Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu jabbed President Barack Obama in the ego Thursday in an announcement of his accepting an invitation by Congressional Speaker John Boehner to address a joint session of Senators and representatives next month.

Just by coincidence, pure coincidence, the Prime Minister will be speaking two weeks before the Knesset elections, a situation which gave Obama the opportunity to rule out a meeting with his sparring partner as a matter of standard operating procedure that the president does not meet with visiting dignitaries near an election.

Whether Boehner invited Netanyahu or whether the Prime Minister invited himself doesn’t matter to President Obama.

Netanyahu advised the American Ambassador but did not notify the president before Boehner made public that the Prime Minister will address Congress, a move that the White House officially said departed from protocol but really meant was a direct  cut at Obama.

The office of the Prime Minister poured salt on the cut Thursday when it announced:

Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu has accepted the invitation sent by Speaker John Boehner, on behalf of the bipartisan leadership of the House of Representatives and the Senate, to address a joint meeting of Congress…..

The address will provide an opportunity for the Prime Minister to thank President Obama, the US Congress and the American people for their support of Israel.

Netanyahu has cornered Obama. He will profusely thank the president for the support that both men know is grudging.

And since the president is supporting Israel, and since Israel wants tough sanctions on Iran to remain, just like Boehner does, it only is logical that  Obama is really not supporting Israel if he vetoes a Congressional bill that would impose new sanctions on Iran if does not conclude negotiations on limiting its nuclear program by the next diplomatic deadline, which keeps getting extended while Tehran plays for time.

In case Obama did not get the message from Netanyahu that the Prime Minister and the president are on the same page, even if in a different book.

Netanyahu’s office added:

“Just last week I discussed with President Obama the common challenges we face from Islamist extremism, including resurgent terrorism and Iran’s pursuit of nuclear weapons.

“I look forward to being able to share with the joint session Israel’s vision for working together to address these threats and to reiterate Israel’s commitment to the bond that unites our two democracies.”

Netanyahu, like most of us, heard or read Obama’s State of the Union address this week in which he vowed to fight terror but, instead of mentioning “Islamist extremism,” made clear that  “we continue to reject offensive stereotypes of Muslims — the vast majority of whom share our commitment to peace.”

Pass the salt, please.

A spokesperson for President Barack Obama is making sure Israeli Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu knows his boss is disgruntled.

The White House says it is “reserving judgment” of Israeli Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu to address a joint session of Congress about Iran on February 11, but that the event to which the prime minister has been asked to speak “is a departure from protocol.” The event is being held at the first branch of the American government, the legislative branch.

Netanyahu’s planned visit comes in response to a direct invitation by Congressional Speaker John A. Boehner, who asked the prime minister to address lawmakers of both houses on the issue of the Iranian nuclear threat. Boehner extended the invitation Wednesday, Jan. 21, less than 24 hours after Obama snubbed the Congress on the issue in his State of the Union address, broadcast live Tuesday night local time on national television.

White House spokesperson Josh Earnest told reporters in a briefing aboard Air Force One that it had not yet spoken with Israeli government officials. He said U.S. officials are reserving judgment on prime minister’s visit until they hear from their Israeli counterparts about Netanyahu’s plans.

“The protocol would suggest that the leader of one country would contact the leader of another country when he’s traveling there,” Earnest told reporters traveling with Obama. “This particular event seems to be a departure from that protocol,” he added dryly in a clear poke at Israel’s top leader and the Speaker.

As has been the case for some time, there is obviously no deep friendship between the American president and the Israeli prime minister. Nor have Obama’s staff in recent months bothered to trouble themselves to hide their own personal distaste for most members of the Israeli administration.

But this latest sarcasm makes it plain the president is now granting new privileges to those who speak for him; or perhaps he is no longer chooses to restrain his own emotions in the interest of diplomacy or simple good taste.

Sadly, this particular battle is not even with Netanyahu although Obama has decided to make it so: actually it’s between the president and his Congress, and Israel’s prime minister is just being caught in the crossfire.

In his address, Obama vowed to veto any measure that in any would infringe on negotiations with Tehran over its nuclear development activities.

Israel’s voters, meanwhile, are facing a national election in March. Netanyahu will have to answer to his constituents at the ballot box himself and explain what, if anything, he has or has not done to eliminate the existential threat to Israel presented by Iran’s nuclear program.

Netanyahu has repeatedly warned the international community, and the United States, that Israel will never allow Iran to achieve its goal in creating an atomic weapon of mass destruction.

No Israeli government official, and few – if any – intelligence officials in the world today actually believe Iran’s claims that it is continuing to increase and upgrade its uranium enrichment activities for “peaceful purposes only.”

