Slattery follows the Democratic platform of opposing both the Patriot Act and the war in Iraq. Senator Roberts is likewise consistent with his own party's stances and a McCain supporter. But in order to keep his base of support, Slattery, who says Osama bin Laden still needs to be captured, should be careful that he doesn't appear to be supporting Bush's agenda.

Pat Roberts openly supports drilling in America's Wildlife Refuges! Specifically in the Alaskan Wildlife refuge! That's an extremely brazen suggestion to make in passing, but to openly support as one runs for senate is just shameful. Jim Slattery, on the other hand, has absolutely no intention of suggesting such preposterous alternatives. Slattery knows that Americans must loosen their dependency on foreign oil and quickly. Instead of searching for cheap and quick ways out, Slattery is willing to look into all types of green and even nuclear energy to find safe and environmentally friendly ways to keep out country moving.

Sloppy and quick is the name of the game for Pat Roberts. Drilling in Alaska would put thousands of animals and pristine forests at risk. Many species protected by the refuge already face endangerment. Shouldn't we as Americans feel that protecting our fragile wildlife for future generations is a responsibility?

Slattery is willing to work with American ingenuity to find green ways to brighten the future.

So Roberts and diplomacy don't really seem to go hand-in-hand when it comes to the middle east. Roberts, believe it or not, played a major part in designing phases I and II for the Bush administration's plan for Iraq. We all know how thrilled Americans are with the war in Iraq and the enormous holes it's created in our pockets and federal budget. Many thanks, Roberts.

Slattery, on the completely opposite side of the political spectrum, pledges to do everything in his power to remove our troops from Iraq as quickly and responsibly as possible.

"I find it unbelievable that in 2003 our nation went to war based on faulty, inaccurate intelligence data. As a result of this tragic mistake, more than 4,000...men and women have died in the war in Iraq."-Slattery

Below is some of Roberts' handiwork.

Coming out of the woodwork (to some degree,) Jim Slattery is campaigning the Democratic ticket for the Kansas Senate against the Republican incumbent, Pat Roberts.

Having served in the House of Representatives for 12 years, Slattery is no stranger and suffers no lack of experience in the dealings of Congress. His platform emphasizes the state of our national security; the cost of the war in Iraq and its affect on our economic situation; and the energy crisis and the need to invest in alternative resources.

Although Slattery has been out of the public eye for the better part of the last two decade while working in Washington as a lobbyist and practicing law, he is still a familiar name to Kansas voters and has potential to pull votes from centrist Republicans in the state as well as independent votes from Roberts.

Republican incumbent for Kansas' Senate seat, Pat Roberts, has a challenge in explaining to his constituents why he didn't support the proposals to allow the Federal Housing Administration to insure $300 billion in refinanced loans. Siting “unintended consequences,” Roberts was reluctant to support the Bill that he though was unfairly helping irresponsible homeowners. The Foreclosure Bill passed and was signed into law last session without the support of Roberts.

Jim Slattery (D) and Sen. Pat Roberts (R) sparred off this past Saturday in the first debate of the Kansas Senate race during an outdoor event at the AT&T;Arena on the Kansas State Fairgrounds.

The debate lasted an hour and covered aggressive attacks between the candidates on the issues of the war on terror, the federal budget, immigration, and Social Security among others.

Roberts launched his attack in an effort to paint Slattery as a "millionaire Washington lobbyist", pointing out his support for tax increases and amnesty for illegal immigrants. Slattery countered by labeling Roberts as "a 40-year Washington insider who should be held to account for the federal budget deficit and intelligence failures that led the United States into war in Iraq."

Slattery criticized the Senator's role on the Senate Intelligence Committee and accused him of helping to push the war initiative in 2002 under "faulty and inaccurate intelligence data".

Roberts defended himself by reminding the Democratic hopeful that he was also apart of the committee that investigated the intelligence failures prior to the war and that Slattery wouldn't even be able to make this point had he, along with the Committee, released the information regarding the intelligence failure to the public.

