Trying to pick Charles Krauthammer\’s best column is like trying to pick Ty Cobb\’s best hitting day.  There is an awful lot to choose from.

But his latest column, which talks about Benjamin Netanyahu\’s speech to a joint session of congress, is right at the top of the list…maybe even the single best of them all.

Click here to read it…but continue below to read just the first third or so….and you\’ll understand why I say what I do:

BenjaminNetanyahu\’s address to Congress was notable in two respects. QueenEsther got her first standing O in 2,500 years. And President Obamacame up empty in his campaign to pre-emptively undermine Netanyahubefore the Israeli prime minister could present his case on the Irannegotiations.

On the contrary. The steady stream of slights andinsults turned an irritant into an international event and vastlyincreased the speech\’s audience and reach. Instead of dramaticallyunveiling an Iranian nuclear deal as a fait accompli, Obama must nowfirst defend his Iranian diplomacy.

In particular, argues theWashington Post, he must defend its fundamental premise. It had beenthe policy of every president since 1979 that Islamist Iran must besanctioned and contained. Obama, however, is betting instead ondetente to tame Iran\’s aggressive behavior and nuclear ambitions.

For six years, Obama has offered the mullahs an extended hand. He hasimagined that with Kissingerian brilliance he would turn the Khameneiregime into a de facto U.S. ally in pacifying the Middle East. Forhis pains, Obama has been rewarded with an Iran that has ramped upits aggressiveness in Iraq, Syria, Lebanon, Gaza and Yemen, andbrazenly defied the world on uranium enrichment.

He did the same withRussia. He offered Vladimir Putin a new detente. “Reset” hecalled it. Putin responded by decimating his domestic opposition,unleashing a vicious anti-American propaganda campaign, ravagingUkraine, and shaking the post-Cold War European order to itsfoundations.

Like the Bourbons, however, Obama learns nothing.

God I wish Krauthammer was wrong. But he isn\’t. Not even a fraction of 1%.

Thank you, sir, for saying it this well.  And let me again urge everyone who read the above excerpt to use the link I\’ve provided and read the rest as well.