The subliminal power that a random combination of numbers has on us has never been more consequential. The top-secret codes we all hold in this highly secured part of our memory: Social security number, credit card number, PIN numbers, ID numbers (and the list goes on), have become essential to our very existence. The recent information technology explosion has summarized the stories of our lives in four or nine simple digits so we can all be meticulously sorted in an immense electronic file cabinet that appears to be infallible. I call it the System. It contains volumes about our identity and proves to be a much more explicit reference to us than our first and last names which are starting to look more like mere formalities.

The trouble with that is the occasional complication with the System, the vicious glitch that can crumble our wonderful world of numbers. I bet Sen. Ted Kennedy can tell us about that, since the illustrious political icon that he is has been pulled aside for secondary screening and told he wouldn’t be able to board onto his plane because he had a “name likeliness with someone of concern.” I’m sure he would’ve never imagined, being a renowned senator, that he would ever be living a terrorist’s nightmare, but it happened. The System made it happen. The Secretary of Homeland Security apologized but his name couldn’t be automatically taken off the list: steps needed to be taken. Even with his high connections he had to suffer the aggravation imposed by the System.

So if a high political figure of the world’s greatest nation can be held up as suspicious in his own country, what would happen if they made a mistake about some common college girl named Marli Lalanne who somehow got listed among the unwelcome? I predict I would be getting neither apology from Tom Ridge or even a chance to ask for one. The moral of this story is that we all need to be aware of the limits and casualties of the system and make sure we control its decisions, not the other way around, especially in sensitive sectors like homeland security.

Marli Lalanne can be contacted at m.lalanne@umiami.edu.

Having Hardball with Chris Matthews taped on campus was really cool. Hosting Crossfire and The Morning Show was equally exciting. And don’t forget Vanessa Carleton’s amazing post-debate performance at the Rat.

But aside from all the pomp and circumstance of this past week’s debate events, I thought the debate itself was surprisingly disappointing.

The day of the debate started out great. President Shalala hosted a luncheon for all the student essay winners and campus leaders-complete with guest speakers, granola bars, and 121 coveted debate tickets. She even went so far as to offer shawls (from her own personal collection!) to any student who feared freezing to death in the Convocation Center’s 59-degree environment, as requested by the candidates.

Finally-8:30 p.m. Perched atop my seat with Shalala’s shawl wrapped tightly around my frozen feet, I eagerly awaited President Bush and Senator Kerry’s grand entrance onto the stage. Ninety minutes and five granola bars later, I still sat eagerly awaiting-eagerly awaiting the Convocation Center’s exit doors to open.

Now, before you all brand me as an ungrateful baby, let me preface by stating that I felt incredibly honored to be given the opportunity to attend the actual debate. A rare event in American history, the content of the first presidential debate could have a deciding impact on the campaign. Key words: could have.

Could have…but didn’t. While both Kerry and Bush managed to present (or rather, repeat) their ideological differences in foreign policy, neither candidate really stood out as the apparent victor.

Maybe it’s just me, or maybe it’s the frost that had accumulated on my arms and legs during my few hours in the Convocation Center. But I thought that both candidates could have presented stronger, more passionate cases for themselves. Nothing new was revealed, and I felt neither impressed nor inspired at the debate’s end. In fact, the only memorable part of the evening was the incessant repetition of phrases like “I believe…” from Senator Kerry and “Wrong war, wrong place, wrong time” from President Bush.

Now don’t get me wrong-the entire debate experience provided me with a multitude of important life lessons: Avoid repeating annoying phrases in public speeches; reporters will leave you alone if you have food in your mouth; never drink two whole sodas prior to 90 minutes without bathroom breaks; and, most importantly, internal body temperature can indeed be preserved for up to three hours in shockingly cold conditions.

All jokes aside, having the first presidential debate of 2004 at our school was pretty cool. But one small tip for President Bush and Senator Kerry: Try turning down the A/C at your next two debates. Maybe your speeches will warm up too.

Taryn Southern can be contacted at t.southern@umiami.edu.

It wasn’t a typical conversation with a typical candidate. In Ralph Nader’s address to UM students, he didn’t make us feel good about ourselves or fill us with empty promises, but instead provided ugly statistics and said that our generation is “silly” in terms of our priorities and what influences us.

He didn’t receive applause and cheers. It was a time for students to digest their abundance of opinions but lack of political action.

His goal was to provoke, to anger and to stir a plan for action among students that want to see any real change in this country, not just another changed name for who resides in the White House.

He couldn’t have been more honest. The Democratic and Republican parties have grown further away from actually putting their ideologies into action. Political parties have been sadly reduced to beliefs instead of action. Proposed bills go unwritten; they are frozen by Congress, and they sometimes end up in such a chopped up state that it would have been better to abandon the issue altogether.

Every election year the same issues have come up: healthcare, social security and retirement, affordable housing, education, etc., but what major changes have really been made in the last two administrations for the betterment the people? We have gotten so caught up in discussing and complaining about the issues that nothing ever really gets accomplished.

Instead of calling upon more disconnected politicians, Nader calls us to become leaders. In order to see the fruits of real change, we need to demand more than just renewed empty promises; we need to start staging our fight. Our country wasn’t born as a result of an impersonal, passive population, but a passionate, aggressive, active population.

Nader even quoted a Chinese proverb that states, “To say and not to do is not to say.” Simply voting is just getting by in the political process and it takes a ridiculous about of time and energy just to get people to do that. It is what happens after the candidate is elected that ultimately matters.

Nader runs for the presidency with no intention of actually winning, but to get something bigger accomplished: To open the doors to those who have been abandoned by their parties that have resorted to incompetent candidates who lack the fervor for real change because they are too busy trying to please the both sides.

