I am not a fan of President Bush.In fact, I am loath to call him "President Bush" in the first place.

Most of Brandeis agrees with me. As a liberal arts college in Massachusetts - one of the most solidly liberal states in the nation (at least, election-wise)- Brandeis is pretty consistent in its liberal political stances. More students supported the anti-war rally last year than stood behind Bush during that pivotal time, and complaints about the president and his questionable policies are often heard around campus. But as the 2004 election begins to approach, we all need to take a page from the King himself - Elvis Presley - and demand "a little less conversation" and "a little more action, please."

Recently, an e-mail has begun circulating around the internet entitled "Resume of George W. Bush." All information within this document is actually true, as I spent quite a bit of time making sure that my nausea was justified. The section titled "Accomplishments As President" is simply a list of just about everything Bush has done as leader of this country, and it is beyond disturbing. Included on this list are stunning achievements such as:

I invaded and occupied two countries at a continuing cost of over $1 billion per week.

I spent the US surplus and effectively bankrupted the US Treasury.

I am supporting development of a nuclear "Tactical Bunker Buster," a WMD [Weapon of Mass Destruction], and breaking the nuclear arms treaty,"

I have cut health care benefits for war veterans and support a cut in duty benefits for active duty troops and their families - in war time.

I am the first president in US history to have the United Nations remove the US from the Human Rights Commission.

The list of Bush's foibles is three pages long.

As an American citizen who was and remains concerned about America's standing and ability to contribute to world affairs, I was sickened by what I read. I always knew that Bush was not a good president but never before had I understood how bad of a job he has actually done. It has been documented, but not widely reported, that President Bush took the entire month of August in 2001 off for a vacation. And this vacation is special; by not being available in his full presidential capacity, he may have inadvertently allowed September 11, 2001 to happen. If nothing else, his negligence is a mistake for which he should never be forgiven.

But our options, as voters, remain unclear. The Democratic Party's candidates seem to blend into one amorphous and disturbingly moderate body. Dean and Clark seem, in many ways, indistinguishable. All candidates have spoken out against gay marriage in light of the new Massachusetts court ruling but continue to support "civil unions." Dean even went as far as to say that he wanted to appeal to the voters who fly the confederate flag - that the Democratic Party won't forget about them. I appreciate his campaign strategy, but in the process of trying to reach out to more conservative voters, he is effectively alienating me. I don't want to see the Democrats work with the laws and policies Bush has put into place; I want to see them throw them out the window, smash them into a thousand pieces and start changing things. I want to see a 180- degree turnaround, I want people marching and screaming in the streets. I want a new America.

But if I want that, I have to suppress my urge to vote for the most extreme, radical candidate there is, and so do the rest of us. We are voices, yes, and we are votes, but we are not the only votes in America and we can't afford to forget that. The East Coast tends to be a bubble of liberal spirit so much that we begin to forget that there is a way of thinking other than our own. The truth remains that most of this country is inclined to the right. Most of them support the war in Iraq and are highly patriotic, and willing to stand behind their president, no matter how corrupt or malignant he is. Because of this harsh reality, we must move in small steps away from the horrible situation we are in now and toward a far better future.

The first step is to vote for someone you may not like. The 2004 elections are not elections for the ideal, but instead a chance to choose the lesser of two evils. No Democratic candidate will truly satisfy the more radical among us. Even the more moderate voters may be disappointed in who is picked to run. But the fact remains that whoever runs will be better than who we have in office now. It is our responsibility as students and as eligible voting citizens to exercise the power given to us at birth (otherwise known as age 18), and to exercise it wisely.

These are the slow, small steps of democracy: the power to, as a people, take something bad out of office and replace it with something a little better. Our grandparents aren't going to be here in 25 years when our efforts may pay off. Even our parents may be gone by then. The future we are building by voting is for ourselves. It is so we can live in a country that is both prosperous and benevolent. It is so we can live in a country where our voices and our votes really count for something, where the power lies not in the hands of Big Oil and corporate America but in us, the citizens.

Somewhere along the line, America has gotten off track, and we finally have the power to push it back in line.

We have a year to make up our minds. We have a year to educate ourselves, to follow the actions of our government and those who wish to run it. We have a year to talk and talk and talk until our faces turn blue before we will be asked to get up in the morning, walk to the polls and help shape the future. I implore you all to listen carefully and to watch closely. I implore you all to think carefully and think hard. And when, a year from now, election day rolls around, I implore you all for a little less conversation and a little more action, please.