The measure passes, 246-182, with 16 Republicans voting yes and one Democrat voting no, according to C-SPAN.

A majority of House members have voted for a nonbinding resolution opposing President Bush’s troop increase in Iraq, with the roll call complete.

AP: Dems Claim Majority for Iraq War Bill

The Democratic-controlled House issued a symbolic rejection of President Bush’s plan to deploy more troops to Iraq on Friday, opening an epic confrontation between Congress and commander in chief over an unpopular war that has taken the lives of more than 3,100 U.S. troops.

AP: House OKs Measure Opposing Troop Surge

This is a great first step. Now the Senate plans a vote this holiday weekend.

Senate to Call Unusual Weekend Vote on Iraq Troop Surge

The U.S. House of Representatives nears a historic vote on the rosolution to oppose President George W. Bush’s plan to escalate the war in Iraq with 21,500 more troops.

Democrats pushed a measure critical of President Bush’s Iraq policy to the brink of House passage on Friday, the culmination of an extraordinary four-day debate over a war that has killed more than 3,100 U.S. troops, according to the Associated Press.

“The passage of this legislation will signal a change in direction that will end the fighting and bring our troops home,” House Speaker Nancy Pelosi said in prepared remarks, endorsing the measure that takes issue with Bush’s decision to send more troops into the faltering battle.

We’ll bring you the vote tally as soon as it’s available.

Meanwhile, we just got the tripod set up and are about to begin counting and photographing birds for the Great Backyard Birdcount. We’ll put something up as soon as we can…

I hope you are watching the historic debate on the House floor on C-SPAN.

If you are, you would have just seen Rep. Terry Everett, R-Enterprise, Ala., make one of the worst speeches in the history of the United States House of Representatives.

It’s no wonder you rarely see Rep. Everett making speeches on the House floor. He’s one of the most invisible members of Congress because he’s just a terrible public speaker. His speech was slurred like he was on drugs, but it could have just been nervous dry mouth.

How can someone be that nervous and/or inarticulate after being in Congress for more than 20 years?

I know Everett personally. He used to be a newspaper publisher. He owned Gulf Coast Newspapers in Baldwin County in the early 1980s. He sold out the six-newspaper chain for $3 million in about 1984 and went on to use the money to finance his own run for Congress. He’s been there and largely unchallenged ever since, a prime example of incumbent dead wood.

Of course he supports President Bush and his escalation of the war in Iraq, because he is a do-nothing, yes-man for the corporate, Republican right.

Most of his time in Congress is spent pushing the space arms race with China, since the biggest research and manufacturing company in his district is Lockheed Martin, which has the Terminal High Altitude Area Defense (THAAD) missile plant in Troy.

Lockheed Brings A THAAD To Troy

Everett Speech: Space is No Longer a Sanctuary

Of course none of this comes under any media scrutiny in Alabama, perhaps because of the top secret nature of some of the research and maybe because of Everett’s cozy relationship with newspaper publishers, a club to which he used to belong.

I know for a fact Everett was a corrupt newspaper publisher. I watched in ethical agony once when he changed the text of one of my stories. I covered the courthouse in Bay Minette when the Mobile Press-Register challenged Gulf Coast Newspapers’ exclusive second class mail permit to publish legal ads in Baldwin County.

Everett changed the text of my story and slammed the judge presiding in the case, trying to force him to rule in his favor – under my byline. Of course it backfired and just pissed off the judge.

Why the people of Alabama continue to elect dumbasses like Terry Everett is a mystery to me. They say you get the representation you deserve. I guess that’s true…

If you are representated by Everett and want to voice your displeasure, go to his Congressional Website and send him an e-mail or call him up and bitch.

Democrats continued to assail President Bush’s policy on Iraq into the night on Tuesday, calling it a catastrophic failure, as the U.S. House of Representatives plunged into monumental debate on a war with dwindling public support that has cost 3,100 troops their lives.

The Democratic leadership set aside most of the week for the historic debate, according to the AP and other news sources, which is projected to culminate Friday in an “damning” vote against a Lame Duck President.

The “bare-bones,” nonbinding resolution will say the House “disapproves of the decision of President George W. Bush … to deploy more than 20,000 additional United States combat troops to Iraq.” The 95-word measure adds: “Congress and the American people will continue to support and protect the members of the United States armed forces who are serving or who have served bravely and honorably in Iraq.”

The debate was the first on Iraq in Congress since Democrats gained control of the House and Senate in midterm elections that swung on voter opposition to the war.

Passage seemed a virtually certainty, sources say. Democratic leaders said they expected no more than one or two members of their rank-and-file to oppose it, and Republicans said that despite lobbying by the White House, they expect at least 24 Republican members to swing for it, which means it would command the votes of at least 250 or 260 votes out of 435, a clear majority offering a stinging rebuke to a Commander in Chief.

Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid said he would attempt to pass an identical measure later this month, although Republicans blocked debate on a different proposal critical of the troop increase earlier this winter when Democrats refused to give equal treatment to a Republican alternative.

Democrats made clear the nonbinding measure was the beginning of a longer campaign to bring the war to an end.

