As Israeli Prime Minister Netanyahu prepares to address Congress, Senate Democrats are playing a game of political musical chairs, deciding whether to attend or sit this one out.

With prominent progressive Senators Bernie Sanders and Elizabeth Warren boycotting, and others like Tina Smith and Brian Schatz still on the fence, the Democratic caucus is deeply divided on Netanyahu's upcoming speech. Key figures like Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer and Senate Foreign Relations Committee head Ben Cardin plan to attend, hoping for a constructive dialogue amidst the ongoing Israel-Gaza conflict. Meanwhile, some Democrats criticize the invitation as a Republican move to create discord within their ranks, leaving the party scrambling to find a unified stance.

Senator Chris Murphy finds himself in a Hamlet-esque dilemma, teetering between attending and skipping the speech. 'I haven't decided yet,' Murphy confessed, perhaps hoping a coin toss will provide a decisive answer before the speech on July 24th.

Bucking the trend among progressives, Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer, despite having his own bones to pick with Netanyahu, co-signed the invite. A move that raises eyebrows, considering his past criticisms of the Israeli Prime Minister's policies.

On the 'I'm not going' list are Senators Bernie Sanders and Elizabeth Warren, who have proudly declared their planned absence. This strong stance aligns with their broader progressive platform, and it's no surprise they’ve taken this position given their vocal criticism of Netanyahu’s handling of the Israel-Gaza situation. It seems like their seats will be the coveted spots at Congress that day, but sadly, they'll remain empty.

Then there are the undecideds, including Senators Tina Smith and Brian Schatz. It seems they may be waiting for the political winds to offer some guidance before making their final decision. The anticipation surrounding their choice is almost as gripping as awaiting the results of a season finale.

For Senators who are definite attendees, such as Jon Tester, Tammy Baldwin, Bob Casey, and Sherrod Brown, their commitment speaks volumes. They appear poised, ready to face what is sure to be a divisive and high-stakes address—after all, it's not every day they get to add 'worked through political drama' to their résumés.

The timing of Netanyahu's visit, amid an ongoing war between Israel and Hamas in Gaza, only heightens the tension within Senate chambers. Some Democrats feel that the invitation is less about diplomatic discourse and more about creating intra-party strife. It's as if they've been invited to a party only to discover there's a surprise piñata, and it's filled with political conflict instead of candies.

House Speaker Mike Johnson didn’t just whisper an invitation to Netanyahu; he rolled out the red carpet officially. Some Democrats, however, are less thrilled and see the invitation as a Republican strategy to stir the pot right when party unity is crucial.

Former House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, while expressing reservations about Netanyahu, wishes he would step up and act more as a statesman. However, her hopes for a change in his approach seem as likely as a cat swapping its love for independence for fondness for group hugs.

Senator Chris Van Hollen has categorized the invitation as offering a 'political lifeline' to Netanyahu, a sentiment echoed by other Democrats who view this move with a level of skepticism usually reserved for 'unlimited' data plans.

On the other hand, there's Rep. Michael McCaul’s perspective. McCaul, a Republican, believes hearing directly from Netanyahu is crucial, especially for the younger generation who might lack the historical context to fully grasp the ongoing conflict. After all, not every generational gap can be bridged with a social media post.

Rep. Gregory Meeks, weighing his obligations as the top Democrat on the House Foreign Affairs Committee, has committed to attending. He seems to feel a sense of duty compels his presence, suggesting that his RSVP comes not from a place of enthusiasm, but necessity.

Nevertheless, others like Rep. Seth Magaziner view the situation through a more cynical lens. Magaziner expressed a wish that Netanyahu wouldn’t even be Prime Minister by the time of the address, yet acknowledges the importance of being present. Guess some hopes are better left as wishes!

Rep. Don Beyer, however, has put his foot decisively in the boycott camp, conditional only on Netanyahu’s unlikely transformation into a champion for a ceasefire.

Some members of Congress, including those from the Congressional Progressive Caucus like Pramila Jayapal, plan to skip Netanyahu's address. Their collective absence will undoubtedly send a message, though what that message is depends on one's perspective. Skipping speeches isn't new in politics, but perhaps they just have 'prior engagements.'

In the grand scheme, the RSVP roulette surrounding Netanyahu's address is less about aligning waitstaff and more about making a statement. Whether they attend or not, each Democrat's decision highlights the complex balancing act of personal convictions, political strategy, and international diplomacy they must navigate.