Israel hits target on Syrian/Lebanese border

What a knee-slapper!

Yeah, come on guys, don't blame Obama! No fair, he's just the PRESIDENT, it's not like he sets the agenda and directs foreign policy or anything. Not like it's HIS State Department.
No, it's not Obama who's sending BILLIONS (not to mention tanks and fighters) to countries like Egypt and Pakistan--why, it's CONGRESS--they're the ones doing this against his wishes! That's it, it's Congress, it's Spencer, it's Ray Lewis--anybody but Obama!

I can well understand that you'd be down to any absurd suggestion in your futile attempt to exhonerate your hero Barack. But you're slipping over the border into desperate / pathetic territory. But, you're surely spending a lot of time here, trying to convince your "intellectual inferiors" (as you called us) that black is white and the earth is flat. Perhaps "der Ole Professor" (as you called yourself) is past his use-by date? But at least you left me laughing out loud. Have you considered comedy as a profession?

George,
Is that a yes or a no about whether Congress can cut off foreign aid?

Short of an outright disapproval of the entire foreign aid budget(as part of the full fiscal budget)--submitted to Congress by the administration--I'm not aware that any mechanism exists for Congress to dictate how and to whom that aid money is distributed.
And, that says that Congress is still voting on the ADMINISTRATION'S agenda, not one they've put forward. The president is bound by neither expressions of support nor disapproval from members of Congress. So, that's a NO to your question.

And, you know what, "der Ole (self-proclaimed) Professor?" Even if I'm wrong about that, the buck still stops with Obama. He's the CEO, he sets the tone, he advances the agenda, he pursues the policy. So, how about answering your own question:

"If so, is it fair to single out Obama as the reason aide continues to Egypt and or Pakistan?"

That's a YES to your question...

The laws governing all foreign aid were recently seriously overhauled by the Global Partnerships Act of 2012. See the Congressional executive summary here. http://democrats.foreignaffairs.house.gov/112/GPA112/Title-by-title_summary_12-11-12_Final.pdf

I believe it is fair to say that the executive requests and the Congress approves foreign aid. I don't pretend to be expert on the subject but both the limits of executive discretion and the oversight of Congressional approval appear to have been significantly tightened up by virtue of the new Act. See in particular Section 9 and 10 which define requirements of the Executive for providing detailed info to Congress and restrictions of allocation to entities that violate human rights and or have acted against US interests.
An excerpt:
9 SEC. 9302. CONGRESSIONAL BUDGET JUSTIFICATION.
(a) REQUIREMENT FOR SUBMISSION.—The President
shall prepare, and submit to the Congress not later than February 1 of each year, a report justifying the resources requested for all foreign assistance programs.
(b) MATERIALS TO BE INCLUDED.—The report sub-
mitted pursuant to subsection (a) shall include—
(1) a description of each planned country, re-
gional, or centrally-funded program for the coming fiscal year, and the rationale for each such program; (2) the dollar amount of each program—
(A) as proposed for the coming fiscal year;
(B) as estimated for the current fiscal
year; and
(C) as allocated for the previous fiscal
year; and wherever possible, a description of the results achieved for each such program in the previous etc etc etc
(See http://democrats.foreignaffairs.house.gov/112/GPA112/HR6644.pdf )
The point being that without an informed and approving Congress Obama is unable to provide foreign aid to anyone. So why tar him as the bad guy for aid given to Egypt and Pakistan? Hey, I'm against such aid and I think both these countries should be disqualified as recipients of aid given the language prohibiting aid to human rights violators in the 2012 Act and the blasphemy laws in force in both countries. My point is simply that it is not fair to put all the blame on Obama.

Anyway, If Morsi and the MB stay in power in Egypt, it won't be long before the aid to Egypt is terminated.

So, we seem to agree that, regardless the nuances, it's the administration who composes puts forward the agenda. But then you seem determined to mire the question of Obama's responsibility for funding beyond-the-pale islamist regimes and movements by submerging it under the intricacies of governmental mechanics. But one does not have to be a Constitutional scholar to see where Obama's sympathies lie! I repeat that this is HIS administration, His State Department, HIS agenda, HIS policies. Shall we start with Benghazi and work back...or begin with his mendacious Cairo speech and move forward?

Now, does that mean there's not plenty of blame to share? Not at all--and nobody said that! But blame-spreading doesn't minimize Obabma's primary respsonsibilty in the least! He--as president--not "Congress"--is acclaimed as "The Leader of the Free World." He gets the big house, the 747 and "Hail to the Chief." He also gets the brickbats when he has them coming...and comporting with--and funding--people who are NOT our friends is a sure way to keep those coming.

Harry Truman understood more than 60 years ago what you would have us forget about Obama today: "The Buck Stops Here." That's perhaps too plain-spoken and not poetic enough for you and your "progressive" friends. But it does possess the advantage of truth...