Goldblog reader Howard Deutsch writes:

 AIPAC types are worked up about J Street because while J Street has claimed to be "pro-Israel" and "pro-peace," they have, to an outsider's view, spent a lot of their energy arguing with Israel's American supporters on the right (AIPAC) or Israel's policies during the Kadima government (Cast Lead, where they were to the left of Meretz).  Meanwhile, as Jon Chait noted, plenty of people who clearly don't consider themselves pro-Israel in any way that I would recognize somehow gladly identify with and endorse J Street.

If J Street spent similar amounts of energy countering anti-Israel forces on the left as they did countering pro-Israel forces on the right, there might not be less acrimony (we are talking about political folks here), but I would at least find them to be an organization whose core beliefs and activities matched their self-described characterization.  You shouldn't, e.g., have to push hard for a grudging repudiation of Walt and Mearsheimer - J Street should be doing that as part of their mission to represent a mainstream pro-Israel position.  Even if it means [gasp!] making common cause with AIPAC.

We want to hear what you think about this article. Submit a letter to the editor or write to letters@theatlantic.com.