But I forgot. Americans have it “good.” As long as there isn’t widespread famine, suicide bombers or too much disease, we don’t have too much to worry about. Our lives are so much better than those of others. Nader said the American people could have everything they want, but don’t vote for anything they want. Well, I guess that not using our power is power in itself.

Marquita Bell can be contacted at m.bell@umiami.edu.

RE: Pre-medical advising

As a pre-medical student at the University of Miami, I have to say that I am appalled by the services that are offered by the pre-medical advising office. For those that are unaware, when a student applies to medical school, the student must request a committee letter of recommendation from the school’s pre-medical office. Our pre-medical office claims that it takes six weeks to write a letter of recommendation. I requested my letter on Aug. 4, 2004.

Six weeks later, I went to the pre-medical office with the envelopes that must be supplied when the letter is done. I was then notified that my letter was not written because my envelopes had not been received. At no time prior to this point was I informed, either verbally or in writing, that I needed to bring in envelopes to have my letter written. I handed in the envelopes and was told that my letter would be written within a week – it was not. My letter was finally written two weeks after it was supposed to be. Many medical schools work on a rolling admissions process and will not evaluate an applicant until all of his or her materials are received, including the committee letter.

Of course, the real problem is that there are 1,500 students listed as pre-med and only one pre-medical advisor (and one assistant) at UM. Not all 1,500 students apply to medical students, but one person cannot adequately advise all those students. So why is there only one advisor, you ask? Pre-medical students are enrolled in several different colleges, including Arts and Sciences and Engineering. No one school is willing to foot the bill for a second advisor, because it is not only their students that will be receiving services.

I suggest that each college pay an amount proportional to the percentage of pre-medical schools enrolled in that college. It is all too clear that another advisor has become very necessary. Students’ futures are on the line.

Jaime Legendre

RE: The presidential debate at the University of Miami

I stand in accordance with the scores of alumni who praise the University of Miami community for its peerless performance in hosting the first presidential debate. An unequivocal sense of pride and promise surrounds our campus in the wake of such an impressive production.

However, recently published comments have prompted me take up arms in defense of my colleague and successor, Luke A. Kosar. Those viewing the Hardball broadcast witnessed both Luke and College Republican President Scott Wacholtz field cunning questions from Chris Matthews – and both similarly gaffed at times. This should come as no surprise, considering both the moniker and nature of the broadcast.

However, the comments that are fallaciously attributed to Luke are fitting and apt of none other than our president, George W. Bush. The president’s fundamental misunderstanding of the issues is more than simply a product of a primitive grasp of the English language. Bush seems to be living in a fantasy world, one experienced in rose-colored tint. This fantasy, and its very real consequences, is no more apparent than when Bush speaks of the Iraq conflict.

If anyone is prostrating, it is President Bush. Fully knowing that a Republican Congress would never renew the ten-year ban on assault weapons, Bush continued what he does best – mislead – by claiming he would support such legislation. However, during his first campaign he emphatically stated that he would support second amendment rights without exception, no matter how distorted his and the NRA interpretation are. Our law enforcement officials are now in more danger than ever. Even the Al-Qaeda recruit manual encourages its minions to purchase assault weapons in the United States, because of how easy they can be attained.

The prostration continues, with Bush and his right-wing congressional subordinates attaching no-bid contract clauses for companies like Halliburton to the $87 billion supplemental budget request. By attaching such clauses last minute, Bush and his cronies commercialized a bill that dealt with the safety of our troops. Both Kerry and Edwards initially supported the bill, but later voted against it, based on principle, when these last-minute clauses were added for the sole purpose of further enriching large corporations.

If anyone is unfamiliar with the issues and has mastered the art of prostration, look no further than President George W. Bush.

Christian G. Wilson

Founder & President Emeritus

University of Miami College Democrats

Class of 2004

We have already had several editorials on the presidential debate, but we continue to feel compelled to mention the positive impact the debate has had on UM students. Hosting the first presidential debate has enhanced our political mind frame in this all-important election year.

This Tuesday night, students planned their evenings around watching the vice-presidential debate. It was normal to see students’ away message online saying “call me later – watching the vice-presidential debate.” The vice-presidential debate. The usually ignored sibling of the presidential debate. We were eagerly looking forward to a political happening and not to, say, the baseball playoffs that started the same day. Until last week, many students weren’t even aware that a vice-presidential debate was to be held, and now, we’re actually tuning in.

Behold the winds of change.

Perhaps even more exciting is that the presidential race seems to get tighter with each debate. The Kerry campaign gained momentum after last week’s presidential debate at UM, a momentum that was carried through the vice-presidential debate, since Sen. John Edwards did a good job debating. Furthermore, the Bush campaign has now also gathered strength with Vice President Dick Cheney’s forceful performance Tuesday night. In effect, the general consensus on the vice-presidential debate was, as of press time, that it was a draw, since both candidates performed well. This keeps the presidential race tense, close and, inevitably, exciting.

The vice-presidential debate was appealing and effective for several reasons. Because the vice-presidential candidates are under relatively less pressure than the presidential candidates, they had more leeway to speak freely – and, of course, entertain us by throwing mud and fire. In addition, the format of the debate was somewhat less structured than that of the presidential debate, and having the candidates sitting down side by side made the questions more personal and the answers more aggressive than in last week’s presidential debate.

The presidential candidates need to make the most of the two debates they have left, because the race is so close and because now they have our attention. And, despite the pessimists that think tonight’s second presidential debate-that will be held in town hall format-will not be watched because it’s a Friday night, we sincerely hope they’re wrong.

After all, who says we can’t tune in to politics before dressing up to go to South Beach?