Even if the Supreme Leader himself crosses his heart and solemnly says so.

Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu will reportedly address a joint session of Congress on February 11 at the invitation of Speaker John A. Boehner, who has asked him to address American legislators on the issue of Iran.

Boehner extended the invitation Wednesday less than 24 hours after President Barack Obama snubbed the Congress on the issue in his State of the Union address on national television.

“Prime Minister Netanyahu is a great friend of our country, and this invitation carries with it our unwavering commitment to the security and well-being of his people. In this time of challenge, I am asking the prime minister to address Congress on the grave threats radical Islam and Iran pose to our security and way of life,” Boehner wrote in a statement. “Americans and Israelis have always stood together in shared cause and common ideals, and now we must rise to the moment again. As many have pointed out, there’s no proof Obama’s actions have in fact halted Iran’s nuclear program. Indeed, the diplomacy has worried those who most fear the consequences of a nuclear breakout in Iran, including Netanyahu.”

The invitation was a strong gesture of support to the Jewish State. But it was also a direct slap at the president who repeated his threat to veto any proposed legislation toughening sanctions against Iran over its nuclear development activities. Obama wants lawmakers to allow him time to complete diplomatic negotiations with Tehran.

Last week it was announced that Iran is building two new nuclear plants “for peaceful purposes” – similar to all the other “peaceful civilian” nuclear facilities now churning out uranium enriched to military weapons grade levels.

Iran’s atomic agency chief said a week ago that Iran is increasing its uranium enrichment capacity to 30 tons per year, according to the Tasnim news agency, as quoted by China’s Xinhua news group. The increased production levels are intended to meet the “fuel needs of the Bushehr nuclear power plant.”

But at the beginning of the current round of negotiations, didn’t the Iranians agree to “freeze” their program during the talks? It is no secret that Iran has used talks to buy time in the past – nor is it a secret to anyone who watches the “talk game” that they are doing it now as well.

Israel’s prime minister has warned world leaders repeatedly about the risk facing their nations, their people and his own because of the gamble taken by the White House. He also said there was a limit as to how far Israel would be willing to allow that gamble to endanger Israeli lives.

Netanyahu has addressed the U.S. Congress twice before, in 2011 and prior to that in 1996. Each time he has addressed the threat of Iran’s steadily growing nuclear prowess and what it could mean for America and the world.

Next month’s address will undoubtedly exacerbate the already strained ties that exist between Jerusalem and the White House. But time is running out for everyone. Netanyahu and the people of Israel face elections in March.

Iran can do a lot of damage before then.

Michael G. Grimm, a Republican congressman representing Staten Island, has changed directions and announced late Monday Dec. 29, that he will resign from his position, effective Jan. 5. Grimm is resigning in the wake of charges of felony tax evasion, to which he pleaded guilty.

Grimm was charged with underreporting employees’ wages while he was owner of a Manhattan restaurant, Healthalicious. He was originally charged in a 20 count indictment and the charges hung over him during his re-election campaign. When he pleaded guilty, Grimm said he would not resign. However, after meeting with John Boehner, the Speaker of the House and Republican leader in congress, the New York congressman changed direction.

Grimm, 44, a former agent in the Federal Bureau of Investigation, issued a statement shortly before midnight on Monday, Dec. 29. He wrote: “I do not believe that I can continue to be 100 percent effective in the next Congress, and therefore, out of respect for the Office and the people I so proudly represent, it is time for me to start the next chapter of my life.”

The sentencing hearing for Grimm is set to take place on June 8, 2015.

How can you tell when the White House is in a panic? When they recruit a disgraced has-been Israeli politician to go after Netanyahu’s Iran message. It means they were unable to get President Shimon Peres to carry that bucket of water for them, which says a lot.

After revelations that the U.S. has been misleading two of its most loyal friends in the region, Israel and Saudi Arabia, and conducting secret talks with Iran even before the latter picked “moderate” Hassan Rouhani – it’s not easy to find A-list Israelis to make fun of Bibi’s “hysteria.”

So Olmert agreed to do the deed, and told a conference of security experts on Sunday that Netanyahu’s public criticism of the American nuclear deal with Iran was provocative and counterproductive.

Netanyahu, you’ll recall, said the deal with Iran was an “historic mistake” and Israel is not bound by it.

This means that no matter how much good will Rouhani is getting from Obama and the EU gang – Israel could up and bomb the plants overnight, any night. And, considering the Saudis’ mood about Obama these days – the IAF could fly through Saudi airspace unmolested. Why, the royal band would be playing Hatikva as the Israelis fly above (you don’t want them to play the Saudi anthem, because it could interfere with the mission).