“A vote of disapproval will set the stage for additional Iraq legislation, which will be coming to the House floor,” said Speaker Pelosi of California, who underscored the significance of the debate by delivering the first speech.

“In a few weeks, the war in Iraq will enter its fifth year, causing thousands of deaths, tens of thousands of casualties, costing hundreds of billions of dollars and damaging the standing of the United States in the international community,” she said. “And there is no end in sight,”

“The administration’s policy on Iraq has failed. It failed yesterday, it’s failing today, and it will fail tomorrow,” said Rep. Peter Welch of Vermont, serving his first term in Congress after winning his seat last fall. “These failures have left America weakened, not strengthened.”

Rep. John Dingell of Michigan, who served in World War II and has been in Congress since 1955, joined the choir.

“When faced with a choice of approving of the president’s policy or giving a vote of no confidence, the choice is easy,” he said. “I cannot support, nor will I condone, any policy that continues the long train of failure that brought us to this point.”

Senate Democrats were persuaded to give Robert M. Gates a free pass to become Defense Secretary in December, 2006, despite warnings from CIA officers who had worked with him. The Democrats bought into the “conventional wisdom” that Gates would guide George W. Bush toward a phased withdrawal from Iraq.

Instead, Gates is emerging as a loyal foot soldier for Bush in expanding the war – and to demonstrate his thanks to the Democrats for the free pass, Gates now is accusing them of aiding America’s enemies by not falling in line behind Bush.

For the full story of how the Democrats were bamboozled again, go to the independent ConsortiumNews.Com.

As I sit here waiting on the cable guy to show up and get the new DVR box working on the new TV (the old one blew) so I can record the president’s speech tonight, I suppose it is time to change the subject from Alabama football to American politics.

Just to prove what a macho dumbass he is for his faithful mass audience, President George W. Bush will take to the public airwaves tonight to try and make the case that what we need in Iraq are more troops, not less.

The Washington Post is reporting today that this will be the first time Bush has gone against the advice of the military commanders on the ground, as he likes to call them. In one of his latest Bushisms, he told the Post: “I’m a strict adherer to the command structure.”

Bush To Go Against Generals With Iraq Troop ‘Surge’ Speech

Sources tell the Post that Bush will borrow from Newton’s third law of motion tonight and say, “… we have to go up before we go down.”

Righto, commander-in-poop.

More troops are not being recommended by the Pentagon or the Baker-Iraq Study Group or even the Iraqi government

It’s clear Bush has decided on this strategy because he is a selfish little frat boy who has not learned a damn thing in his tenure in the White House. And it’s clear Bush does not give a damn about the future of Iraq, American Democracy or even the Republican Party.

Virtually all the experts agree that an escalation of the war in Iraq will only hurt Republicans in the 2008 elections, since no amount of new troops in Iraq will save this debacle now. Perhaps if the U.S. had gone in with 400,000 troops in the beginning the outcome would have been different.

But then, that ignores the larger point that the invasion should never have happened in the first place. Saddam was not an “imminent threat” to the U.S. nor an ally of al Qaeda, which was responsible for the attacks of 9/11.

Too bad the new cable box won’t include a button for the American people to vote on whether to send Bush back to the ranch. Now that would be a cool innovation – in technology and democracy.

It will be interesting to see if the White House docs get Bush’s meds just right tonight. If he is too hyper or too relaxed, and slurs his speech again, we could get this impeachment movement off the ground sooner, not later…

George W. Bush may have felt a thrill of vindication as he went to bed with visions of Saddam Hussein dangling at the end of a rope, but Bush achieved something more important for the Bush Family legacy. He silenced a unique witness who, if given the opportunity, could have testified about the roles of George H.W. Bush and other top U.S. officials in aiding and abetting Hussein’s crimes against humanity.

By making sure that Hussein never appeared before an international tribunal, Bush kept those Bush Family secrets safely tucked away.

For the full story of the troublesome testimony that Hussein might have delivered if not sent to the gallows, go to the independent ConsortiumNews.Com.

The appointment of Robert Gates to replace Donald Rumsfeld as Defense Secretary was widely viewed as a sign that George W. Bush was prepared to accept more realism on the Iraq War and possibly agree to a phased withdrawal of U.S. troops.

That wishful thinking led Democrats to treat Gates as a closet ally and to support his nomination unanimously. But the new Defense Secretary now is signaling that he’s onboard with Bush’s determination to press ahead in Iraq until “victory.”

For the full story on the worsening Iraq debacle, go to the independent ConsortiumNews.Com.

U.S. policy in the Middle East is staggering toward the abyss along a path marked in the past few days by the Saudi ambassador’s abrupt resignation and George W. Bush’s postponement of a major speech on the Iraq War.

It’s increasingly apparent that Bush has no intention of changing direction despite prospects for a region-wide conflict. As the crisis worsens, some hidden history is relevant as are thoughts on what a creative path forward might look like.

For the full story about a newly relevant “top secret” memo and some new ideas for addressing the Middle East crisis, go to the independent ConsortiumNews.Com.