Thursday, October 09, 2008

Insightful analysis about fatherhood

There's been a lot of debate about whether writers should speak about politics lately--whether anyone with a blog that can influence others should bother to speak about it. For the sake of not having to deal with flame wars, I have (somewhat) tried to avoid doing it this election.

But I have never made a secret of the fact that I'm a registered Democrat and that I'll be voting for Obama in November. And I have friends who are registered Republicans and who will be voting for McCain, and I respect their opinion, because I respect my friendship with them.

So in light of all the recent blog debate about whether you should even post about politics, I decided that it was fine to link to Charles Coleman Finlay's post about how fatherhood affects both McCain and Obama. I found it insightful.

I trust that you'll all keep any comments civil; if this descends, even the slightest, into a flame war, I'm going to delete all comments and close comments for this post.

(Off to continue Yom Kippur stuff--still fasting... 14 hours and counting now. =)

9 comments:

Chumplet - Sandra Cormier said...

I'm not American so I'm not voting. However, your campaign seems so much more interesting than ours.

Needless to say, I plan to dress as Tina Fey/Palin for Halloween. I think I can pull it off. After all, I'm a hockey mom.

Ink Johnson said...

Wow, he really knows what he's talking about. (Is anyone amused how Joe and Jane Blogger have much more interesting, true things to say about politics than the pundits?)

Kristine Overbrook said...

The post was insightful, and most likely correct.

Anne-Marie said...

thanks very much for the link. I am, like Sandra, watching from the northern sidelines. I think the Hallowe'en idea is brilliant, although I doubt my young students would have a clue!

Elissa M said...

I'm always wary of armchair psychology. I don't much go for in-person psychoanalysis, either. Still, Mr. Finlay makes an interesting point. For a long time now I've thought everything GW's done is due to things his own father did or didn't do. We all have baggage.

Angelo said...

It is an interesting analysis, however I personally believe it is irrelevant when choosing an elected official. My thought process is fairly simple: we elect officials to accomplish an objective. If, at the end of their term, they have accomplished what we put them in office to accomplish, then re-elect them to another term. If they have not, vote them out of office. It doesn't matter who the other candidate is... if the incumbent is not doing his/her job, anyone else is better. ;)

Deaf Brown Trash Punk said...

I didnt know that Yom Kippur is all about fasting until my Jewish friend explained it to me yesterday. Just like Ramadan!

this election has been REALLY ugly and very divisive for the longest time due to race and... politics.

but yeah, I love Obama...

sylvia-rachel said...

I like his analysis a lot.

I'm torn between agreeing with angelo (upthread) that none of this personal stuff should be in any way relevant to one's choice of candidates -- because I really think it shouldn't -- and thoughts along the lines of You know, I'd really rather the leader of the world's only superpower not be motivated primarily by a desire to one-up his militaristic ancestors ...

Ink Johnson said...

I see where angelo is coming from, but I'd prefer to feel that the person with the codes to our nuclear weapons is stable, and therefore I'd vote (if I could vote) for the person with the stable psychological reason for running. I don't think John McCain will initiate a nuclear apocalypse if elected, but I'd still rather go with the candidate with the stabler motivation.