Republicans Hand Down Order on Debating Iraq: “Don’t Mention, You Know, Iraq”

Let our journalists help you make sense of the noise: Subscribe to the Mother Jones Daily newsletter and get a recap of news that matters.


The House of Representatives has begun debating the Democrats’ Iraq War resolution that expresses disapproval of the president’s troop increase. Republican leadership has handed down an edict on how all good GOPers are to behave.

We know this because Majority Leader Steny Hoyer’s (D-MD) office somehow got a letter from Reps. John Shadegg (R-AZ) and Peter Hoekstra (R-MI) to their Republican colleages entitled “Iraq Resolution Debate, Their Terms or Ours?” I’ve excerpted below. Via ThinkProgress:

“The debate should not be about the surge or its details. This debate should not even be about the Iraq war to date, mistakes that have been made, or whether we can, or cannot, win militarily. If we let Democrats force us into a debate on the surge or the current situation in Iraq, we lose.”

“Rather, the debate must be about the global threat of the radical Islamic movement.”

There’s more on this “global threat” — enough to make Muslims around the world think we’re fighting a war against them, even — and a jab at the “liberal mainstream media.” Read the full letter in pdf format here.

Update: Democratic talking points here.

DOES IT FEEL LIKE POLITICS IS AT A BREAKING POINT?

Headshot of Editor in Chief of Mother Jones, Clara Jeffery

It sure feels that way to me, and here at Mother Jones, we’ve been thinking a lot about what journalism needs to do differently, and how we can have the biggest impact.

We kept coming back to one word: corruption. Democracy and the rule of law being undermined by those with wealth and power for their own gain. So we're launching an ambitious Mother Jones Corruption Project to do deep, time-intensive reporting on systemic corruption, and asking the MoJo community to help crowdfund it.

We aim to hire, build a team, and give them the time and space needed to understand how we got here and how we might get out. We want to dig into the forces and decisions that have allowed massive conflicts of interest, influence peddling, and win-at-all-costs politics to flourish.

It's unlike anything we've done, and we have seed funding to get started, but we're looking to raise $500,000 from readers by July when we'll be making key budgeting decisions—and the more resources we have by then, the deeper we can dig. If our plan sounds good to you, please help kickstart it with a tax-deductible donation today.

Thanks for reading—whether or not you can pitch in today, or ever, I'm glad you're with us.

Signed by Clara Jeffery

Clara Jeffery, Editor-in-Chief

payment methods

We Recommend

Latest