Last week's column was my attempt to explain the visceral connection military families have to Sen. John McCain, and it generated a surprising amount of negative feedback from readers. Being a McCain-supporter wins you few friends these days. Some of the responses were so heated, and dare I say nasty, you would think that I personally shopped for Sarah Palin's wardrobe. Alas, I am just a mom who writes -- OK, so I'm an outspoken mom who writes, but still -- which is why one reader's message accusing me of not having my priorities straight just because I feed my children chicken nuggets (apparently a clear correlation to priorities) especially thrust a dagger in my heart.

Of all the complaints readers sent, the majority of them were about my assumption that a candidate who served in the military is better suited to be president. A close second: My supposed assertion that John Kerry did not serve honorably. Not true. The column simply offered up the controversy as an example of a candidate's service being called into question.

In a previous pre-election column, I said the following, and I think it's worth repeating here:
"There is an old saying in the military that goes like this, "We (the military) are protecting democracy, not practicing it." It is funny, but also true in many ways. The military dictates where my husband will live, where he will fight (it doesn't matter if he agrees with the mission or not), how he will behave (on duty or off), and even how he will wear his hair. The military is the last institution that can discriminate based on weight, eye sight, disabilities, moral character, and basically anything else that it deems not conducive to the mission. For all it's control, however, the military as a whole does not select its leader, even though the new president directly affects the military's mission and becomes every service man or woman's new boss. The people elect a leader and that leader commands the military."

Commanding the military is not a president's only job, but it is one of the most important. In this regard, military service is not a prerequisite, but it certainly helps earn service men and women's trust.

What went largely unnoticed in last week's column, however, was my attempt to unite. Yes, unite, by explaining that the disappointment of McCain-supporters was not sour grapes but an emotional reaction to losing, just as, I assume, celebration on the Obama side was not "gloating," but a sincere emotional response to winning. All politics and political parties aside, Election Day is quite emotional.

In July, I had the opportunity to sit down with Michelle Obama and interview her for a military-spouse magazine. Although I disagree with her husband's plans for the military, I found Mrs. Obama- the-person to be exceptionally warm, friendly and intelligent. She and I chatted about being working mothers. She said she was proud of me, and I said I appreciated her humor and outspokeness. I would love to be Mrs. Obama's neighbor and, I don't know, watch Oprah in with her in her living room or something. But I didn't vote for her husband. 

In 2005, I was invited to dinner with someone who I will simply call "a very powerful liberal." "He'll attempt to change your mind," some friends said. "Watch out for truth serum!" they joked. In actuality, we spent most of the dinner talking about writing and raising children, and we have remained friends to this day, despite our political differences. I may not vote for him either. 

It's dangerous, yet inevitable, to mix emotion and politics. 

Separating the person from the policies is important. I voted for McCain based on policies. I was emotional about his loss because of his shared history, almost like an old friend, with the military.

I'm excited for the Obamas because of what they have accomplished, how they have energized so many youth, and because I was very impressed with Mrs. Obama during our meeting. But I'm not excited about the policies an Obama administration will likely to put in place. That's politics.

Now, as for my children's eating habits? Well, that's another column...just as soon as I figure out what it has to do with politics and priorities.