If you feel that Obama is such an excellent choice to have caused you to abandon your previous commitment to working within the Republican party to make it better, and to have it more inclusive of moderates, and also find Obama excellent enough to not need ANY of the checks and balances built into our system (since he’ll obviously have a solid majority in both houses of Congress, and a media that fawns over him instead of doing its job, and a public which can’t seem to separate its disdain of Bush from a rational critique of his policies-including an inability to distinguish McCain from Bush even though they’re incredibly different in temperament and philosophy)…

Then why is it, Pete, if something has led you to believe that much in Obama’s greatness, that the sole reason you gave to your friends to explain your support is that certain other Republicans have decided to support Obama? You couldn’t give any reasons of your own? Don’t you think friends (whom I presume have had some discussions with you in the past, hopefully where you’ve shown more respect for them than to parade them in front of the scornful ‘moderate’ crowd at TMV as poster children for Limbaugh conservatism- even though as Michael points out their comments overall don’t warrant that kind of caricaturization) might actually want to engage you in a real discussion of the concerns they bring forward- or perhaps more to the point, engage you in a discussion of concerns that YOU yourself used to express about the need for political balance?

Sorry, but each time you write a post supposedly explaining your shift in position, you lose more and more respect in my eyes. I keep reading these posts thinking, OK, convince me that you actually see some reason to have reversed yourself over the concerns that you used to express (which led me to sign on to your letter (I still support all of the principles there, do you? And if so, how can you possibly think that they will be better advanced under an Obama administration than a McCain one?)

But instead of seeing any logical explanations, I see the exact same thing as I see in the explanation of those other Republicans who’ve made the same decision as yours- basically taking a leap of faith that this man’s personality, intellect, and style will transcend all of the elements that don’t bode well for any counterweight to unfettered, corrupt liberalism. Our founding fathers never would have put their faith in the personality of one man, and neither should we.

If you ever get around to actually explaining why none of that matters anymore, Pete, or why you think Obama can transcend it all, I’ll listen, but I’ve seen several posts like this one that really give no logical explanation at all, so I’m not inclined to keep reading and I think you’re mainly wasting your time (or at best, just getting more affirmation from people who already agree with you at TMV.) Do you need those pats on the back to make yourself feel more comfortable with your decision?

If anything, I’d tend to write back that I couldn’t give a rat’s behind who other Republicans are voting for. They do not cast my vote and therefore it holds no water.

Course I never thought Pete came across as a Conservative – Centrist certainly, but not a Conservative.

You know, I’m engaged to a girl with whom I disagree with on politics quite often. But we love each other, and we get along perfectly.

Whether or not such differences should play a role in friendships or even personal relationships is, in my opinion, only an issue if one takes politics too far, namely from the public into the private sector; making politics too personal.

I added a few other notes, as well, to clarify as you have that we’re free to disagree on some issues and still get along.