Roberts attacked Slattery's support for the immigration bill, which promoted amnesty to illegal immigrants and argued that such legislation is "(the cause of) some of the problems that we have today."

The debate as a whole seemed to be more of a partisan bickering match rather than a platform for the candidates to clarify any detailed plans they might have to address specific issues. In this game, Roberts is without question the more aggressive and, should the future debates be carried in a similar manner as this one, he will definitely carry the edge over Slattery from the conservative Kansas vote (and on account of voter familiarity.)

Slattery has challenged the incumbent Senator Roberts to four more debates, which Roberts (at this point) is resisting.

The two candidates have two more debates scheduled before the November elections.

Jim Slattery (D) put the deal down on the table (so to speak) this Monday when he said, "An election for an incumbent is fundamentally a job evaluation. And that’s certainly the case with Sen. Roberts. Does his job performance warrant him being hired for another six years?"

And, while the report in the Dodge City Daily Globe didn't mention any further direct attacks against Sen. Roberts (R) made by Slattery, it does go on to point out his positions on energy policy, health care, and fiscal responsibility.

A big item on his energy plan is investing in the production of fuel-efficient vehicles. He is also a Democratic advocate of offshore drilling that respects conservation efforts and allocates its income towards the research and engineering of alternative energy sources.

He sums up his energy position up plainly, " "I support drilling. I support wind energy. I support nuclear. I support clean coal technology. I support geothermal. I support solar energy. I support everything we can do to reduce this dangerous dependence on foreign oil."

On fiscal policy, Slattery referenced the financial irresponsibility of the war in Iraq and claimed, "The huge deficits that we’ve been running drive down the value of the dollar and drive up the price of gasoline and everything that we import. The government should be required to balance its budget just like American families and the great majority of state and local governments do. If you don’t have the money, you don’t spend it. And if you’re going to increase spending someplace, you have to increase your revenue or you have to cut spending someplace else."

Yet, in order to not whittle the war down to a mere issue of misspent money, he made it a point to acknowledge the fact that "We have lost more than 4,000 of our best and bravest men and women. We have strengthened Iran, weakened Israel and exhausted our army."

He supports a universal healthcare initiative by reforming Medicare programs and other efforts. As a means of tying the issues of health care to his economic plan, he argued, " I strongly support giving Medicare the authority to buy drugs in volume at discounted prices from the drug companies. This would save Kansans million of dollars."

Slattery Supports Israel and Multilateral Action

To a questioner concerned with the nature of America’s interest in Israel, Jim Slattery s declares, “Let me just make it very clear the United States can never waver in its defense for the state of Israel. Period. Exclamation mark … [B]ut at the same time we have to be constantly committed to the pursuit of peace in that region and I believe that entails with all the parties in that region with which you could possibly engage.” He follows his party’s support of Israel and its proclivity towards multilateral engagement. Unclear, however, is how he would be able to get regional players to warm up to Israel.

Slattery Gets Sebelius's Endorsement

Kansas Governor Kathleen Sebelius has endorsed Jim Slattery. In her endorsement, she touts Slattery’s voting record. He voted against NAFTA, for raising the minimum wage, for Davis Baker Act and he supported other measures that favor voters. Sebelius has earned much popularity in the state and respect nationally for her willingness to work on bipartisan issues. As global trade is widely seen as the culprit for agricultural and manufacturing job loss, this endorsement may appeal to the unemployed and those concerned about their job security.

Slattery: Roberts's Intelligence Failure Should Not Be Rewarded

Slattery contends that Sen. Roberts does not deserve his seat in the Senate. The Democratic contender brings up his experience in the private sector to appeal to voters and says that if a person does not do his or her job, they do not deserve to work. Slattery bases his condemnation on Sen. Roberts inability to ascertain proper evidence to go to war.

“[W]e went to war in Iraq based on faulty inaccurate intelligence data. And I was further reminded that Sen. Pat Roberts was the chairman of the Senate Intelligence Committee. He had the duty and responsibility to make sure that the intelligence data that was relied upon, to make the decision to go to war was in fact accurate and right. It was not. He and his committee failed in their responsibilities.”