Olmert said he, too, had disagreements with Obama, but always made sure to voice them in private.

Bibi’s response was that in contrast to “others,” when it came to the security of Israeli citizens “I will not be silent.”

Why should the White House be in a panic? Because of the bipartisan action taking place in both houses of Congress – something which has been rare, indeed, these past few years. As always, only the Jews could get the Democrats and Republicans together, or, if you will, only a clear betrayal of an old friend by the president could do it.

Anonymous senior officials in the Obama administration have been making a point of saying that Netanyahu’s efforts to appeal to Congress won’t be effective and Netanyhau can be “managed”, saying that Netanyahu is “weak and desperate”, that Netanyahu lacks self-confidence, and and the the White House isn’t excited by Netanyahu’s opposition, according to a report on Israeli TV. The official made sure to add that they aren’t naive.

The anonymous senior official doth protest too much, methinks.

According to Ray Takeyh, a senior fellow at the Council on Foreign Relations writing for Politico, the Iran accord, freezing but not eliminating Iran’s nuclear program over the next six months, is proving “contentious,” as congressional critics are highlighting its problems. House Speaker John Boehner (R-Ohio), for instance, urged that the agreement be met “with healthy skepticism,” and Sen. Chuck Schumer (D-N.Y.) said that the sanctions relief vs. Iranian concessions “does not seem proportional.”

Takeyh reminds readers that all the Iran sanctions bills to date have passed with overwhelming bipartisan majorities.

“Liberals and conservatives have come together to punish the Islamic Republic for its nuclear transgressions and sponsorship of terrorism. During the past three decades, while many countries have been enticed by Iranian commerce, Congress has distinguished itself by persistently holding Tehran responsible for its human rights abuses.”

And Takeyh insists this should not be attributed to pressure from AIPAC etc., since “American legislatures are perfectly capable of being offended by supreme leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei’s penal colony without such advocacy.”

Of course, the Iranians are not helping. President Obama wakes up every morning to discover new quotes from Iranian officials being candid about the interim deal. Last week, Hossein Shariatmadari, the voice of the Supreme Leader, according to the Washington Post, bragged to the Wall Street Journal that “if the right to enrich is accepted, which it has been, then everything that we have wanted has been realized.”

Wouldn’t you panic reading this quote? The Iranians are spilling so many beans, somebody is bound to trip and break something…

According to the Hill, the sanctions effort is led by Senators Robert Menendez (D-N.J.) and Mark Kirk (R-Ill.), who co-authored the Iran sanctions legislation that sailed through the Senate 100-0 two years ago (see: Senate Foreign Relations Chair (D) Attacks Obama ‘Fear Mongering’). And Senators Schumer and John McCain (R-Ariz.) are pushing for new sanctions, too.

It appears that the new legislation will take into consideration the general support of the American public for any deal that doesn’t require starting yet another war. What they’ll do is push for verification of Iran’s compliance. It will focus on getting Iran to dismantle its nuclear program, which the current six-month deal does not do.

Meanwhile, it appears Ehud Olmert, once Israel’s political fixer, has been reduced to doing Obama’s bidding. It’s a good job, but with an obvious sunset date: 2016. Until then, send all water carrying assignments to Yossi Olmert’s older brother.

The proposed immigration bill now in the Senate has been altered to t remove requirements that would  affect Israeli and other foreigners wanting to work temporarily in Jewish summer camps, but the House may block its passage.

Provisions for the J-1 non-immigrant visa for exchange visitors  now “allow an important cultural exchange” between American youth and foreign staff members, Rachel Laser, deputy director of the Reform Movement’s Religious Action Center told the Jewish Forward.

The original version of the bill contained extra requirements that were changed after Jewish camp operators said it would hurt their programs, where 1,400 Israeli counselors and almost the name number work in summer camps.

The altered Senate version could come unraveled if House of Representatives  Speaker John Boehner goes through with his threat to block its passage if he thinks a majority of republicans will not vote for the measure.

Originally published at Sultan Knish.

He folds a napkin in what looks like some expensive oyster bar, but is probably just a television studio backdrop. “The government has to get us back to work.”

Liberalism has become sick with its own disease. It is as dogma-ridden as any Red drinking sour beer in 1920s Chicago. It has nothing to offer to anyone except the ideological denunciation of thought crimes and the attendant superiority of being on the right side of the guillotine. And it has the misplaced self-righteousness of those who are busy pretending that they are angry about what is being done to other people, rather than their own egotistical anger with which they confront their sense of futility.