Wicker - where is he on the issues?

Iraq: still supporting the spending of $12 billion per month in Iraq.

Social Security: Still supports risking your retirement savings on Wall Street.

Jobs: Supports tax breaks for companies shipping jobs overseas.

Voting: voted with Bush almost 90% of the time.

Mississippi deserves better, much better.

There's more...

Roger Wicker and Ronnie Musgrove only have one thing in common - they kind of look alike.

That's where the resemblance ends.

Roger Wicker has voted 13 times against increasing the minimum wage. Roger Wicker has voted to risk your Social Security money on Wall Street. Yes - that Wall Street. Roger Wicker supports tax cuts for the wealthy, while the middle class suffers.

Roger Wicker represents the failed policies of the Bush administration.

Ronnie Musgrove represents you.

There's more...

Roger Wicker is not standing up for workers. He has voted against minimum wage increases multiple times.

The kind of wage increase he does support is one closer to home - his own wage, as a matter of fact.

So while Roger Wicker is busy supporting the Bush agenda of opposing minimum wage increases so the working poor can support themselves, he is busy giving himself pay increases, all at the tax-payers expense.

To make life harder on those who are already struggling, he also voted against expanding health care coverage for the children of poor parents in Mississippi.

Roger Wicker has been busy in Washington - increasing his own pay, but making things harder for the rest of us.

There's more...

Roger Wicker - better pay for him, nothing for the teachers or soldiers....

With Roger Wicker's record of raising his own salary, but ignoring the needs of our teachers, can WE afford him?

There's more...

I wrote a diary that went over this briefly yesterday.  However this is too important not to highlight again.  The way this dispute has broken down, you have the Democrats led by AG Jim Hood citing a 2000 state law that is very specific about where races go on the ballot but says nothing about special elections being placed at the bottom of the ballot, while Haley Barbour and his lackeys are claiming that the precedent is set for special elections to go at the bottom of the ballot.  A law that does not mention special elections specifically versus precendence is how the GOP is framing this.  Too bad for them their frame is not based on facts. (surpised? I did not think so)

There's more...