Slattery Connects Environment, Trade, and Jobs

In a talk with union members, Slattery illustrates how a new carbon cap and trade system could benefit workers. By engaging in such a program, foreign companies will have to compete with American companies and raise both their environmental standards before they can penetrate the American market.

“Climate change has to be done right…If you dramatically increase the cost of energy in this country, what you do is you will push these [steel] businesses to China. And the Chinese don’t have any energy laws…What we have to do is impose what I have called performance standards. So that we can say to the rest of the world that if you want access to the US market, your products, going into this market, are going to have a certain carbon footprint…We’re not going to be able to solve this problem on our own. We can lead by example, but if we’re not careful how we lead by example, we’ll wake up again and realize that we’ve shipped off a lot of jobs offshore.”

Slattery Slams Roberts For Not Preventing Foreign Manufactuers From Getting U.S. Government Contracts

In a controversial government business transaction, EADS Airbus, a French manufacturer, won a contract to produce U.S. Air Force Tankers. Domestic producers such as Boeing lost the bid and therefore American jobs. Slattery explains that Sen. Pat Roberts did not keep language in a House of Representatives bill stating that foreign companies could not receive state subsidies if they are going to compete with American manufacturers. The Democratic candidate points out that Sen. Pat Roberts serves on the Senate Armed Service Committee and Senate Conference Committee.

“Senator Roberts had a chance in that conference committee to say that that language is going to stay in the bill. Had that language stayed in that bill we wouldn’t have any problems here.”

Slattery Explains How He Would Cut Support to Foreign Companies

A questioner asks what should be done about foreign companies, who with the support of government-sponsored tax abatements, have moved into America and set up their own operations. Slattery responds that these tax abatements must be returned to the government if they move outside of American borders.

“There’s got to be a way to have a claw back provision so that if you’re moving jobs offshore or you’re moving jobs to Mexico, you have to return some to the tax abatement that you got to entice you into that particular community or state.”

This measure, however, does nothing to stem what has been seen as the original cause of outsourcing: free trade.

Slattery Makes a Strong Push For Domestic Labor

Despite claims that a protectionist approach would leave American products less competitive in the global market, Slattery remains unabashedly protectionist about trade. He argues that he identifies with the American worker by highlighting,

“I have worked hard for different companies that are threatened by subsidized imports, by imports that are dumped in this country for different reasons. The law firm that I was associated with was a law firm that represented only domestic companies.”

He goes on, “When people say to me that ‘Buy America Provisions’ in our defense authorization bills are protectionist. My response to that is, ‘Do we want to be a great global power? Yes or no? And if we want to be a great global power then we have to have a manufacturing base in this country.”

Slattery Supports the Right to Organize and a Living Wage

In order to curry favor with unions and workers , Slattery states, “Throughout my political career, I have always supported strongly the rights of workers to collectively bargain and organize."

One way he will help workers, the Democratic candidate submits, will be by facilitating workers to assemble. He says decisions by employees to organize should be derived at confidentially in order to protect individuals from employer intimidation.

Further, he supports Davis-Baker laws, which advocate a living wage and health insurance and retirement benefits to workers.

Slattery (D) took his aggressive campaign against Sen. Pat Roberts (R) to the Overland Park Farmers Market where he criticized the incumbent Republican's support of Bush's fiscal policies that have brought the current financial crisis.

"You reap what you sow," the Democratic challenger claimed, "Senator Roberts has supported this reckless fiscal policy, and the people of Kansas are starting to notice."

"It's time to fire these people that have been doing such a miserable job."

After delivering a economic tongue-lashing against Roberts, Slattery proceeded to spell out his own proposals for a "pay-as-you-go" system where Congress would have to cut government spending or raise taxes.

He argued that spending could be tightened significantly by withdrawing our troops from Iraq by redirecting the $10 billion a month being invested in our efforts there back to the U.S.