Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s last few days of campaigning were extremely disappointing and cynical, even by Israeli political standards. He filmed a glorified campaign commercial that masqueraded as a speech to the U.S. Congress, walked back his belief in the two-state solution and rushed around giving interviews after shunning the Israeli press and debates for most of the campaign.

Then on election day, he practically ran through the streets shouting “The Arabs are coming! The Arabs are coming!” like a modern-day, racist Paul Revere.

That being said, however, Obama’s threats following Netanyahu’s reelection are absurdly hypocritical and suggest that “No-Drama Obama” is taking his poor relationship with Netanyahu personally. According to a White House official who spoke to CNN:

The President told the Prime Minister that we will need to re-assess our options following the Prime Minister’s new positions and comments regarding the two state solution.

Interestingly, Obama doesn’t seem to have a problem with Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas (“Abu Mazen”), who formed a unity government with the terrorist group Hamas. This is the same Abu Mazen who has delayed Palestinian elections indefinitely, continues to pursue unilateral actions on the world stage against Israel without offering any political concessions and has publicly feted murderous terrorists on numerous occasions.

Did I mention that he’s a Holocaust denier?

Yet apparently if another Israeli candidate had managed to unseat Netanyahu, peace would have magically sprouted in the Middle East similarly to how a Noble Peace Prize wondrously appeared for Obama.

Abbas rejected former Prime Minister Ehud Olmert’s fair offer in 2008 and refused to talk peace with Netanyahu in 2010. But because of the soft bigotry of low expectations, effective Palestinian PR techniques for shifting the blame to Israel and Obama’s personal animus towards Netanyahu (some of which I think is justified, to be clear), Obama and many others seem to be placing the blame for a lack of peace solely on Netanyahu and Israel.

Obama could have condemned Netanyahu’s late campaign tactics while expressing understanding that sometimes politicians regrettably appeal to baser segments of the society during a campaign and twist the truth. American Jews and Americans in general mostly accepted Obama’s dubious explanation during his first presidential campaign that he had no idea that the pastor he was connected to since the 1980s (and who officiated at his wedding), Reverend Jeremiah Wright, was a raving anti-Semite.

And Netanyahu didn’t publicly challenge Obama when the U.S. President somewhat recently suggested that a deliberate terror attack on French Jews was “random.” Leaders sometimes make mistakes.

Obama is of course currently in the middle of intense negotiations with Iran, a worldwide sponsor of terror that has frequently hoped for the disappearance of the world’s only Jewish state and doesn’t hesitate to call out “Death to America!”

If Obama can try to make peace with the Ayatollahs (and Mahmoud Abbas), there is no need to reassess the relationship with Israel. There are no perfect leaders in the Middle East, unfortunately, and America and Israel still need each other.

I hope that Netanyahu and Obama overcome their differences and continue working together for the good of the region. That will only happen, though, if the U.S. President uses the same fair standard to evaluate all world leaders.