Republican lawmakers, candidates and party officials have launched a nationwide campaign this week to portray Democrats as  weak on national security.

Their starting point is a dispute over the administration’s counter-terrorism surveillance policy, but the end point is the election in November.

Meanwhile, Democrats are strongly criticizing Republicans for “fear mongering.”

With eight months to go before voters cast their ballots, Republican strategists are moving swiftly to marshal their campaign weaponry and contrast the presumptive nominee and GOP lawmakers with their Democratic opponents.

Freshman House Democrats from New Hampshire to Arizona are under assault for a decision by Democratic leaders not to pass Senate legislation that would have reauthorized expanded wiretapping powers for national intelligence agencies.   

With lawmakers at a stalemate on a rewrite of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA), an overwhelming majority of House Democrats supported Speaker Nancy Pelosi’s (D-Calif.) decision to allow a temporary surveillance law to expire at midnight on Feb. 16. Democrats wanted to pass an extension to the temporary law, but Republicans and the White House dismissed that approach.

Now, as the GOP attacks intensify, vulnerable Democrats may wonder if the confrontation with President Bush should have been avoided.

Bush used his radio address over the weekend to lambaste Democrats for putting the nation at “greater risk.” McCain called the decision to leave Washington without passing the intelligence legislation “disgraceful.”

Democrats responded that Bush has “chosen to manufacture a sudden and unnecessary confrontation” and argued that intelligence officials would still have the legal justification they need without congressional action.

But a nuanced policy debate outside of Washington could be a risky move for Democrats, who are competing with slogans that proved effective in campaigns since the Sept. 11 terrorists attacks.

Republicans appeared to be going back to that playbook this week in various parts of the country, trying to link vulnerable lawmakers with the bitter dispute in Washington.

In a typical example, Fergus Cullen, chairman of the New Hampshire Republican Party, accused freshman Reps. Paul Hodes (D-N.H.) and Carol Shea-Porter (D-N.H.) of playing politics on legislation “critical” to national security.

“By skipping town and allowing this legislation to lapse, Reps. Paul Hodes and Carol Shea-Porter have shown they just don’t take the threat to our nation seriously,” said Cullen.

Former Rep. Jeb Bradley (R-N.H.), who is running for Shea-Porter’s seat, has also joined the fray.

“[W]hile Congress adjourns for 10 days, a dangerous gap in intelligence gathering capability now increases the risk of terror attacks and undermines the safety of Americans,” said Bradley.   

Shea-Porter’s chief of staff fired back at her opponents.