Heretofore the Mitch McConnells and the John Boehners could argue that they could not aggressively oppose Obama because of his popularity (read first black president) and they certainly could not close down the government because the Republicans would be blamed and the electorate would turn against them costing Republicans the White House in 2016. They used this to denigrate Ted Cruz. The argument has continued even though after Ted Cruz' valiant filibuster on the Senate floor the Republicans swept into the Senate.
But now, on this issue, there is no plausible argument concerning forfeiting the next election. The people are opposed to this agreement and certainly would not be opposed to the approach argued for by Andrew McCarthy in his brilliant article. If Mitch McConnell and John Boehner have any interest whatsoever in preventing a rupture of the Republican Party, if they wish to frustrate Donald Trump and demonstrate that they can represent the party as well as K St., they will follow McCarthy's prescription. If they are patriots they will follow his recommendations. I don't think the Republican leadership qualifies on any point.
I am not clear about the procedural steps necessary to accomplish this goal (assuming the near miraculous, that Mitch McConnell has a road to Damascus epiphany). As a first step either the Senate and/or the House must pass a resolution reciting the findings of McCarthy's article. Question: would such a resolution be subject to filibuster? If so, we are in the same predicament because we would not get enough votes to override. Question: why would Obama even have an opportunity to veto such a resolution? Why would it even be sent to him?
Assuming a resolution can evade a filibuster, there is a real chance. But the problem, of course, is not in the reasoning or in the doing, it is in our leaders. We have met the enemy, Pogo, and it is us.
