November elections are closing in and the seasonal mudslinging has begun.

Bob Casey is a walking unibrow, Ed Rendell's the gubernatorial version of Butterbean, and Rick Santorum...well, Santorum is receiving the most intriguing dirt of all.

Before we get to the details, take a second to think of the standard potshots politicians exchange. But, now, there is a movement to define, actually place in the dictionary, the word "Santorum" as the messy aftermath of sexual intercourse.

This reviling insult is the very first hit on Google for the word "Santorum." Go ahead and try it, sicko. This movement, full of youthful vulgarity, stands out in a crowd of tired smear campaigns.

If this new trend were to stick, the political battlefield would soon resemble a playground.

Imagine the possibilities. Republicans could define "Clinton" as the inspiration for Shawnna's "Gettin' Some" song. Democrats could define "Mark Foley" as...well, "Mark Foley." Picture George Bush's encyclopedia entry: Youngest member of the Bush presidential family. Large crowds and bright lights make him anxious and prompt his defense mechanisms of nasal laughter and excessive squinting. His natural enemies are pretzels, the word "subliminal," and sayings from Texas, where he's from, I think.

This fresh method of tossing dirt transcends common mudslinging. No matter how vulgar or silly, these attacks are effective tools of political activism and can be started by a single citizen, as was the case in this latest Santorum controversy.

The pioneer of this movement, Dan Savage, took offense to Santorum's comments on homosexuality in an interview when Santorum said he had no problem with homosexuality but with homosexual acts.

So, Savage designed a Web site to promote this definition. The definition isn't suitable for print, but you can find it on www.urbandictionary .com.

Santorum continued to say that, because the Constitution does not give Americans a right to privacy, we have no right to engage in consensual sex in our homes. College students (Penn State students, at least) account for a large amount of sex in the world. My right to have consensual sex is something the government should leave alone.

Although Savage took a strange path to express his opinion, he still voiced it louder than most.

My fellow Penn Staters and I can learn something from Savage. Get active. Change what you don't like.

While Savage's approach isn't the most refined, it is an effective way of getting heard. Would Savage's words have been as effective in letter format? Probably not. Would his movement have reached the renowned Google search engine? Would his actions and opinions be on the lips of politicians, news reporters and the pages of The Daily Collegian? No.

He chose a personality trait of his own and placed it on a wild path to pursue his political objectives. It obviously worked.

Out of the 100 percent of Americans that complain about politicians' actions, about 30 percent of them vote. The Revolutionary War, arguably the most important in American history, was fought to bring Americans the right to vote. Voting is the absolute least we can do to change what we oppose.

Follow Dan's model: take a personality trait of your own (in Dan's case it was a sick sense of humor) and apply it to a cause you believe in.

Politics doesn't have to be boring. You can involve your own personality in what you stand for.

Pass out pamphlets, join a political group, attend a rally, organize a rally...the opportunities are endless. Whether you support baby eaters or lobby for dog molesters, follow Savage's example.

Instead of being spoken for, speak for yourself.