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.

Even according to right wing lawyers Rivkin and Casey, this means:

unlike most other sovereign states, the U.S. constitutionally cannot default on its financial obligations. In particular, it must continue to make payments, interest and principal, on its bonds, effectively requiring Congress to provide sufficient authority for that purpose.

Indeed, these two GOP lawyers urged the GOP House to:

Consistent with its obligations under Section Four, Congress should promptly increase the debt ceiling, but with one key caveat: The increase can be used only for borrowing to service existing obligations. By anchoring this action in a specific constitutional obligation, Congress would make it difficult, if not impossible, for the Obama administration to oppose this resolution of the debt-ceiling battle. At the same time, Congress should reclaim immediate control of the issuance of all other new debt obligations.

I'm all for that as well. Let Congress assert its authority over ALL matters. Of course this is no good for the GOP, as they have already appropriated spending for the fiscal year.

But even if Congress does not raise the debt ceiling, the President, it seems to me, has a much more plausible case for saying he has the right to insure that this Constitutional provision is not violated than he does for, say, the Libya action.

And this legal creativity would actually serve the national interest.

Speaking for me only