Another hifalutin’ bigwig makes the same “debt ceiling is unconstitutional” rebuttal I was already making last week.

Me, a lowly hobby blogger with naught but a tattered tissue of a BA to my name. Last time, it was Michael McConnell, a hifaultin’ law professor at Stanford University. Today, it’s (degree status unknown) Reason columnist Tim Cavanaugh:

Though I missed President Obama’s Twitter Towne Hall, I gather that he was asked about his position on a fanciful new theory regarding the 14th Amendment and the debt ceiling, and that he avoided giving an answer. Given the frenzy for this fad among pro-debt intellectuals and their dupes, the president’s coyness is shameful.

Garrett Epps’ 14th Amendment theory is a transparent fraud.

The “theory:” that the 14th Amendment gives the President unlimited ability to borrow money. The debt ceiling is, therefore, unconstitutional, and the whole debate over raising it is a complete waste of time.

Cavanaugh writes:

I don’t know whether Epps is a fool or a knave in making this embarrassingly thin case.

Word. He could add the names Chait and Dayen to that sentence, as well.

Now, look: I don’t blame Cavanaugh or anyone else for tackling this subject now, a full ten days after I first did, without mentioning me. It’s entirely possible he doesn't even know about that.

Maybe not plausible, but possible. Still: intelligent, thinking people can reach the same conclusions independently of each other, and that, I presume, is what has happened here.

All I’m saying is: I can be a hifalutin’ bigtime columnist for a big(ger)time publication and/or nationally syndicated medium for a lot less than what these other guys make. That’s all.

Previously:

• What do we call a person whose credit card payments are so high he can’t possibly pay them without taking out another credit card?

• Liberalspeak: “living” and “breathing” equal “morbidly advanced leprosy.”