This is a bit weird. The Nation has an editorial up attacking proponents of a binational solution to the Israel-Palestine conflict and saying that the outcome of the conflict should, instead, be the creation of two states, one Arab and one Jewish, living side-by-side. This is, obviously, the mainstream position on the issue. But something about the editorial infuriated TNR's Jamie Kirchick who saw it as an example of how "the oldest journal of opinion in the United States has yet to find an anti-American cause with which it cannot sympathize."
Is it Kirchick's view that to be a decent, patriotic American one must support the dissolution of Israel in favor of a unified secular state west of the Jordan river? Surely not. But that's the view The Nation was primarily attacking. So are we to understand that Kirchick thinks that to be a decent, patriotic American one must support the creation of a Greater Israel including the West Bank and Gaza Strip from which the Palestinian population will either be "removed" or else kept in a state of permament stateless captivity? I'm fairly certain that's a good deal more extreme than TNR's editorial line.