, �laughing stock� in the world, or being castigated as being �arrogant.� John Kerry, it seems to me, is full of the same hubris, yet he bugged out of Vietnam after only three months, as I understand it. Americans should be ready to laugh at themselves � it�s much healthier�

I think that Hacks, in general, and not just Old Hacks, are less likely to be prone to this kind of �exceptionist� bragging. After all, do we not all say � and know � that �you�re just as good as your last story?� It�s time American Old Hacks weighed in with OpEd pieces in their local papers pointing out how ridiculous the whole �exceptional� business is. I lived in New York for 18 months as a correspondent at the UN, and believe me Americans are not �exceptional.� They�re all struggling to get through life like the rest of us. Let�s put an end to all this �exceptionist� claptrap before it goes any further!

You remember George Zimmerman, I know you do. And that his wife called 911 on him the other day. If not, go here.

I liked this touch:

Mark O�Mara, who represented George Zimmerman in his murder trial, said on Monday that his client did nothing wrong and the dispute was typical for a couple going through a divorce. On Tuesday, O�Mara said he was not going to represent George Zimmerman in this matter.

�I�ve come to know them as a family, and it�s not a good idea to get in between them,� O�Mara said.